Kingdom Studies: Didn't god create the world in 6 days, and create Adam on day 6? It's pretty clear in that regard. Every day is enumerated explicitly. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
That implies that the world is basically 6000 years old.
If you don't believe that the world was created in 6 days, literally, then you can't believe that 6000 years elapsed after Adam.
It's sad that many well meaning people take any portion of the bible literally at all.
It's sad when many well meaning people do not read scripture as the God inspired poetry that it is.
When one portion of any book collected together over the course of hundred of years is expected to preform the same way, in every circumstance, as every single other section, it is grossly over-limiting the action of such a graceful, amazing, powerful, and life giving narrative which it is.
Though some parts were intended to be used as literal history, some other parts were implied as some of the most beautiful poetry of the ancient world.
"Though some parts were intended to be used as literal history, some other parts were implied as some of the most beautiful poetry of the ancient world."
... and then all of it was evaluated for usefulness in maintaining control over the congregations by council after council.
The amount of "apocryphal" material expunged from the bible speaks more to its intent than anything left in it.
No Mark, I subscribe to the "Gap Theory" which makes perfect sense in understanding a 6000 year history to Adam, but an earth that could be millions of years older.
Seb - You asked where older fossils would fit in the "Gap theory".
It's as simple as this: From Adam to Today is roughly 6000 years.
Anything prior to Adam simply was not recorded in the bible.
As a matter of fact, we haven't found anything recorded in any culture older than 6000 years.
The Sumerians have some of the oldest known writings which date back roughly 6000 years.
In one tablet that lists the Kings, it mentions some of them reigning for thousands of years.
If one were to believe that their kings ruled for thousands of years at a time, then that would be a record of something that took place more than 6000 years ago, but the actual writing is no more than 6000 years old.
As for the "Young Earthers", I think they are simply unlearned.
They have never done any serious delving into history/science.
Yes I understand how fossils of dinosaurs and such fit in the theory, but I'm talking about human fossils here. If you aknowledge their existence and age, I don't see how Adam fits in the theory.
The bible records the history of mankind back to Adam which was 6000 years ago.
ReplyDeleteIt's sad that many well meaning people take that to mean that the earth is only 6000 years old.
That is never stated, nor is it implied.
It simply doesn't give us much history prior to Adam.
The pseudo-epigriphal book of Enoch however, does give a little more background.
Kingdom Studies: Didn't god create the world in 6 days, and create Adam on day 6? It's pretty clear in that regard. Every day is enumerated explicitly. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
ReplyDeleteThat implies that the world is basically 6000 years old.
If you don't believe that the world was created in 6 days, literally, then you can't believe that 6000 years elapsed after Adam.
It's sad that many well meaning people take any portion of the bible literally at all.
It's sad when many well meaning people do not read scripture as the God inspired poetry that it is.
ReplyDeleteWhen one portion of any book collected together over the course of hundred of years is expected to preform the same way, in every circumstance, as every single other section, it is grossly over-limiting the action of such a graceful, amazing, powerful, and life giving narrative which it is.
Though some parts were intended to be used as literal history, some other parts were implied as some of the most beautiful poetry of the ancient world.
"Though some parts were intended to be used as literal history, some other parts were implied as some of the most beautiful poetry of the ancient world."
ReplyDelete... and then all of it was evaluated for usefulness in maintaining control over the congregations by council after council.
The amount of "apocryphal" material expunged from the bible speaks more to its intent than anything left in it.
No Mark,
ReplyDeleteI subscribe to the "Gap Theory" which makes perfect sense in understanding a 6000 year history to Adam, but an earth that could be millions of years older.
Where do the fossils of e.g. Lucy (3.2 million years old) or the early humans (150,000 years old) fit in this theory?
ReplyDelete@Seb - the "young earthers" simply deny the validity of radiocarbon dating, radioactive decay, and all other methods that conflict with their Truth.
ReplyDeleteOh.. alright then.. bulletproof
ReplyDeleteSeb -
ReplyDeleteYou asked where older fossils would fit in the "Gap theory".
It's as simple as this:
From Adam to Today is roughly 6000 years.
Anything prior to Adam simply was not recorded in the bible.
As a matter of fact, we haven't found anything recorded in any culture older than 6000 years.
The Sumerians have some of the oldest known writings which date back roughly 6000 years.
In one tablet that lists the Kings, it mentions some of them reigning for thousands of years.
If one were to believe that their kings ruled for thousands of years at a time, then that would be a record of something that took place more than 6000 years ago, but the actual writing is no more than 6000 years old.
As for the "Young Earthers", I think they are simply unlearned.
They have never done any serious delving into history/science.
Kingdom Studies -
ReplyDeleteYes I understand how fossils of dinosaurs and such fit in the theory, but I'm talking about human fossils here.
If you aknowledge their existence and age, I don't see how Adam fits in the theory.