How Would Logos Counter/Support This Strange Theory..?

...".In the beginning was the Word,and the Word was with God and the Word was God.God is a trinity and that trinity consists of God the father,God the son,and God the Holy Ghost.Jesus was up in Heaven with God before he took on the mission of becoming man 's Savior.

As for repleneshing the Earth.

The first Earth had the dinosaurs and cavemen.When God cast Lucifer out of Heaven and down to the Earth he wiped out that first creation and the Earth became like it is described in Genesis 1:2.In Genesis 1:3 God begins to restore the Earth and this time he makes the first man with an eternal soul,Adam.this is how the Earth was replenished.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Rosie Perera

This kind of question is better posted on http://christiandiscourse.com.

Rick

If you are simply wanting to learn about the theory, there are a few searches that you could try in Logos. Search everything for "gap theory", "two floods" or a less likely search is "ruin and reconstruction theory".

MJ. Smith

Welcome to the forums. As has been indicated by others, your question is best worded in terms of searches and tools and without the emotion laden "counter/support" or "strange theory"

To learn about the interpretation of John 1:1-5 simply enter that passage reference in the home page and let the default layout display your resources - assuming you have a decent breadth of resources in your library.

I could easily guess the source of your second quote but will not. If you provide a source and author I will supply the appropriate method.

BTW: Logos is designed to be a library resource providing you with the information necessary to make your own decisions and build your own arguments. It is not designed to promote a particular theological position. How you build your library determines any theological bias, to the degree possible.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698341#Comment_698341

Not a book near as I can tell its a forum discussion on a different website.

David Paul

..."This Strange Theory"...

While certain elements of these comments may be uncommon and unfamiliar (and maybe even incorrect), chances are pretty high that whatever you counter them with, no matter how familiar and common it may seem, will be just as prone to error as what you consider strange.

Here's the thing: YHWH nowhere suggests that we should bother ourselves with "solving" these "creation issues". I think, given YHWH's nature, attempting to address these issues is seen as "going off the reservation". Stick to what He says and don't worry your head with issues He neither addresses nor asks us to address.

It is a human conceit that supposes we must explain what He asks us to accept.

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698346#Comment_698346

Also as far as I can tell the sentiments expressed in that quote are not supported by scripture. Using Logos to search, I've come up empty on any reference to destroying the first creation at the fall of Satan. Sounds like an amalgam of imagination and perhaps extra-biblical material.

May as well take this opportunity to plug Poor Man's commentary:

2. Mark! what a resemblance there is between the empty void of nature, before the lights of heaven were introduced into the creation, and that of the human soul before the light of grace hath passed upon it. No expression can more strikingly point out the state of an unawakened, unregenerated soul, than that of darkness covering it. Isaiah 60:2.

Robert Hawker, Poor Man’s Old Testament Commentary: Genesis–Numbers, vol. 1 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2013), 4–5.

Whyndell Grizzard

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698352#Comment_698352

Also as far as I can tell the sentiments expressed in that quote are not supported by scripture. Using Logos to search, I've come up empty on any reference to destroying the first creation at the fall of Satan. Sounds like an amalgam of imagination and perhaps extra-biblical material.

May as well take this opportunity to plug Poor Man's commentary:

2. Mark! what a resemblance there is between the empty void of nature, before the lights of heaven were introduced into the creation, and that of the human soul before the light of grace hath passed upon it. No expression can more strikingly point out the state of an unawakened, unregenerated soul, than that of darkness covering it. Isaiah 60:2.

Robert Hawker, Poor Man’s Old Testament Commentary: Genesis–Numbers, vol. 1 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2013), 4–5.

Great quote- and appropriate! "...how great is that darkness..."

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698377#Comment_698377

I'm so lazy I won't even draw a red circle with the word theology inside and a red line on a slanted diagonal ... or even a yellow pentagon with black edging and the word caution theology ahead ....

George Somsel

There was a book that I read when I was a kid (many moons ago) by Pember Earth's Earliest Ages which espoused that theory. I don't think it's in Logos (hopefully not).

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698391#Comment_698391

Hmmm ... red circle ... ok. Red line on a slanted diagonal ... ok. This is sounding like ghostbusters.

Well, anyway, if anyone's looking for some value-added, if you have Utley (most or at least many do), he has an excellent listing of all the various creation theories surrounding 'Yom'. I didn't know he had it (including a short description of the Gap theory).

Matthew C Jones

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698350#Comment_698350

Here's the thing: YHWH nowhere suggests that we should bother ourselves with "solving" these "creation issues". I think, given YHWH's nature, attempting to address these issues is seen as "going off the reservation". Stick to what He says and don't worry your head with issues He neither addresses nor asks us to address.

It is a human conceit that supposes we must explain what He asks us to accept.

Proverbs 25:2

abondservant

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698377#Comment_698377

Also as far as I can tell the sentiments expressed in that quote are not supported by scripture. Using Logos to search, I've come up empty on any reference to destroying the first creation at the fall of Satan. Sounds like an amalgam of imagination and perhaps extra-biblical material.

May as well take this opportunity to plug Poor Man's commentary:

2. Mark! what a resemblance there is between the empty void of nature, before the lights of heaven were introduced into the creation, and that of the human soul before the light of grace hath passed upon it. No expression can more strikingly point out the state of an unawakened, unregenerated soul, than that of darkness covering it. Isaiah 60:2.

Robert Hawker, Poor Man’s Old Testament Commentary: Genesis–Numbers, vol. 1 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2013), 4–5.

Great quote- and appropriate! "...how great is that darkness..."

Thank you sir.

In case anyone was wondering, I came across that quote when I looked up Gen 1:2.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698396#Comment_698396

Here's the thing: YHWH nowhere suggests that we should bother ourselves with "solving" these "creation issues". I think, given YHWH's nature, attempting to address these issues is seen as "going off the reservation". Stick to what He says and don't worry your head with issues He neither addresses nor asks us to address.

It is a human conceit that supposes we must explain what He asks us to accept.

Proverbs 25:2

I knew that verse even before Reftagger illuminated it. The word translated "things" in the ESV and "matter" in NASB is daabhaar. While it can be translated using those words, daabhaar actually means "word", and the "things" or "words" that ':Elohhiym conceals are concealed in His Word. This is a reference to His penchant for prophetic speech, because as I have said before, the Bible isn't written in Hebrew or Greek as much as it is written in prophecy. Prophecy is the language of ':Elohhiym.

It is a human conceit that supposes we must explain what He asks us to accept.

What I said in the quote above does not conflict with what I just finished saying. YHWH emphatically wants what He has concealed in prophecy to be properly understood. He says so in numerous ways. On the contrary, He says nothing whatsoever about determining how old the universe is or how old the earth really is or where and how dinosaurs and cave men fit into the Bible's story of creation. Where creation is concerned, what ':Elohhiym says inevitably (one could even say "deliberately") contradicts all of the physical evidence, and most importantly (and no Christian apologist can credibly account for this in any way), it contradicts all of the mathematical evidence of the universe.

Some say, in perfect "arguing-from-the-conclusion" fashion, that all the evidence of the physical world DOES=MUST=DOES=MUST=DOES agree with what they think Genesis requires...primarily because it is inconceivable to them that it could be otherwise. For them, saying otherwise is tantamount to denying the existence of God. Others say that the Big Bang was caused by God 13.8 billion years ago, because the math says so, and since God said He created everything, somehow the two agree even though agreement contradicts both concepts at their most fundamental levels. Simply put, ':Elohhiym said He created the world about 6000 years ago.

In regard to the vast majority of "stuff" that Christian apologists blather on about in their efforts to "explain" the "difficult" concepts regarding creation, very little of it--next to nothing--can be found in the Bible, regardless of how deeply one searches. Those simply are not the issues which the "kings" are supposed to be "searching out". Attempting to have a Biblical discussion of dinosaurs is sheer stupidity. Dinosaurs are not addressed in the Bible at all. Most emphatically on this point, as my "one-of-these-days" book Monsters of Prophecy will demonstrate, neither B'heimohtth nor Liwyaatthaan has anything whatsoever to do with dinosaurs. No human being has ever laid eyes on a living dinosaur, almost certainly because no dinosaur has ever lived.

I'm going to leave it at that. If someone wants to take this discussion to ChristianDiscourse, I won't show up. My point is simply that all of the apologistic mumbo-jumbo--whether its from the Young Earth anti-evolution crowd or its the blather of the Big Bang scientific compatiblist crowd--in the eyes and testimony of the Bible, it's all "strange theories".

Logos is a great tool. However, it can't perform magic, and whatever voodoo (i.e. Christian apologetics) someone may want to prove with this tool, no matter what arguments or incantations or bizarre "conclusion therefore proof" drivel they concoct, Logos can't make what is untrue true.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/698341#Comment_698341

To learn about the interpretation of John 1:1-5 ...

Search can find term(s) within Bible milestone:

trinity WITHIN {Milestone <Jn1.1-5>}

Topic Guide and Sermon Guide may be useful.

Another search is:

(dinosaurs, "cave men") WITHIN {Milestone <Ge1.1-3>}

Third search of Heading Text and Large Text for articles is:

(gap,restitution) BEFORE 1 WORD theory

Keep Smiling [:)]