• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Age of the earth...Young or old?

The bible say....9 And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

It doesn't say the moon made on day 4 gathered together the land on day 3...that's once again something you've added.
Psalms 104 provides a biblical explanation....

Basic science. The gravity and magnetic field of the moon is what holds back the oceans and seas in its place. Without the sun there would be no gravity on earth. All the water would just float out into space. Do you think the earth wasn't tilt on its axis during that time?
 
If you believed the bible you would see your theory isn't biblical. That's the obvious point.

Bickering doesn't prove a young earth position.
 
Basic science. The gravity and magnetic field of the moon is what holds back the oceans and seas in its place. Without the sun there would be no gravity on earth. All the water would just float out into space. Do you think the earth wasn't tilt on its axis during that time?
The earth was probably tilted at the time of the flood.

As to the beginning of your post....I pretty much disagree. I have no reason to believe what you posted.
 
The earth was probably tilted at the time of the flood.

As to the beginning of your post....I pretty much disagree. I have no reason to believe what you posted.

The tilt is caused by the sun and not because of a flood.

Bickering doesn't....but the bible does. I have no need to re-write Genesis as you do.

I believe in the Bible, but I disagree with your viewpoint of Genesis. Nobody is rewriting Genesis but simply revealing the common sense behind it from basic science.
 
The earth was probably tilted at the time of the flood.

Also, the gravitational pull of the sun and the gravitational pull of the earth is like a tug-and-war match. But the sun pull is stronger than the earth. That is what causes the tilt. The pull is so strong that is causes the earth to rotate around the sun. One rotation around the sun is how you get one day (24 hours). What does days mean if there was no sun until the fourth day?
 
The tilt is caused by the sun and not because of a flood.



I believe in the Bible, but I disagree with your viewpoint of Genesis. Nobody is rewriting Genesis but simply revealing the common sense behind it from basic science.
No, you are not revealing the "common sense" behind it. What you are doing via speculation pertaining to what you call "common sense" ....in doing so are adding to what Genesis says in order to make your common sense work. It reminds me of the "swoon theories" to explain Jesus' resurrection.
 
Also, the gravitational pull of the sun and the gravitational pull of the earth is like a tug-and-war match. But the sun pull is stronger than the earth. That is what causes the tilt. The pull is so strong that is causes the earth to rotate around the sun. One rotation around the sun is how you get one day (24 hours). What does days mean if there was no sun until the fourth day?
Common sense tells us the earth was revolving as a light shown on it. We've seen biblical examples of a light source illuminating on Rev 21...that wasn't the sun. So, for you to claim the sun is the only light source...is unfounded.
 
Common sense tells us the earth was revolving as a light shown on it. We've seen biblical examples of a light source illuminating on Rev 21...that wasn't the sun. So, for you to claim the sun is the only light source...is unfounded.

So, according to your beliefs, the eternal God is the source of light. And there was no earthly time since there is no sun. And one day is like a thousand years to God. What did those days mean?
 
And what does that prove? Nothing
It proved exactly the same as when you said it.

Point me to where.
Already done - you provided no evidence in response and ignored mine.

If you’re so sure snd it bothers you so much then show me.
Already done - you provided no evidence in response and ignored mine.


If I don’t agree with you, I’m calling God a liar? That’s pretty arrogant
You disagree with the Bible; and, yes, that's an arrogant thing to do.


Maybe we both do.
No, you do.


Prove they are lies or apologize.
Already done - you ignored the proof.


Prove with scripture not your emotions that each day was 24 hours.
Already done - you ignored the proof.

Every time the Hebrew word for day "yom" is used, in the OT, if it is accompanied by a number, or "morning", or "evening", it means a literal day. The creation days have all three, so it's as emphatic as it can be that these are literal days.

Are you going to ignore the proof again?


I’ll be waiting.
 
We find the following passage in the book of Revelation...
23 And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and its lamp is the Lamb.

Now, I'm not saying this was the light....as the light also might be the light of angels.....but it most certainly does answer the question....How can we have the light of Day in verse 4 when the sun wasn’t created until verse 14

No, it does not answer my question. I have been told that Genesis 1 is a 'straight-forward sequential historical account'. However here is a big problem. God called the light 'Day' but we have no sun. Saying it is God's glory (which we have a Hebrew word for - 'shekinah' - which was not used) or the light from angels or anything else is not the straight-forward use of the word Day.

You can't have it both ways. You can't claim it is a straight-forward account and then have to bring in ideas that are not present in the text to explain what is going on.
 
Except that "taking into account the original ancient near eastern context of the passage" is exactly what Bible believers (to whom you disparagingly refer as "young earthers") have done.

What did Jesus teach?

Mark 10:6 (WEB) But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female.

This proves that God making mankind male and female was from the beginning of creation (i.e. during the Genesis creation week, not billions of years after the earth was created).

Mark 13:19 (WEB) For in those days there will be oppression, such as there has not been the like from the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will be.

This shows that man's suffering started very close to the beginning of creation, not billions of years later.

Luke 11:50,51 (WEB)
50 that the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary.’ Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

This places Abel's murder very close to the foundation of the world, not billions of years later.

------------------------------------------------

--The 1st C. historian, Josephus, tells us that the Jews of his day (i.e. the original near Eastern context) believed that both the first day of creation and Adam's creation were about 5,000 years before Christ.

------------------------------------------------

What did Jesus teach about Moses' writings?

John 5:45-47 (WEB)
45 “Don’t think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you, even Moses, on whom you have set your hope.
46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me.
47 But if you don’t believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”

So, what did Moses write?

Ex. 20:8-11 (WEB)
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 You shall labor six days, and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to Yahweh your God. You shall not do any work in it, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your livestock, nor your stranger who is within your gates;
11 for in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore Yahweh blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy.

The whole basis for the Jewish Sabbath day was the six literal days of creation, followed by a literal day of rest.

Now that you have a small amount of the biblical proof for six literal day of creation (not to the mention the fact that every time "day" (Hebrew: "yom") is accompanied by a number, or "evening", or "morning", it means a literal day, in the OT - the creation days are accompanied by all three; in other words, it could hardly be made more emphatic that these are literal days, not figures of speech), what are you (and anyone else who disbelieves the literal creation account) going to do with it?

Why didn't you answer any of my questions? If you believe it is a straight-forward historical account, please defend you position by answering my questions.
 
Not picking at anyone in particular, but please folks, let’s be nice and remember the rules. Hot topics can remain cool.
The children are listening.
 
The bible say....9 And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

It doesn't say the moon made on day 4 gathered together the land on day 3...that's once again something you've added.
Psalms 104 provides a biblical explanation....
You just helped his understanding without even knowing it. And God said, "Let the waters" under the heavens be gathered into one place.

These passages you presented above should show you that God was active in His creation. He didn't create it ready-made as we see it today. He was actively working it. He was moving things around, namely the water. So why couldn't He do the same with the sun and moon?


You're agreeing with us and you don't even see it. Because it's logical huh, it makes sense.
 
It sounds like you're saying the theories of secular science trump what the bible says......heck, even secular science says man evolved from lesser primates. I would imagine you believe the bible also got that wrong.
You should stop imagining things, it does you no good. Those are your words, not mine. :)
 
If you believed the bible you would see your theory isn't biblical. That's the obvious point.
Stop telling other Christians that they dont believe the bible because they dont agree with you. Bro, learn to attack what you see as wrong, not the person.
 
Why didn't you answer any of my questions? If you believe it is a straight-forward historical account, please defend you position by answering my questions.
I addressed several of the issues you had raised: e.g. I demonstrated that Jesus taught that there were not billions of years before Adam; that he taught that the days of the creation week were literal; and that the 1st C. contextual understanding was of an earth that was only about 5,000 years old.

My post was already fairly long, so I waited to see if I would get a fair, sensible and substantive response, before addressing anything else.
 
Back
Top