Age of the earth...Young or old?

[Carbon]

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.

How do you know how God's new heaven and earth will be? Will we need oxygen or the sun?

 

[David1701]

Bickering doesn't prove a young earth position.

And insultingly insinuating that another poster is merely "bickering" does not prove your position, nor does it further discussion at all.

 

[Carbon]

You disagree with the Bible; and, yes, that's an arrogant thing to do.

Stop telling me I disagree with the bible "because I disagree with you." That is very rude and not very Christ-like.

 

[Carbon]

It proved exactly the same as when you said it.


Already done - you provided no evidence in response and ignored mine.


Already done - you provided no evidence in response and ignored mine.



You disagree with the Bible; and, yes, that's an arrogant thing to do.



No, you do.



Already done - you ignored the proof.



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.

Show some proof.

 

[Carbon]

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.

Amen!

 

[Carbon]

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.

Many cannot. Many have been taught one way their entire lives and never considered another view. It's as if they even considered it, they are doing evil.

 

[David1701]

Stop telling me I disagree with the bible "because I disagree with you." That is very rude and not very Christ-like.

The Bible says that God created light (not the sun) on Day 1.

The Bible states that God created the sun, moon and stars on Day 4.

In the OT, every time the Bible says "day", accompanied by a number, "morning" or "evening", it means a literal day.

You have stated that you disagree on all three counts, which means that you disagree with the Bible. The only reason that you disagree with me, is because I agree with the Bible about this. It's not about me.

 

[David1701]

Show some proof.

I did, and you ignored it. I'm not going to keep wasting my time posting proof, only for you to ignore it and claim that none has been posted. That is what Seth used to do.

You're going on "ignore", until or unless I see some fruit.

 

[Carbon]

The Bible says that God created light (not the sun) on Day 1.

That's not what I see.

The Bible states that God created the sun, moon and stars on Day 4.

I disagree. I see it as it was already created on the first day as a part of the heavens. And it is being explained to you how God is working. Scripture explains the significance of this new visibility. For marking days, years, seasons, etc...

In the OT, every time the Bible says "day", accompanied by a number, "morning" or "evening", it means a literal day.

Not to my understanding. 4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven. Genesis 2.

You have stated that you disagree on all three counts, which means that you disagree with the Bible.

David, I never knew you took up mind reading. But give it up, because you are wrong about what I believe.

The only reason that you disagree with me, is because I agree with the Bible about this. It's not about me.

Ha, you are starting to remind me of fltom.

 

[Carbon]

I did, and you ignored it. I'm not going to keep wasting my time posting proof, only for you to ignore it and claim that none has been posted. That is what Seth used to do.

You're going on "ignore", until or unless I see some fruit.

Okay David, probably for the best. TTYL

 

[Carbon]

I believe on day 4, the sun, moon, and stars became visible from the surface of the earth (which is where we should be considering the creation account from) for the very first time.

 

[Carbon]

They perished before the foundation of the world (not Noah’s flood).

Come to think of it, that sounds like a Gap theory. If I remember correctly a Gap theory teaches that the earth did not begin formless and void, but rather became, formless and void.

 

[Alive]

Come to think of it, that sounds like a Gap theory. If I remember correctly a Gap theory teaches that the earth did not begin formless and void, but rather became, formless and void.

Yup…that is what I recall from way back.
There is a verse in Jeremiah used to text proof it.

 

[Carbon]

Yup…that is what I recall from way back.
There is a verse in Jeremiah used to text proof it.

Can you recall the verse?

 

[Alive]

Can you recall the verse?

No…give me a minute.

 

[Alive]

Here ya go.
“I looked at the earth, and behold, it was a formless and desolate emptiness; And to the heavens, and they had no light.

I looked on the mountains, and behold, they were quaking, And all the hills jolted back and forth.

I looked, and behold, there was no human, And all the birds of the sky had fled.

I looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a wilderness, And all its cities were pulled down Before the LORD, before His fierce anger.

For this is what the LORD says: “The whole land shall be a desolation, Yet I will not execute a complete destruction

“For this the earth will mourn, And the heavens above will become dark, Because I have spoken, I have purposed, And I have not changed My mind, nor will I turn from it.””

(Jeremiah 4:23-28 NAS20)

Accordance

accordance.bible

 

[CrowCross]

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?

NO....that is not what I'm saying Mr.Starwman.

 

[David1701]

Here ya go.
“I looked at the earth, and behold, it was a formless and desolate emptiness; And to the heavens, and they had no light.

I looked on the mountains, and behold, they were quaking, And all the hills jolted back and forth.

I looked, and behold, there was no human, And all the birds of the sky had fled.

I looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a wilderness, And all its cities were pulled down Before the LORD, before His fierce anger.

For this is what the LORD says: “The whole land shall be a desolation, Yet I will not execute a complete destruction

“For this the earth will mourn, And the heavens above will become dark, Because I have spoken, I have purposed, And I have not changed My mind, nor will I turn from it.””

(Jeremiah 4:23-28 NAS20)

Accordance

accordance.bible

Yes, that passage is frequently used as a proof text, by Gap Theory adherents; however, the context shows that it refers to the destruction that was going to come upon Judah, comparing the results of that destruction to the formless and empty condition of the newly created earth, before God had made it inhabited.

The word translated "earth", in Jer. 4:23, can be (and should be, in that verse) translated "land".

 

[CrowCross]

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.

So WHAT???? If you need to change what scripture clearly says...then so be it.
We can only speculate on what the light was....and we know it wasn't the sun because the bible tells us the sun was made on day 4. Period.

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.

You can't say it was the sun when the bible tells us the sun was made on day 4.

 

[CrowCross]

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?

Because that's NOT what the verse says.


Day 4 is a description of what was made on that day...just like the other verses tell what was made on the other 5 days....but the sun for some reason breaks that pattern...even though it says it was made on day 4. Sorry Carbon.

You're agreeing with us and you don't even see it. Because it's logical huh, it makes sense.