• **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.

Young Earth/Old Earth

Young Earth or Old Earth

  • Young

    Votes: 19 59.4%
  • Old

    Votes: 11 34.4%
  • Never thought about it

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I dont know

    Votes: 1 3.1%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 1 3.1%

  • Total voters
    32
You are just not getting it..

Or, maybe? Do not want to get it.

So?

grace and peace .........
There was no death before Adam sinned. Do you get that? Or maybe you don't want to get it?

Can you not understand that the passage in Jeremiah is a metaphor?
 
There was no death before Adam sinned. Do you get that? Or maybe you don't want to get it?

Can you not understand that the passage in Jeremiah is a metaphor?
No... but you do.
Enjoy......

Nice to have met you, David. keep pounding it home to win the argument.
 
That passage in Jeremiah is comparing the darkness and unformed/empty condition of Israel, after judgment upon them, with the unformed and unfilled condition of creation, before it was formed and filled. What it is NOT doing, is saying that the condition of the Earth, before being formed and filled, was a result of ruination.

It is not the translators who were weak in understanding, but interpreters who make unfounded assumptions, as you have done.

But you must understand what a rare expression it is. There is no other meaning to it, there being only 2 instances.

It might help if you compared Ps 104; it is extremely difficult to see which lines are about creation week, and which about the cataclysm. This is prob why 2 Peter 3 has the line 'the earth was formed out of water' and then the later cataclysm 'was through water.'

My Greek professor at a conservative Bible college, as we studied Jude and 2 Peter, said, 'the universe is full of beings and entities. Earth-bound humanity is a small fraction.'
 
There was no death before Adam sinned. Do you get that? Or maybe you don't want to get it?

Can you not understand that the passage in Jeremiah is a metaphor?

Jeremiah 4:27 tells us that you are watering it down...

For Jeremiah after citing Genesis 1:2 needed to add something...

"This is what the LORD says:
“The whole land will be ruined, but I will not destroy it completely."


Jeremiah 4:27

The reason for that being said by Jeremiah after quoting from Genesis 1:2?

The Jews having been taught the Torah since childhood understood that in Genesis 1:2?
The earth was found in a state of a destroyed, chaotic, ruined mess. One having a eerie sense of emptiness about it.

Jeremiah had to qualify what he said earlier by making it know in 4:27, that unlike Genesis 1:2?
They will not be completely destroyed like the earth was found to be in vs 2.

Others may get it.
 
The Jews having been taught the Torah since childhood, understood that in Genesis 1:2?
The earth was found in a state of a destroyed, chaotic, ruined mess. One having a eerie sense of emptiness about it.
@David1701 is correct. There is *nothing* in Gen 1.2 to indicate that God created a perfect earth, and then it was subsequently ruined and then God recreated again. That is embellished midrash. Even your source indicates this. It's not in Genesis 1.2 itself. The midrash is to 'solve' the theological problem of a pre-existent chaotic state prior to creation.

There's really no point arguing about it. You are arguing for a theory on the "basis" of something that isn't there. This is all we're given:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

That's it. That's all we're given. Before God started creating, the earth was formless and empty.

Does the Bible say why the earth was formless and empty? I ask again, does the Bible say why the earth was formless and void before God began His work of creation? NO. The Bible doesn't tell us why. So any attempt to add in an entire back story of creation and ruined creation in between v.1 & v.2 is complete conjecture.
 
@David1701 is correct. There is *nothing* in Gen 1.2 to indicate that God created a perfect earth, and then it was subsequently ruined and then God recreated again. That is embellished midrash. Even your source indicates this. It's not in Genesis 1.2 itself. The midrash is to 'solve' the theological problem of a pre-existent chaotic state prior to creation.

You should have been Jeremiah's teacher!

If you were?

Jeremiah would not have made such a stupid misapplication of Genesis 1:2 in the Hebrew.

Too bad you were not around then...

Think of all the confusion and arguing it could have avoided.
 
You should have been Jeremiah's teacher!

If you were?

Jeremiah would not have made such a stupid misapplication of Genesis 1:2 in the Hebrew.

Too bad you were not around then...

Think of all the confusion and arguing it could have avoided.
I think the OT scholars who are experts on Genesis and Jeremiah know better than both of us, but your condescension is noted.

In fact, look at that (below).an OT scholar who notes the relationship between Genesis and Jeremiah, yet comes to a different conclusion from yours.

The problem is you are interpreting Genesis in light of Jeremiah instead of Jeremiah in light of Genesis (!). For as you note, Jeremiah is alluding to Genesis, not the other way around. So Genesis is the primary understanding that Jeremiah modifies, not the other way around, as one OT scholar notes, Israel's judgment will be *like* a return to primeval chaos, but not a full return to it.

(And importantly, it is GOD who is returning them to a primeval chaos like state, which makes God the source of the chaos in Genesis IF we follow your strict one-to-one adherence)

phpPQOlAc.jpg

phpcH52M4.jpg


phpgFAHIX.jpg


phpr4Yl6k.jpg
 
No human death

It is possible for there to be death of animals (and certainly plants) before the fall
It doesn't say "No human death" - that is your presumption. Death came by sin; it does not say that only human death came by sin.
 
No... but you do.
Enjoy......

Nice to have met you, David. keep pounding it home to win the argument.
Your character is showing...

Once you start using insults, as you have done in these last two posts, you have lost the argument.
 
But you must understand what a rare expression it is. There is no other meaning to it, there being only 2 instances.

It might help if you compared Ps 104; it is extremely difficult to see which lines are about creation week, and which about the cataclysm. This is prob why 2 Peter 3 has the line 'the earth was formed out of water' and then the later cataclysm 'was through water.'

My Greek professor at a conservative Bible college, as we studied Jude and 2 Peter, said, 'the universe is full of beings and entities. Earth-bound humanity is a small fraction.'
There are created angels (including fallen ones), humans, animals and plants, on the Earth. To claim that the universe is "full of beings and entities", without a shred of evidence, is a sign of a teacher whom I would not trust.
 
@David1701 is correct. There is *nothing* in Gen 1.2 to indicate that God created a perfect earth, and then it was subsequently ruined and then God recreated again. That is embellished midrash. Even your source indicates this. It's not in Genesis 1.2 itself. The midrash is to 'solve' the theological problem of a pre-existent chaotic state prior to creation.

There's really no point arguing about it. You are arguing for a theory on the "basis" of something that isn't there. This is all we're given:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

That's it. That's all we're given. Before God started creating, the earth was formless and empty.

Does the Bible say why the earth was formless and empty? I ask again, does the Bible say why the earth was formless and void before God began His work of creation? NO. The Bible doesn't tell us why. So any attempt to add in an entire back story of creation and ruined creation in between v.1 & v.2 is complete conjecture.
I agree, except for one thing: Genesis does not say that before God started creating, the Earth was formless and empty. Before God started creating, there was God, and that's all.
 
God is perfect in every way...so everything that God made at the beginning was PERFECT..

The Holy Bible says, in Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." And in verse 25b, "And God saw that it was good."
 
There are created angels (including fallen ones), humans, animals and plants, on the Earth. To claim that the universe is "full of beings and entities", without a shred of evidence, is a sign of a teacher whom I would not trust.

Eph 1, 6, Col 1, Phil 2, I Pet 3, Heb 1, 2 Pet 1, 2 Pet 2, Jude... Also see how many 'creatures' there are in the Rev. Lots of 'knees' out there that will bow, which are not on earth.

Usually the expression is the 'principalities and powers' which are personified but not on earth.
 
God is perfect in every way...so everything that God made at the beginning was PERFECT..

The Holy Bible says, in Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." And in verse 25b, "And God saw that it was good."

25b is at the end of creation week, and the text is not saying God did the ruination of tohu wa-bohu. So we are both right.

See above on Genesis narrative format (chs 1-39 before Joseph wrote them down). There is a formula in which the first line of a section is a title, for exs., 1:1, 2:4, 5:1, 10:1.

When the tribe was practicing oral recitation of the material (from ch 11--39 we can refer to the tribe of Abraham, not too much before that), the teacher would call out a section title, and the student would recite that section, and they usually ended in a summary statement.

So 11:14 may be a reference to the name 'Hebrew' (Eber); I haven't seen anything recent on that. But Abraham is mentioned 3 Semite generations later as the son of Terah. We likely assume that the material we are reading was being preserved verbally that far back, and Joseph put it in written form, and the written has handed down to Moses.
 
Eph 1, 6, Col 1, Phil 2, I Pet 3, Heb 1, 2 Pet 1, 2 Pet 2, Jude... Also see how many 'creatures' there are in the Rev. Lots of 'knees' out there that will bow, which are not on earth.

Usually the expression is the 'principalities and powers' which are personified but not on earth.
Principalities and powers refers to angels, good and bad (and, possibly, civil magistrates). The non-human creatures are different varieties of angels. There is no living creature, other than what I outlined, mentioned in Scripture.
 
25b is at the end of creation week, and the text is not saying God did the ruination of tohu wa-bohu. So we are both right.

See above on Genesis narrative format (chs 1-39 before Joseph wrote them down). There is a formula in which the first line of a section is a title, for exs., 1:1, 2:4, 5:1, 10:1.

When the tribe was practicing oral recitation of the material (from ch 11--39 we can refer to the tribe of Abraham, not too much before that), the teacher would call out a section title, and the student would recite that section, and they usually ended in a summary statement.
<sigh>

"Tohu wa-bohu" does not have to mean "ruination"; and, in context, in Gen. 1, it doesn't.
 
Oh, "varieties of angels." Do you have a BDB reference on that? It is a standard OT literary lexicon.
 
<sigh>

"Tohu wa-bohu" does not have to mean "ruination"; and, in context, in Gen. 1, it doesn't.

The rule of hapax legomena favors it. Single-reference, single usage. Is the issue that you are concerned about piles of time? There is no necessary connection to lots of time. There is simply a dark, watery mass, and the Spirit hopes to make something useful from it. As you know from other Scripture a dark, watery mass is dreaded, a place of imprisonment, confinement. We may find that we live in a renovated prison!

Genesis gives us human history detail, not detail about those other beings. There is too little to conclude with. We have no idea what other business God has been up to, except very spare reference.

I favor Lewis' understanding that when the universe is barren and lifeless, it makes it more difficult to imagine and comprehend the simplicity with which the Bible regularly interacts with other realms, because we have allowed ourselves to be shaped by gradualism, naturalism. See "The Myth That Became Fact" in GOD IN THE DOCK among others.
 
It doesn't say "No human death" - that is your presumption. Death came by sin; it does not say that only human death came by sin.
It doesn't say no, but the reference is only to human death. Plus we see references to God's creation of predators in Psalms 104 for example

The bottom line it doesn't say death came to ALL creatures and that there was no death of non-human kind. That is an assumption
 
Back
Top