Evidence For A Young Earth

Originally posted by RJHinds

I did not say this man was infallible as the scripture, however he submitted some information from science that supports the scripture in my opinion.

But why do you refuse to treat the following portions of scripture as infallible?

God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

(Genesis 1:31; 2:1-3 NASB)

This fact was important enough to God that He included a reference to it in His ten commandments to the children of Israel as follows:

“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

(Exodus 20:8-11 NASB

I don't see a problem with that passage to an ancient pre-Adamic world.

I might if there were not other passages like in Ezekiel and Isaiah which speak of the fall of a very ancient enemy of God - the Anointed Cherub or the Daystar.

I really am not doing anything that the YECs are not doing. You brothers go outside of Genesis to obtain truth that helps you understand Genesis too. For instance, without consulting other books of the Bible you would not know what the serpent means.

So what am I doing that you are not doing?
Taking into account Satan's ancient career and fall, elaborated elsewhere than in Genesis, I use it to put the puzzle pieces together paying very close attention to the words.

The heavens and earth were made in six days, not in billions of years, according to this command from God.

But the heavens and the earth were CREATED in the beginning.

The oldest book in the Bible, Job tells us about the beginnings of things. And it says that God does some things "past finding out". So both in terms of space and time, God has done some things past our knowledge and past our finding out.

"Who also spreadeth out the heavens. and treadeth upon the heights of the sea; Who maketh the Bear, Orion, and the Pleiades, And the chambers of the South;

Who doeth great things past finding out,
And marvelous things without number" (Job 9:8-10)

I think we can preserve the essential truth of the Gospel and of creation and also realize that God could have done some things marvelous and great which are past our finding out. Genesis chapter 1 is not exhaustive about all the things God may have done.

"Evidence For A Young Earth"

It's always funny when RJHinds starts a thread and then have to fight for what he takes as obvious. Perhaps RJHunds is just plain wrong, picks the wrong sources, written by people who have a reason to make people get desinformed. And picks with people he wouldn't start pick with in the first.

What is it that always reminds me of a pitbull...?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
[b]"Evidence For A Young Earth"

It's always funny when RJHinds starts a thread and then have to fight for what he takes as obvious. Perhaps RJHunds is just plain wrong, picks the wrong sources, written by people who have a reason to make people get desinformed. And picks with people he wouldn't start pick with in the first.

What is it that always reminds me of a pitbull...?[/b]

This whole creationist thing is now in the realm of politics. The whole POINT is to buy off enough senators (USA) and judges and sway voters to their POV so they can force creationism to be taught in a science classroom (As if it were a real science).

That is the bottom line which is why I fight these intellectually dishonest asssholes.

Originally posted by sonhouse
This whole creationist thing is now in the realm of politics. The whole POINT is to buy off enough senators (USA) and judges and sway voters to their POV so they can force creationism to be taught in a science classroom (As if it were a real science).

That is the bottom line which is why I fight these intellectually dishonest asssholes.

You mean that RJhinds and his alike, theirs agenda is to turn US of good America into some kind of Iran with hard and fanatic teocratic leaders. Like RJHinds would like to turn into a leader for the christian variant of Boko Haram?

Well, when we think about it...

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] I did not say this man was infallible as the scripture, however he submitted some information from science that supports the scripture in my opinion.

But why do you refuse to treat the following portions of scripture as infallible?

God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth ...[text shortened]... st our finding out. Genesis chapter 1 is not exhaustive about all the things God may have done.

You left out my statement below:

The heavens and earth were made in six days, not in billions of years, according to this command from God.

This was in reference to God's explanation for His sabbath Day command. See Exodus 20:11.

For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

There is no hint of billions of years for the creation of the natural world anywhere. What may have happened before or after that week of time with the spirit creatures is not included in the creation narative of Genesis chapter one that covers the creation week.

We do know that God created the angels before he created the physical universe. The book of Job describes the angels worshipping God as He was creating the world: “Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone - while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-7).


Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/when-angels-created.html#ixzz32l9UA0Au

Originally posted by RJHinds
You left out my statement below:

[b]The heavens and earth were made in six days, not in billions of years, according to this command from God.

This was in reference to God's explanation for His sabbath Day command. See Exodus 20:11.

For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the se ...[text shortened]... 38:4-7).


Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/when-angels-created.html#ixzz32l9UA0Au[/b]

There is no hint of billions of years for the creation of the natural world anywhere. What may have happened before or after that week of time with the spirit creatures is not included in the creation narative of Genesis chapter one that covers the creation week.

I think that you are afraid of the prospect of billions of years because it makes man seem insignificant. But our sense of significance is in God and God alone.

The chief factor of our being significant is found in His love for us.

This is why Paul said "neither height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 8:39)

A billion years does not separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. I am not insisting that there was a billion years. Do not misunderstand my point. I am saying the BIG TIME cannot dwarf our ultimate significance because of God's love.

This statement I am about to right was true 3,000 years ago and is STILL true today -

"When I see Your heavens, the works of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You have ordained,

What is mortal man, that You remember him, and the son of man that You visit him? " (Psalm 8:3,4)

The ancient Psalmist was perplexed when he viewed the vastness of creation. "Why would you be concerned about us little humans?" That was his bothering question.

This is a problem to man. He feels the vastness of creation surely must make him insignificant. I think that you are afraid of the prospect of a billion years without man's existence for the same reason. It tends to make feel dwarfed in significance.

But neither height nor depth nor billions of years or billions of light years can make man insignificant to our Creator because of His great love which is manifested in Christ.

I am persuaded as Paul was persuaded. Nothing can seperate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus. And if the universe is far older than a comfortable 6,000 years that cannot mean man shrinks in insignificance because we cannot imagine what God would be doing all that time without us.

Big time and big space (to our human measurements) do not matter. God's love in His Son matters the most.

Carl Sagan could not conceive that man is significant when he considered the tremendous amount of real estate out there amongst billions of galaxies. I would tell him "Dr. Sagan, billions of galaxies do not diminish one bit our preciousness to God and Jesus Christ."

And I would say to you that if we were not around for billions of years in this little microscopic speck of earth, neither does that diminish our preciousness to God.

To paraphrase Psalm 8 a little "When I consider [the eons of time before the earth was occupied by human beings, even if billions of years] what is man that You are mindful of him, or the son of man that you visit him."

We should be ground our sense of self worth ultimate in God's love. It doesn't matter if what we see or what we sense with our science theories make us "feel" like an also-ran in the universe.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You left out my statement below:

[b]The heavens and earth were made in six days, not in billions of years, according to this command from God.

This was in reference to God's explanation for His sabbath Day command. See Exodus 20:11.

For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the se ...[text shortened]... 38:4-7).


Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/when-angels-created.html#ixzz32l9UA0Au[/b]

There is no hint of billions of years for the creation of the natural world anywhere. What may have happened before or after that week of time with the spirit creatures is not included in the creation narative of Genesis chapter one that covers the creation week.

RJHinds, there is NOTHING in the narrative about a crucial character in early Genesis, the serpent in the garden chapter 3. It only says he was more subtle.

There were NO chapter divisions in the original ancient Hebrew writing. Chapter divisions were placed latter. And the serpent is important to understand. That is why you go elsewhere to get information from God's word about that serpent.

The account of early human life includes these details and not only the manner of creation. This shows that the early Genesis is ABOUT something MORE than just six days. Again, when we look to other information elsewhere in the Bible we are doing nothing that you yourself are not doing.

We do know that God created the angels before he created the physical universe. The book of Job describes the angels worshipping God as He was creating the world: “Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone - while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-7).

I think this is a good point and I will reply to it soon. I may do so without reading your link below first. But though the Job 38 verse speaks of the formation of the earth, I am not sure that it would mean the whole universe. Possibly but possibly Job 38 is more restricted to the earth.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/when-angels- created.html#ixzz32l9UA0Au

[/quote]

Originally posted by sonship

There is no hint of billions of years for the creation of the natural world anywhere. What may have happened before or after that week of time with the spirit creatures is not included in the creation narative of Genesis chapter one that covers the creation week.

I think that you are afraid of the prospect of billions of years because ...[text shortened]... see or what we sense with our science theories make us "feel" like an also-ran in the universe.

I have no problem with there being an eternity or eons before the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth. I even believe God may have created the spirit world and the spirit creatures in eternity past before He created our physical world.

However, I have a problem with changing the clear word of God to conform to the teachings of religious Gurus and other false prophets and false teachers.

Originally posted by sonship

There is no hint of billions of years for the creation of the natural world anywhere. What may have happened before or after that week of time with the spirit creatures is not included in the creation narative of Genesis chapter one that covers the creation week.

RJHinds, there is NOTHING in the narrative about a crucial character ...[text shortened]... d more: http://www.gotquestions.org/when-angels- created.html#ixzz32l9UA0Au [/quote]
[/quote]

It does not matter if there were no chapter and verse divisions in the original writings. I know they were put there to make it easier to refer to a portion of scripture and that was all I was doing.

The point I was making was the serpent or dragon, who is later identified as being possessed by Satan the Devil, who was also a cherub angel called Lucifer, or the Shining One, did not show up until after the creation week to tempt Eve. By that time Adam and Eve had already spent some time walking and talking with God and taking care of the Garden of Eden.

Moses simply identifies this serpent or dragon as more crafty than any beast of the field that God had made. All the beasts of the field were made by God on the sixth day of creation just before Adam and Eve.

Originally posted by RJHinds

However, I have a problem with changing the clear word of God to conform to the teachings of religious Gurus and other false prophets and false teachers.

You seemed less concerned with changing the word than you are changing the theorizings about dust on the mood, salt in the ocean, shrouds. Rarely do I see you argue along biblical lines alone for evidence of your young universe.

I think it is risky to think the bible is inspired by God only if it agrees with some modern scientific theorizings.

But you can show me what in the Scripture I CHANGED.

While "But there earth was waste and void ..." is not a typical English rendering it is deemed as valid by some Hebrew scholars.

And the fact of the matter is that BEFORE the invention of geology or the conceptualizing of evolution readers of the Hebrew Genesis also understood worlds created and destroyed before the arrival of Adam's world.

They could not have been motivated by the desire to harmonize to geology's billion years or evolution theories billion years. Those ideas came along in the 19th century. And back to the second and third century AD we see commentary about Destruction / Reconstruction.

But I would add another comment. Even if Christian DO find that they have to reconsider carefully what the Bible actually said in light of science discoveries, that is not necessarily wrong in and of itself.

That is unless one worships conservatism as a way of life - "The Old is ALWAYS better and the NEW is ALWAYS to be mistrusted."

Centuries some Christians had to revise their concepts about whether the Bible meant the the earth did not move or whether it allowed for a moving planet.

The Young Earth verses Old Earth debates of today would have been the Moving Earth verses the Stationary Earth of many centuries ago.

Maybe you would have been a strong "Stationary Earther" writing articles condemning Copernicus for being a guru and changing the word of God. And you seemingly, would have had Bible passages to back up your theology that the Earth DOES NOT MOVE - PERIOD.

IE. "Oh no!! The Bible says the earth is on pillars and cannot be moved. The earth is on "foundations". The word of God says so. So it cannot be moving around anything. It is still and on pillars and foundations.

See? It is unmoved and fixed! Tremble before him, all the earth; yes, the world is established, IT SHALL NEVER BE MOVED." (1 Chron. 16:30);

See? The real Bible readers know that the earth can never be moved like Copernicus and the gurus and Bible changers falsely teach - "Yes, the world is established; IS SHALL NEVER BE MOVED." (Psalm 93:1)

See? Only the weak Christians throwing in the towel, believe the false teachers that the earth moves around the sun. The Bible says it should never be moved. "He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved." (Psalm 104:5)

RJHinds, would you have been a "Still Earther" back in those days of Copernicus ? Yes or No?

Two summaries:

1.) Some readers understood a pre-Adamic destroyed world before the invention of Geology or Evolution theory.

2.) Reconsidering what the Bible MEANS in view of science is not ALWAYS a wrong thing to do in and of itself.

Originally posted by RJHinds
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

And you stumble upon the very reason God is said to create the universe in six days. He wants to show Himself as being accessible to the common man, comparing His work with the normal work week of the common man, and exactly why it is necessary to have a day of rest. "If the Lord needed to rest after His work, then surely YOU could take some time out of your busy week to rest and to keep the Lord's sabbath holy."

I should thank you for finally making it clear to me why God illustrated a "six-day" creation. It's so He could promote this idea of a holy sabbath day. Not because it actually took six 24-hour days. If you think so, then you miss His point entirely.

Originally posted by sonship

[b] However, I have a problem with changing the clear word of God to conform to the teachings of religious Gurus and other false prophets and false teachers.

You seemed less concerned with changing the word than you are changing the theorizings about dust on the mood, salt in the ocean, shrouds. Rarely do I see you argue along bib ...[text shortened]... ring what the Bible MEANS in view of science is not ALWAYS a wrong thing to do in and of itself.[/b]

At this point in time I do not see a large gap in time that makes it necessary for me to come up with billions of years of history to explain it. I am satisfied to leave it the way it is also because the science discoveries are not convincing enough to make me believe YEC is wrong.

Originally posted by Suzianne
And you stumble upon the very reason God is said to create the universe in six days. He wants to show Himself as being accessible to the common man, comparing His work with the normal work week of the common man, and exactly why it is necessary to have a day of rest. "If the Lord needed to rest after His work, then surely YOU could take some time out of y ...[text shortened]... t because it actually took six 24-hour days. If you think so, then you miss His point entirely.

You are welcome young lady.

Originally posted by RJHinds
At this point in time I do not see a large gap in time that makes it necessary for me to come up with billions of years of history to explain it. I am satisfied to leave it the way it is also because the science discoveries are not convincing enough to make me believe YEC is wrong.

Maybe it is not billions of years. Maybe its more. I continually say that the gap is undefined in the Scriptures.

But let me ask you this. Do you believe that the stars will fall to the earth in the end times? Consider this passage:

" And the stars of heaven fell to the earth as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind." (Revelation 6:14)

We know that aside from the sun the next nearest star is Alpha Centauri which is about four light years away. When you shake a fig tree really hard all the figs will fall off. Do you believe all the stars in the night sky will plunge to the earth including Alpha Centauri ?

The Bible doesn't say anything about stars being billions and billions of miles away. Am I right ?

Being true-blue then, to the what Revelation 6:13 says we should expect stars to drop down to the earth like figs from a shaken tree ?

I think that we need to consider the language in which the Holy Spirit uttered this matter but also the more modern science which was unavailable to the Apostle John when he wrote that. Nothing was said anywhere in the Bible about stars being billions and billions of miles from earth.

So is science wrong and we should expect the Milky Way stars to shower down to the ground ? Do you see my point ?

Originally posted by sonship
Maybe it is not billions of years. Maybe its more. I continually say that the gap is undefined in the Scriptures.

But let me ask you this. Do you believe that the stars will fall to the earth in the end times? Consider this passage:

[quote] [b]" And the stars of heaven fell to the earth as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wi ...[text shortened]... ng and we should expect the Milky Way stars to shower down to the ground ? Do you see my point ?

We must keep in mind what kind of literature Revelation is when interpreting it. The vision revealed to John is prophecy like that revealed to Daniel and it must be interpreted in the same way. Just like the beasts in Daniel and Revelation do not represent literal beasts, but empires and kingdoms, the stars in Revelation may not represent literal stars, so we must not jump to conclusions since it is stated in the form of an anology. So this most likely refers to the sudden judgment of God that will come on mankind when he least expects it.

No, the Holy Bible does not say how far away the stars are from earth because it says God stretched out the heaven. So in the beginning the stars may have been closer to the earth, right?

I see your point. And I see that you are mistaken, because this does not apply to interpreting the creation account in Genesis chapter one.