Announcement

Collapse

Creation Science Rules

This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective.
Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed.
1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team
2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
See more
See less

Young Earth or Old?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by Stripe View Post
    The Darwinists decided they didn't need God. "We can make man better than You," they told Him. God suggested a competition and they readily agreed. So they got a bunch of dirt to start making their own man. But God said: "Oh, no, no, no. Get your own dirt."
    The subject of this thread is not Darwinism. Holding to the idea that the earth is old and not young does not depend on Darwinism. I believe in the old earth but I deny Darwinism.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
      The subject of this thread is not Darwinism. Holding to the idea that the earth is old and not young does not depend on Darwinism. I believe in the old earth but I deny Darwinism.
      "That's a joke, pastor!"
      Where is the evidence for a global flood?
      E≈mc2
      "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

      "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
      -Bob B.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
        You are saying that the foundation upon which the earth rests is not a part of the earth.
        Nope.

        According to you the foundation of the earth and the earth itself are completely separated!
        No, I think they're two completely different things.

        Not that they're separated.

        I also think that, if you'd simply read the text more clearly, you'd also see (and this doesn't blow your mind, I don't know what will) that it mentions not one, but TWO "earth"s.

        Remember what I said before, Jerry, about in verse one, that the "earth" in verse one isn't "Earth," but "earth," ie. matter?

        Earth (capital "E") is what we live on.

        The earth (lowercase "e") is what Earth is made of. Matter. Atoms, molecules, chemicals, particles. That's what God created in verse one. then set aside a lump of it to lay the foundation of Earth.

        Here, this should help:

        Reread Genesis 1:1-13 again, the first three days, Jerry.

        Pay attention. I'll format the portions that are relevant.

        In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.Then God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.”Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.Then God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear; and it was so.And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good.Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so.And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.So the evening and the morning were the third day. - Genesis 1:1-13 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...3&version=NKJV

        Jerry, did you notice something about the above passage? Note the blue and green portions of the text.

        Did you note that God doesn't call or recognize "good" that which he started on day two? and that he did so twice on day three?

        Assertion:

        God wasn't finished working on the firmament of day two until partway through day three.

        I've colored GREEN the parts where God calls something "good".

        I've colored BLUE the parts where one day ends and the next begins.

        I've colored red the portions of the text where God is speaking, to make it easier to see what He is saying.

        I've underlined portions of sentences (and I'll copy them below) for you to read independently of the text, to get a grasp of what exactly is being said, without all the extra details. (In other words, sentences within sentences, a useful trick I learned while reading Bob Enyart's The Plot Manuscript to help get an idea of what's actually being said.)

        I've HIGHLIGHTED the portions of the text so that you can see the most relevant portions of the text to my argument.

        Ok, now for the underlined sections:

        "... darkness was on the face of the deep . . . the face of the waters"

        "Let there be a firmament . . . and let it divide the waters from the waters"

        "... the firmament . . . divided the waters . . . from the waters"

        "... the firmament . . . called . . . Heaven" [by God]

        "... the waters . . . gathered together into one place, and . . . the dry land appear[ed]"

        "... God called the dry land Earth, and . . . the waters He called Seas"

        Did that help any, Jerry?

        Guess what.

        God didn't form Earth as Adam would come to know it until the beginning of day three.

        And if what I said above is true (that verse 1 describes God making "matter" and not "Earth"), and it most likely does, as it fits scripture the best, as Isaiah said that God laid the foundations then formed the earth (formed, not created; "the earth", not "Earth"), and that the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews said that God laid the foundation of the earth (again, "the earth", not "Earth").

        God literally laid the foundations of matter.

        Then formed that matter into a ball of rock (the mantle) with water on it.

        Then formed a firmament (Hebrew, "raqia") in the midst of the waters, which God called Heaven.

        Then the firmament settled, forming seas, and dry land, which God called Earth.

        And all within the first three days, and He even had time to make some plant-life before wrapping up day three.

        Did that help, Jerry?

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Stripe View Post
          "That's a joke, pastor!"
          Evolution requires an Old Earth, but the evidence for an Old Earth stands by itself- it doesn't depend on "Darwinism".

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by chair View Post
            Evolution requires an Old Earth, but the evidence for an Old Earth stands by itself- it doesn't depend on "Darwinism".
            Creationism requires a young earth, but the evidence for an "old earth" doesn't actually support an old earth. It stands by itself as evidence, evidence which points to a young earth.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by chair View Post
              Evolution requires an Old Earth, but the evidence for an Old Earth stands by itself- it doesn't depend on "Darwinism".
              Uh, it was a joke.

              Did no one get it?
              Where is the evidence for a global flood?
              E≈mc2
              "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

              "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
              -Bob B.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by chair View Post
                Observations show that the Earth is old.
                A particular view of the Bible claims that the Earth is young.

                One can reject the observations in order to stick to a particular view of the Bible. When one does this one rejects normal reality and substitutes a 'spiritual reality' instead. This is a weird situation to be in, but some choose it.

                Or one can have a different view of the Bible, and stick to normal reality. This is easier to deal with.
                We don't agree on much....but on this topic we can agree...

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                  No, I think they're two completely different things.

                  Not that they're separated.
                  So according to your ideas the LORD laid the foundation of the earth but what sat on that foundation was without form!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
                    So according to your ideas the LORD laid the foundation of the earth but what sat on that foundation was without form!
                    Answered in my previous post.

                    You might try responding to my entire post, instead of just snippets, because it seems you only focus on those snippets, instead of what I actually said.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      The earth is old... very old... perhaps even 10,000 years old.
                      All of my ancestors are human.
                      Originally posted by Squeaky
                      That explains why your an idiot.
                      Originally posted by God's Truth
                      Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                      Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                      (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                      1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                      (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                      Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
                        The subject of this thread is not Darwinism. Holding to the idea that the earth is old and not young does not depend on Darwinism. I believe in the old earth but I deny Darwinism.
                        Agreed.

                        Bringing-up 'Darwin' in the first place kinda dates a person, as modern science has obliterated his theories regarding human evolution.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Darwinists are morons.
                          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                          E≈mc2
                          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                          -Bob B.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Apple7 View Post
                            Bringing-up 'Darwin' in the first place kinda dates a person, as modern science has obliterated his theories regarding human evolution.
                            Yes, when the young earth people realize that they are losing the argument they revert to trying to change the subject.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
                              Yes, when the young earth people realize that they are losing the argument they revert to trying to change the subject.
                              Says the one trying to change subject by shifting blame onto your opponent.

                              Would you please respond to my entire post, seeing as it answered your above question.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                                Jerry, have you never seen a skyscraper under construction?

                                It's without form, and void.
                                Yes, I have seen one under construction and it was not inhabited by anyone. On the other hand the LORD created the earth to be inhabited:

                                "For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited"
                                (Isa.45:18).

                                The LORD created the earth to be inhabited and according to you this is the way that He created it:
                                "The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep" (Gen.1:2).

                                Do you really think that is the way that the LORD created the earth to be inhabited?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X