Young Earth or Old?

[6days]

Incorrect.

The passage was from Nehemiah, not Isaiah.

Further, it was a name a number, only, and an assertion without evidence.

Being a Jew, Christ-hater and Trinity-denier, you, of all people, can understand your need for constant correction when it comes to interpreting your scripture...

Question for [MENTION=5868]chair[/MENTION] ...Are you a Christ hater? Are you attracted to Christ by people who dismiss you for being a Jew?

 

[Stripe]

SIX!!!

:wave:

 

[6days]

Scripture uses different terms to relate different events.

No... You are trying to justify your beliefs by forcing an artificial distinction between two different words that are used interchangeably in Scripture. The Hebrew words 'bara' and 'asah' are like the words create and made in English which can be used interchangeably.

In Genesis 1, the word bara (translated as created) is used only three times. So according to your forced interpretation of the word asah, everything else in Genesis 1 was a re-do. Your view is inconsistent not only with other scripture, ,(other examples) but even within the first chapter.
V25 God spoke of making man
V26 God created man.

V21 God created fish and birds
V25 God made the animals

Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them...". It would seem according to your forced interpretation of the words, that I'm God made everything in 6 days that he did not create anything in 6 days. IOW... Your beliefs are inconsistent with scripture.

The Hebrew day is from evening to evening.

God defined a day like this And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night: and theevening and the morning were the first day."

 

[Apple7]

No... You are trying to justify your beliefs by forcing an artificial distinction between two different words that are used interchangeably in Scripture. The Hebrew words 'bara' and 'asah' are like the words create and made in English which can be used interchangeably.

In Genesis 1, the word bara (translated as created) is used only three times. So according to your forced interpretation of the word asah, everything else in Genesis 1 was a re-do. Your view is inconsistent not only with other scripture, ,(other examples) but even within the first chapter.
V25 God spoke of making man
V26 God created man.

V21 God created fish and birds
V25 God made the animals

Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them...". It would seem according to your forced interpretation of the words, that I'm God made everything in 6 days that he did not create anything in 6 days. IOW... Your beliefs are inconsistent with scripture.

Please show us any lexicon that states that they are synonyms for one another.

God defined a day like this And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night: and theevening and the morning were the first day."

That makes for 12 hrs.

 

[6days]

Please show us any lexicon that states that they are synonyms for one another.

Better than any lexicon... I showed from scripture how the words are used interchangeably.

That makes for 12 hrs.

God called a period of daylight and night "one day". You can call it 12 hours if you wish.....Most of us believe there is 24 hours in one day.

 

[6days]

We can understand that the "creation" spoken of there is referring to time when the LORD "began" to make humans both male and female when we look at the following verse which speaks of the very same thing as Mark 10:6:

So... According to you Jesus was not referring to the beginning... But a beginning? You think Jesus was referring not to the beginning, but to a different time when he began to make humans?

Then the sixth day cannot be considered the absolute beginning because five days preceded that day.

"The beginning" is described in Genesis chapter 1. It was a period of 6 days. It was the absolute beginning. It was not a re-do or a recreation of anything pre-existing.

Again looking at Mark 10:6 "But from the beginning of the creation, male and female made he them". As mentioned already the word beginning in Greek is 'arche' signifying an absolute beginning along with the word 'ktiseos' indicating the sum total of all creation.

'A New Testament Commentary' says "Unquestionably the language puts humankind at the very dawn of creation to reject this truth, one must contend that (a) Christ new the universe was in existence billions of years prior to man, but accommodated Himself to the ignorance of his generation, deliberately misrepresenting the situation, or (b) the Lord living in pre-scientific times was uninformed about the matter.

In the absolute beginning the LORD created the earth and He created it at that time to be inhabited

Yes... Genesis 1

When the Lord created the earth it was made in such a way whereby it wasn't created in darkness and it was created with form. But you say that the following verse describes how it was created despite the fact that that verse decribes an earth that is not inhabitable:"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep" (Gen.1:2).

Yes... It is very straightforward. God formed and filled the Earth over the course of six days. "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) cf Genesis 1

What is said in "bold" in the following statement refers to the earth being inhabited before it was in a state described as being without form:"Of the origin of our world the first chapter of Genesis tells us nothing save that 'in the beginning,' whenever that was, God 'created' it. It may be, as Tyndall said in his Belfast address, that 'for eons embracing untold millions of years, this earth has been the theatre of life and death.' But as to this the 'Mosaic narrative' is silent. It deals merely with the renewing and refurnishing of our planet as a home for man" (Sir Robert Anderson, A DOUBTER'S DOUBTS About Science and Religion).

That statement is a sad rejection of Scripture... And, apparently a misunderstanding of the Gospel.

That statement is a rejection of scripture which tells us that in six days God created the heavens and the Earth and everything in them. It is a rejection of Christ's teaching was taught that humanity existed from a time near the foundation of the world... Not billions of years later.

That statement a misunderstanding of the Gospel. If there was eons of physical death, before first Adam sinned, then the physical death of Last Adam would be meaningless. (Romans 5 and 1st Corinthians 15). Furthermore it is the misunderstanding of scripture, in that if there was already millions of years of death, then that would mean that Satan was already the ruler of this world... When God declared it was all very good..

 

[Apple7]

My apologies for forgetting where the verse was from
Now, why don't you get off your ego, bigotry and accusations and actually address the issue that hose verses raise?

What 'hose verses' are you talking about?

 

[Apple7]

Better than any lexicon... I showed from scripture how the words are used interchangeably.

Where?

God called a period of daylight and night "one day". You can call it 12 hours if you wish.....Most of us believe there is 24 hours in one day.

Jesus called a day 12hrs.

John 11.9

 

[6days]

Where?

Post 204 and more

Jesus called a day 12hrs. John 11.9

You have trouble with context... Was Jesus talking about the daylight period of a day? Yes. (There are numerous meanings to the word day... always easy to understand by context in Hebrew, and English)

 

[Apple7]

V25 God spoke of making man

Incorrect.

Gen 1.25 makes absolutely NO mention of 'making' man.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Incorrect.

Gen 1.25 makes absolutely NO mention of 'making' man.

He probably typo'd and meant v26.

Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” - Genesis 1:26 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis1:26&version=NKJV

 

[6days]

Incorrect.

Gen 1.25 makes absolutely NO mention of 'making' man.

You are right... Its verse 26
v26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image
V27 So God created mankind in his own image,

 

[Apple7]

You are right... Its verse 26
v26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image
V27 So God created mankind in his own image,

Again, two entirely different verbs indicating two entirely different modes of creating.

If they were completely interchangeable as you imagine (but cannot produce a single verifiable reference as to why), then why is there only one 'asah' in Gen 1.26, but three 'bara' in Gen 1.27?

According to your private theory, Adam was created once in Gen 1.26, and then three times again in Gen 1.27.

 

[Apple7]

YEC private interpretation...

 

[chair]

What 'hose verses' are you talking about?

So you are reduced to pointing out typos rather than provide a proper response. Sad.

 

[Stripe]

So you are reduced to pointing out typos rather than provide a proper response. Sad.

"Providing."

 

[6days]

….. Adam was created once in Gen 1.26, and then three times again in Gen 1.27.

:sigh:

 

[chair]

Apple, to remind you, these are the verses in question.

Apple..... That is a modern opinion compromising scripture...attempting to add deep time into God's Word. Barah and Asah are used interchangeably throughout Scripture. For example.. Genesis 1:1 God 'bara' the heavens and the earth. In Nehemiah 9:6 God 'asah' the heavens and earth.

So far you have avoided dealing with these verses.
You've given us "Scripture uses different terms to relate different events." - but without any explanation or proof that this solves your difficulty with the verses.
You've given us "Bring forth your verifiable lexicography that claims that it is a 'modern opinion'."- once again avoiding the main question, and vaguely claiming that "lexicography" supports your view.
You've also managed to:
Catch an error I made (when I identified the book the verse came from incorrectly. thank you for the kind correction).
Tried to insult me in a rather bigoted manner.
Focused on a typo (a missed letter!), rather than actually deal with the texts at hand.

Now pull out your lexicons, your translations, your Hebrew Bible, and actually address the question. These two verses use the terms interchangeably. That creates a difficulty for your theses.

 

[Apple7]

Now pull out your lexicons, your translations, your Hebrew Bible, and actually address the question. These two verses use the terms interchangeably. That creates a difficulty for your theses.

Then we come to this passage, which provides us with a one-stop-shop with which to put an end to the ‘YEC literalist 24hr day theory’…

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created in the day that Yahweh God was making earth and heavens. Gen 2.4

This one passage, which includes both ‘asah’ and ‘bara’, makes it clear that the two verbs are NOT interchangeable, as ALL previous SIX days of creation are now referred to as ONE DAY.

Further, this ONE DAY contains GENERATIONS, and, as ALL 38 occurrences of the term used outside of Gen 2.4 indicate, large passages of time expired as used in the genealogical listings of the early patriarchs.


Now...

Go troll another thread.

You bring nothing to the table except your hatred...



:cigar:

 

[chair]

Then we come to this passage, which provides us with a one-stop-shop with which to put an end to the ‘YEC literalist 24hr day theory’…

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created in the day that Yahweh God was making earth and heavens. Gen 2.4

This one passage, which includes both ‘asah’ and ‘bara’, makes it clear that the two verbs are NOT interchangeable, as ALL previous SIX days of creation are now referred to as ONE DAY.

Further, this ONE DAY contains GENERATIONS, and, as ALL 38 occurrences of the term used outside of Gen 2.4 indicate, large passages of time expired as used in the genealogical listings of the early patriarchs.


Now...

Go troll another thread.

You bring nothing to the table except your hatred...



:cigar:

I agree with you that the earth is old. I am merely pointing out that you need to deal more seriously with the objection 6 days raised to your analysis of the words. For some reason you get very defensive and ugly when I point that out.