[ Young Earth ] Young Earth?

[OzSpen]

Firstly, I'm not trying to argue either for or against YEC. I would just like to point out some things for your consideration:

The problem with this theory is the assumption that Gen. 1 is chronological. For example, plants that need sunlight could not live long periods of time without sunlight.​

​

These two verses could be early scribal errors. It is proven that scribal errors - additions and deletions - exist in the NT. If the addition of Cainan and the deletion of 3 generations happened in the NT due to mistakes, and those were the copies that survived generations of copies, then they could easily be scribal errors that happened too early in the manuscripts to discern what was in the autographs. The point is that we shouldn't hang a general doctrine of "generation gaps" on 2 verses that may be a result of scribal errors, but we should get much more evidence than that for such a basis. A doctrine like that always influences us to pretext other ideas with it.​

The context implies that everything from "the beginning" to "evening and morning, the first day" is included in the first day, just as everything from "the first day" to "the second day" is included in the 2nd day.

Oz

I also question the YEC theory, as I do question all origin and "last day" theories. What I object to is making the text fit a theory, in contrast to making the theory fit the text and the context.
TD[/QUOTE]

TD,

You've made some excellent points here about variants.

I've attempted to address one area in my article, The creation of the sun on day 4: Actual days or day-age of millions of years

Oz

 

[Who Me]

WM,

Nowhere have I stated 'millions of years'. Nowhere. If that's your assumption, it is false.

I also have the honesty to state that I am not convinced Gen 1 teaches that the heavens and the earth were created in 6 literal days.

See my post #26 for some details.

Oz

No you haven't 'stated' millions of years, but you have said you are not convinced of a 6 day creation.
That does not leave you many options regarding the age of the earth.
No believe in a 6 day yec, leave an old earth creation with the attendant millions of years.
No reading out of the bible, but lots of reading into it what is not there.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Brock,

While Answers in Genesis and Creation Ministries International support a young earth, there are eminent evangelical scholars who support an old earth. See some of the reasons at: A Biblical Case for Old-Earth Creationism

See also, Norm Geisler: “The Young Earth view is not one of the Fundamentals of the Faith. It is not a test for orthodoxy.”

Oz

Interesting, I'll be saving these for later reading.

 

[OzSpen]

No you haven't 'stated' millions of years, but you have said you are not convinced of a 6 day creation.
That does not leave you many options regarding the age of the earth.
No believe in a 6 day yec, leave an old earth creation with the attendant millions of years.
No reading out of the bible, but lots of reading into it what is not there.

WM,

I need to clarify. I am not convinced Gen 1 teaches creation in 6 literal, 24-hour days.

Why your view that this doesn't 'leave ... many options' for an old earth of millions of years?

What reading of the expositions of eminent evangelical scholars have you read in support of old earth creation - based on the Hebrew text?

I read NOTHING into the Bible. I am an honest exegete who deals with all the issues of the text that I'm about to address.

It is false to state that I do 'lots of reading into it what is not there'. I don't appreciate it when you make false accusations against me.

You don't seem to agree with me, but please give me the liberty to exegete the Scriptures honestly and NOT in eisegesis - as you have claimed of me.

Oz

 

[Who Me]

WM,

I need to clarify. I am not convinced Gen 1 teaches creation in 6 literal, 24-hour days.

Why your view that this doesn't 'leave ... many options' for an old earth of millions of years?

What reading of the expositions of eminent evangelical scholars have you read in support of old earth creation - based on the Hebrew text?

I read NOTHING into the Bible. I am an honest exegete who deals with all the issues of the text that I'm about to address.

It is false to state that I do 'lots of reading into it what is not there'. I don't appreciate it when you make false accusations against me.

You don't seem to agree with me, but please give me the liberty to exegete the Scriptures honestly and NOT in eisegesis - as you have claimed of me.

Oz

In hebrew as in english the meaning of day is taken from the context so numbered days and mention of evening etc all indicate that 'day' means a period of 24 hours.

Then there is the reference to genesis in

Exodus 20:11-13(NIVUK)
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
Either this does mean 6 periods of 24 hours or it means we have to work for 6 periods which are conciderably longer than 24 hours.

You may not like it but genesis talks about 6 days.
To say it does not is to read into scripture something that is not there.

 

[OzSpen]

In hebrew as in english the meaning of day is taken from the context so numbered days and mention of evening etc all indicate that 'day' means a period of 24 hours.

Then there is the reference to genesis in

Exodus 20:11-13(NIVUK)
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
Either this does mean 6 periods of 24 hours or it means we have to work for 6 periods which are conciderably longer than 24 hours.

You may not like it but genesis talks about 6 days.
To say it does not is to read into scripture something that is not there.

WM,

In Gen 1:5 (NIV), it states: 'God called the light ‘day’, and the darkness he called ‘night’. And there was evening, and there was morning – the first day'.

There you have 'day' meaning 2 different things: (1) the period of light; and (2) The period, 'evening ... and morning'. Not midnight to midnight.

In context, Gen 2:2 (NIV) gives a different meaning to 'yom' (day):

​

By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.​

Here, 'day' does not mean 24 hours.

it may come as a surprise to some contemporary conservatives that some of the great stalwarts of the faith were not convinced of this [young earth creation] interpretation.

• Augustine, writing in the early fifth century, noted, ”What kind of days these were it is extremely difficult, or perhaps impossible, to determine” (City of God 11.7).
• J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937), author of the 20th century’s best critique of theological liberalism, wrote, “It is certainly not necessary to think that the six days spoken of in that first chapter of the Bible are intended to be six days of twenty four hours each.”
• Old Testament scholar Edward J. Young (1907-1968), an eloquent defender of inerrancy, said that regarding the length of the creation days, “That is a question which is difficult to answer. Indications are not lacking that they may have been longer than the days we now know, but the Scripture itself does not speak as clearly as one might like.”
• Theologian Carl F. H. Henry (1913-2003), one of the most important theologians in the second half of the twentieth century and a defender of Scriptural clarity and authority, argued that “Faith in an inerrant Bible does not rest on the recency or antiquity of the earth. . . . The Bible does not require belief in six literal 24-hour creation days on the basis of Genesis 1-2. . . . it is gratuitous to insist that twenty-four hour days are involved or intended.”
• Old Testament scholar and Hebrew linguist Gleason Archer (1916-2004), a strong advocate for inerrancy, wrote ”On the basis of internal evidence, it is this writer’s conviction that yôm in Genesis could not have been intended by the Hebrew author to mean a literal twenty-four hour day” (Biblical Reasons to Doubt the Creation Days Were 24-Hour Periods).

I don't appreciate this kind of language against me:

You may not like it but genesis talks about 6 days.
To say it does not is to read into scripture something that is not there.

I find the YEC are the ones who ignore this evidence that suggests other than 24 hour days of creation.

How old is the universe? The Bible nowhere tells us its age exactly. We have to deduce it from other biblical evidence.

What happened on day 1? God created light but when were the sun, moon and stars created? On day 4!

How is it possible to have a 24-hour day when there is no sun, moon and stars in the first 3 days? Could you be overlooking something in your hermeneutics?

See also: The Days of Creation

Oz

 

[Who Me]

I find the YEC are the ones who ignore this evidence that suggests other than 24 hour days of creation.

Then please supply the biblical evidence.

How is it possible to have a 24-hour day when there is no sun, moon and stars in the first 3 days

Light is a form of electonic radiation and can be emitted from many sources. The bible even says that God is a source of light, in fact in revelation it says there is no sun in the new Jerusalem because God is the source of its light.

A sarcastic responce would be to accuse you of saying that God cannot tell the time without some physical object orbitting another object. But I don't need to accuse you of that.

 

[jasonc]

Then please supply the biblical evidence.



Light is a form of electonic radiation and can be emitted from many sources. The bible even says that God is a source of light, in fact in revelation it says there is no sun in the new Jerusalem because God is the source of its light.

A sarcastic responce would be to accuse you of saying that God cannot tell the time without some physical object orbitting another object. But I don't need to accuse you of that.

The uv Ray's, not visible light is what plants need.uv Is not visible by our eyes nor is infrared
But other animals, insects can use them to see
Mosquitoes do use the uv end .uv and ir are different ends as one is thermal and very hot ,the other is colder.the sun emits both and uv is used to allow guided missiles to see the colder target should it cross the sun.

 

[jasonc]

Hydroponics, if you doubt, can be used to grow plants ,its common use is marijuana.

 

[Who Me]

The uv Ray's, not visible light is what plants need.uv Is not visible by our eyes nor is infrared
But other animals, insects can use them to see
Mosquitoes do use the uv end .uv and ir are different ends as one is thermal and very hot ,the other is colder.the sun emits both and uv is used to allow guided missiles to see the colder target should it cross the sun.

Yes it is part of the electro magnetic spectrum, a form of energy that God can easily create without the need of a light bulb, star, radiation sources etc.

 

[jasonc]

Yes it is part of the electro magnetic spectrum, a form of energy that God can easily create without the need of a light bulb, star, radiation sources etc.

Genesis is a written to scientists.?
While I see the day problem but it's not s scientists source nor was it meant to be.


No need for the sun, well reconcile that with Isiah with the perpetual moons and sun where God says those will be around forever.

Of course Gid can but you cant ignore the problem of that use by you.and that saying and no noticing that same verse mentions the darkness .outside the city. Often in Judaism, Jewish words these are not always literal and meant.

Jews,if which my parent was ,say we believe mankind is 6000 years old but the six day account is for the creation of Adam its fall but not the age

I myself see it otherwise but I'm not going to beat another over such great area ,both side have holes.
If you take Genesus as written to counter modern science you are not seeing what the intent of the voriginal story was to convey.

God created in six days,the movement of it all was reflected in worship by the hebrews ,rest in the seventh. They did that and didn't have ti understand the nature and age of the creation.

 

[Who Me]

All I've said is that God can create light without needing a sun.

The case for a 6 day creation rests on more than just genesis. There is also the reference to a 6 day creation in the 10 commandments and Jesus's comment that man was made from the beging of creation.

 

[OzSpen]

Then please supply the biblical evidence.

WM,

I have but you won't accept it.

Information on the Earth’s age must be inferred from the length of the creation days. The biblical word for day, yom, has four different literal meanings: 1) the daylight portion of a day, 2) part of the daylight hours, 3) an ordinary day (now 24 hours), and 4) a longer but finite period of time (no other word in biblical Hebrew carries this meaning). Although many Christians argue that those days represent ordinary calendar days, the biblical text indicates they lasted much longer. Days 1-3 cannot be ordinary days as humanity defines them because the Sun does not become visible until the fourth day. On the sixth day, Adam tends the garden, names all the animals, undergoes divine surgery and marries Eve. These events seem too significant and long to happen in one ordinary day. The seventh day, in contrast to the first six, never closes with an evening and morning. In fact, Psalm 95 and Hebrews 4 indicate that we still live in the seventh day.​

​

The Bible never declares an age for the Earth, but evidence derived from the text fits most comfortably with a date far older than a few thousand years (Reasons to Believe, Biblical Evidence for an Old Earth).​

Oz

 

[jasonc]

All I've said is that God can create light without needing a sun.

The case for a 6 day creation rests on more than just genesis. There is also the reference to a 6 day creation in the 10 commandments and Jesus's comment that man was made from the beging of creation.

Exodus, written before genesis.as that was passed orally.
The problem is that the word day in that context would negate God creating the new heavens as he foreknew,the need for Jesus from God foundations of the earth .meaning God didn't quite stop.

Genesis 3 menti

WM,

I have but you won't accept it.

Information on the Earth’s age must be inferred from the length of the creation days. The biblical word for day, yom, has four different literal meanings: 1) the daylight portion of a day, 2) part of the daylight hours, 3) an ordinary day (now 24 hours), and 4) a longer but finite period of time (no other word in biblical Hebrew carries this meaning). Although many Christians argue that those days represent ordinary calendar days, the biblical text indicates they lasted much longer. Days 1-3 cannot be ordinary days as humanity defines them because the Sun does not become visible until the fourth day. On the sixth day, Adam tends the garden, names all the animals, undergoes divine surgery and marries Eve. These events seem too significant and long to happen in one ordinary day. The seventh day, in contrast to the first six, never closes with an evening and morning. In fact, Psalm 95 and Hebrews 4 indicate that we still live in the seventh day.​

​

The Bible never declares an age for the Earth, but evidence derived from the text fits most comfortably with a date far older than a few thousand years (Reasons to Believe, Biblical Evidence for an Old Earth).​

Oz

While not an old earth type ,the view of shabbat as being a long rest by God is supported by the 7th day as open.

Wheres a rabbi when I need to inquire .

 

[Who Me]

the biblical text indicates they lasted much longer. Days 1-3 cannot be ordinary days as humanity defines them because the Sun does not become visible until the fourth day.

Yet the term day is not used by man but by God. Just as light does not need the sun so to measure time and to determine when a day has ended there does not have to be a planet revolving so the sun appears to rise and set.

 

[Who Me]

The problem is that the word day in that context would negate God creating the new heavens as he foreknew,the need for Jesus from God foundations of the earth .meaning God didn't quite stop.

Sorry I have no idea what you mean. Please elaborate.

 

[jasonc]

Sorry I have no idea what you mean. Please elaborate.

The idea that on the seventh literal day ,God ended his work ,means that he cant create the new earth ,he said and called the new heavens and new earth .the bible says nothing about the 8th day .

Therefore one could say the day ,there meant s certain age ,of time known by God imho

 

[OzSpen]

Yet the term day is not used by man but by God. Just as light does not need the sun so to measure time and to determine when a day has ended there does not have to be a planet revolving so the sun appears to rise and set.

WM,

You didn't deal with the issues I raised.

Oz

 

[jasonc]

While I'm not an old earth type ,light speed is measure by time. Of course if our g star were to die out time itself would continue. God,I believe, set the star in motion each able to be used to set time by.

NASA uses the sun rotation as a time clock not the earth which btw is what our 24 hr day is based upon.

Mercury, venus days are different then ours.

 

[Who Me]

WM,

You didn't deal with the issues I raised.

Oz

Oh I did. I am aware of what yom can mean and it is God who determined how long each stage of creation took.