Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Bible Study Does the Bible communicate a young age of the Earth, Yes or No?
- Thread starter chessman
- Start date
westtexas
Member
We're in the Bible study section so how about taking us through scripture. Can you elaborate a little more? I don't want to assume, but, if you used to be a YECist can I assume that you no longer believe this theory and now believe the "Bang" occurred much longer ago? Can you show us where this comes from in scripture?
I think a good book on the subject is called, "Genesis and the Big Bang" by Dr. Gerald Schroeder. He makes a good case using the scriptures.
Just on my own take, how do you convey to a group of primative nomads wondering the desert what a billion years is? By in large, when dealing with God and his knowledge there are gaps of understanding, that is why faith is required when interacting with him since the finite and infinite intellects can only come to terms on certain things at certain times.
chessman
Member
Westtexas, i know you quoted EdenBorn here but it was my OP so I'll chime in. First, that's an excellent question. Second, it doesn't ... directly. The Bible is only consistent with the effect of the BigBang (outside the universe agent with great intellect, purpose and love for humanity). I wouldn't expect God to explain singularity, particle physics, dark matter, cosmological constants, etc. to Moses. But there are multiple Scriptures that are very, very consistent with what we know of the BB. I will post some as i get back to my computer and off this stupid phone App. But for starters one i really know is Gen 1:1. Obviously it's consistent with YEC and OEC.
westtexas
Member
Looking forward to your thoughts.
E
EdenBorn
Guest
The first thing you have to do is expand your horizons- look at all of Genesis at a birds eye view. And consider the human reasoning of evolution as well:
Genesis includes a likeness in evolutionary order which things were made (water, sea organisms, plant life, animals), Noah's Ark presents an extinction level event (the Flood), and the Tower of Babel shows common ancestry (man split in different customs).
All these things coincide directly to the theory of evolution. In theory, there is a succession of life from the seas, extinction level events, and obviously common ancestry. Even the story of Eden tells of man becoming knowledgeable of good and evil- this our transcendence from animals to humans.
We are the clay- He is the potter. From the dust we were made, and dust we become.
Genesis tells a remarkable story of what science tells.
Last edited by a moderator:
They only coincide when we glance and fail to use care in our study of the Bible. For instance (and I really do NOT want to hijack this thread any further) but consider that according to Scripture, plants came first, then creatures that flew (we call them birds, but the bible doesn't use that term) then insects. If there was nothing to control the insect population the plants would not have much chance for survival. Today, insects make up a very large part of the animal biomass in almost all non-marine, non-polar environments. It has been estimated that the global insect biomass is around 10^12 kg with an estimated population of 10^18 organisms. That's 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 insects today and evidence of more back then. If there were millions upon millions of years where insects were eating plants but nothing except insect-eating-insects to keep their populations down, the plants would have small chance for survival. I mean, plants simply don't know how to run away. Insectivorous plants, some spiders and amphibians eat insects but without flying creatures to consume them, the herbivores would likely have eaten themselves out of house and home, dooming the planet even before Adam was made.
The Bible resolves this problem very neatly. The Genesis record declares that flying creatures [birds] were created on the fifth day (Genesis 1:20-23), and that insects [creeping things] were created afterward on the sixth day (Genesis 1:24-31).
Last edited by a moderator:
You guys are just going to have to put up with this post every so often..... I do hope this thread can stay civil and discuss not debate
Turning our pages rapidly to 1 Timothy 6:20 we find
6:20 keep. The connotation of keep is "guard."
1 Timothy 6:20
6:20 vain babblings. "Profane and vain babblings" (that is, secular and pointless thinking/sayings/philosophizings) are to be utterly avoided, not in the sense of fleeing from them, but rather of not being influenced by them, and by rendering them void, refuting them with truth. We must beware of them (Colossians 2:8), guarding the integrity of the Christian faith.
1 Timothy 6:20
6:20 oppositions. "Oppositions" is the Greek antithesis.
1 Timothy 6:20
6:20 science falsely so called. "Science falsely so-called" is, in the Greek, literally “pseudo-science” or “pseudo knowledge.” This pseudo-knowledge (I don't like calling it pseudo-science, because most people don't think in concept form and it sounds like I'm slamming against something) is nothing other than those philosophies and secular sentiments that have been in “oppositions” against God as Savior and Creator and the world as His creation since the beginning of time.
Timothy is told to guard against "gnōsis pseudōnymos," or "False Knowledge". What kind of false knowledge? Two (2) kinds. The empty kind which involves discussion of vain, empty or useless matters, AND/OR- the profane kind. The word that is translated "profane" can be used to describe ground. In that case, Timothy was being told to not cross the threshold to step upon unholy, common "public" ground. If used to describe men, it's talking about ungodly men and their vain conversations.
That's the kind of false knowledge, or "science, falsely so-called" Timothy was well advised to guard against. Can we think of anything that might qualify under those descriptions today? Basically, we can think of this as saying, "avoid stuff that is the antithesis of what God has declared concerning His creation."
1 Timothy 6:201 Timothy 6:20-21 KJV said:
6:20 keep. The connotation of keep is "guard."
1 Timothy 6:20
6:20 vain babblings. "Profane and vain babblings" (that is, secular and pointless thinking/sayings/philosophizings) are to be utterly avoided, not in the sense of fleeing from them, but rather of not being influenced by them, and by rendering them void, refuting them with truth. We must beware of them (Colossians 2:8), guarding the integrity of the Christian faith.
1 Timothy 6:20
6:20 oppositions. "Oppositions" is the Greek antithesis.
1 Timothy 6:20
6:20 science falsely so called. "Science falsely so-called" is, in the Greek, literally “pseudo-science” or “pseudo knowledge.” This pseudo-knowledge (I don't like calling it pseudo-science, because most people don't think in concept form and it sounds like I'm slamming against something) is nothing other than those philosophies and secular sentiments that have been in “oppositions” against God as Savior and Creator and the world as His creation since the beginning of time.
Timothy is told to guard against "gnōsis pseudōnymos," or "False Knowledge". What kind of false knowledge? Two (2) kinds. The empty kind which involves discussion of vain, empty or useless matters, AND/OR- the profane kind. The word that is translated "profane" can be used to describe ground. In that case, Timothy was being told to not cross the threshold to step upon unholy, common "public" ground. If used to describe men, it's talking about ungodly men and their vain conversations.
That's the kind of false knowledge, or "science, falsely so-called" Timothy was well advised to guard against. Can we think of anything that might qualify under those descriptions today? Basically, we can think of this as saying, "avoid stuff that is the antithesis of what God has declared concerning His creation."
Last edited by a moderator:
chessman
Member
The topic is about the age of the Earth via Scripture and specifically excludes evolution. See topic and original post. There's other threads for evolution as discussing it here will simply hinder the age question
S
Stone-yarder
Guest
"Taking Genesis literally is like taking poetry literally" And this is where the real problem lyes. When we share our faith with an unbeleiver or whomever, the fact that some dont take it literally undermines the rest of scripture especially salvation. If Genesis is not understood as factual and literal as though it really happened then according to your line of thinking salvation was not necessary beacause the sin in the garden of eden was merely symbolic and should not be taken as literal. Why should someone beleive in salvation or the need for it if "sin" is merely symbolic? Why should someone beleive in the rest of scripture why cant it all be symbolic? God used a literal 6 day creation, it says what it says, the real question is do you beleive it?
Last edited by a moderator:
J
JCitoL
Guest
there are 75 generations from adam to Jesus reported in Luke 3:23-38 which makes about 3-4 millennia, so this is in accordance with the written in the book Revelation 17:10
Revelation 17:10 "there are seven kings(i.e. seven times): five are fallen(i.e. counted from the seventh day onwards 5 millennia will pass), and one is(i.e. and the end of God's somnolence/drowse will occur in the 6th millennium), and the other is not yet come(i.e. and the time during which the "darkness" will continue to reign (before God to wake fully up) in the sixth millennium will occur at last); and when he cometh, he must continue a short space(i.e. but it will continue a very short time)."
so this is an evidence that this world is young
Blessings
chessman
Member
You've not presented any "evidence" , however, that refutes the ESV, NIV or AMP scholars statement that in Hebrew "son" cannot mean a distant relative. Especially since it's right there used Jesus, "son of David". Additionally, it is the age of the Earth thAt is the question, not Adam.
Last edited by a moderator:
thisnumbersdisconnected
Member
That phrase does not appear anywhere in the NASB, the KJV, NIV or any other version I can find. So the argument is a moot point, since the word is "descendant" or "seed."
J
JCitoL
Guest
in such cases, as it is with the biblical expression "the son of David" in Matthew 27, the word "son" has a symbolical usage, e.g. the meaning of "the son of David" is: the Lord of David, or, the Lord with/by David
Matthew 27:41-46 "While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions."
but all genealogy in Luke 3th chapter represents the genealogy which is shown/written in the books of the old testament - the following passages from both the New and the old testament show it:
Luke 3:36-38 "Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech, Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son(i.e. who was made direct(ly)) of God.",
Genesis 5:3-32 "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth: And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos: And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan: And Enos lived after he begat Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died. And Cainan lived seventy years and begat Mahalaleel: And Cainan lived after he begat Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died. And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared: And Mahalaleel lived after he begat Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died. And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he begat Enoch: And Jared lived after he begat Enoch eight hundred years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died. And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah: And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. And Methuselah lived an hundred eighty and seven years, and begat Lamech. And Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech seven hundred eighty and two years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died. And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son: And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed. And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters: And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died. And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.",
Luke 3:34-36 "Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor, Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem",
Genesis 11:10-26 "These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood: And Shem lived after he begat Arphaxad five hundred years, and begat sons and daughters. And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah: And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters. And Salah lived thirty years, and begat Eber: And Salah lived after he begat Eber four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters. And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg: And Eber lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters. And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu: And Peleg lived after he begat Reu two hundred and nine years, and begat sons and daughters. And Reu lived two and thirty years, and begat Serug: And Reu lived after he begat Serug two hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters. And Serug lived thirty years, and begat Nahor: And Serug lived after he begat Nahor two hundred years, and begat sons and daughters. And Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah: And Nahor lived after he begat Terah an hundred and nineteen years, and begat sons and daughters. And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram",
Matthew 1:2-6 "Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;"
Blessings
Last edited by a moderator:
chessman
Member
That's incorrect.
- Mark 10:47
- New International Version
When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”
Mark 10:46-48 (in Context) Mark 10 (Whole Chapter)
- New American Standard Bible
When he heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”
Mark 10:46-48 (in Context) Mark 10 (Whole Chapter) - King James Version
And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out, and say, Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy on me.
Mark 10:46-48 (in Context) Mark 10 (Whole Chapter) - New King James Version
And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”
Mark 10:46-48 (in Context) Mark 10 (Whole Chapter) - English Standard Version
And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!”
Mark 10:46-48 (in Context) Mark 10 (Whole Chapter)
It appers in Matt 1:1 WRT Jesus, Matt 1:20 WRT Joseph (which is an example of the very reason we can understand Biblically that to a Hebrew "son" could mean other than a first generation offspring). It also apperas in Matt 9:27, 12:23, 15:22, 20:30-31 and other parallel passages in Luke and Mark.
I undestand that it's a "title". But the reason it can be used as a "title" is the Hebrew word for "son" could mean both first generation male offsping and a later generation as well. There are numerous other exampls, besides just this phrase "son of David" being used this way as well which is why the ESV, NIV and AMP all have these notes in their genealogy passages. I just reference as the most commonly known passaage. but there are others that show this point. Addtionally, the post is about the age of the Earth, not Adam.
Last edited by a moderator:
thisnumbersdisconnected
Member
Sorry, I missed those verses some how. My apologies. However, (and I didn't feel the need to address this earlier, but as it turns out, it would have been a better approach) the editors of the versions you named have no problem with huios meaning a descendant other than a son. Obviously it means "son" as in the first-genration direct descendant of a man. But it also means the children of Israel, the children of Abraham, it even means a student, a pupil of a rabbi, or a disciple. There are no conflicts in calling Jesus a "Son of David" in that aspect.