When science can explain an apple seed...

[sfs]

If things in the universe were created in mature, perfect working order to sustain life, wouldn't it naturally appear old? Even if it wasn't? Like Adam. He was created mature on day one yet looked "older" than a day old.

No, if things were created mature they would have looked mature. Instead they look old: they show an extensive record of a sequence of events that never happened. I would not expect Adam to have been created with an appendectomy scar and a couple of healed broken bones, would you? But that's the kind of thing we see in nature everywhere. Light reaching us just now from supernovas that happened millions of years ago. Ancient soils preserved in the ground with the impression of raindrops and animal tracks still in them. Stuff like that all over.

 

[juvenissun]

No, if things were created mature they would have looked mature. Instead they look old: they show an extensive record of a sequence of events that never happened. I would not expect Adam to have been created with an appendectomy scar and a couple of healed broken bones, would you? But that's the kind of thing we see in nature everywhere. Light reaching us just now from supernovas that happened millions of years ago. Ancient soils preserved in the ground with the impression of raindrops and animal tracks still in them. Stuff like that all over.

Now, this is my updated education from a molecular biologist:

If we plant a red delicious apple from its seeds, then chances are that we will NOT get a red delicious apple tree.

Can you tell me why?

 

[gluadys]

Now, this is my updated education from a molecular biologist:

If we plant a red delicious apple from its seeds, then chances are that we will NOT get a red delicious apple tree.

Can you tell me why?

I am going to go out on a limb and assume a red delicious is a hybrid. In that case, we would not get a red delicious from its seed because of the independent assortment of chromosomes as the gametes are formed.

Sexual reproduction re-assorts the combinations of chromosomes to ensure diversity. That is why, to get the sort of uniform production marketers demand, farmers need to get new F1 hybrid seed every year (or every planting). Or use some form of cloning.

 

[juvenissun]

I am going to go out on a limb and assume a red delicious is a hybrid. In that case, we would not get a red delicious from its seed because of the independent assortment of chromosomes as the gametes are formed.

Sexual reproduction re-assorts the combinations of chromosomes to ensure diversity. That is why, to get the sort of uniform production marketers demand, farmers need to get new F1 hybrid seed every year (or every planting). Or use some form of cloning.

Does that mean we can easily change the DNA of a plant or a seed?

 

[sfs]

I am going to go out on a limb and assume a red delicious is a hybrid. In that case, we would not get a red delicious from its seed because of the independent assortment of chromosomes as the gametes are formed.

Yes. Whether it's technically a hybrid or not, the particular combination of genetic variants won't appear together in the offspring when a red delicious tree is pollinated with pollen from another tree. And the pollen has to come from some other kind of tree, because most apple trees are infertile if pollinated with genetically identical pollen.

When I reproduced sexually, I didn't produce offspring identical to myself either: my wife's genes had as much to say about what our children looked like as I did.

(Other things could be going on too. Even genetically identical offspring might have somewhat different stable gene expression patterns than the parents, because of persistent epigenetic patterns that would probably be reset in sexual reproduction.)

 

[sfs]

Does that mean we can easily change the DNA of a plant or a seed?

No. We're just talking about the standard genetics of sexually reproducing organisms. Mendel would have understood it.

It's true, though, that we are now getting to the point where we can easily change the DNA of organisms -- certainly animals and fungi, probably plants too -- in quite precise ways. That has nothing to do with Red Delicious apples, which arose naturally.

 

[Lollerskates]

Have you ever cut open an apple seed? Inside it has an off white color. It's moist, but yet when placed in the soil that seed knows to grow an apple tree. How does it know?

When science can explain this, then, and only then, will I listen to their nonsense on evolution.

You see if they can't tell me how an apple seed works then they have a lot of audacity to tell me how I came into being....

:::::BLIND POST:::::


I am guessing the OP is asking a profound question on how does nature know to write a specific code that is unique to, say an apple seed, that the apple seed should, when introduced to proper conditions produce a tree that produces more progeny of apples. A "randomness of existence" vs. "complexity of life" issue. How did complexity of instruction with such precision form from chemical reactions? (You almost need near-infinite time to do this, like the statistical problem of monkeys rewriting a Shakespearean novel on a typewriter.)

Another somewhat converse example: how does donkey sperm know that a horse's egg is not suitable for combination and proceation from the product of the two for future generations beyond the mule that is produced? How does nature as a purely "random, evolutionary and mathematical phenomenon" understand "kinds?" Why/how would nature "know" to make a mule sterile? What does/has speciation of the mule said such that it is a given the genetics of a donkey-horse product is best to produce a sterile product not fit for procreation?

Go on.

And OP, correct me if I am wrong in my assumptions of your post.

 

[sfs]

I am guessing the OP is asking a profound question on how does nature know to write a specific code that is unique to, say an apple seed, that the apple seed should, when introduced to proper conditions produce a tree that produces more progeny of apples.

There's nothing mysterious about why the "code" that's in apple seeds should produce more apple trees when it grows. It is the code for producing apple trees, after all -- that's how it got into the apple seed in the first place. The code for producing apple trees came about by evolution. How the very first code came about is currently unknown, although there are some glimmerings of a answer.

A "randomness of existence" vs. "complexity of life" issue. How did complexity of instruction with such precision form from chemical reactions? (You almost need near-infinite time to do this, like the statistical problem of monkeys rewriting a Shakespearean novel on a typewriter.)

Please show your calculations for the time required.

Another somewhat converse example: how does donkey sperm know that a horse's egg is not suitable for combination and proceation from the product of the two for future generations beyond the mule that is produced?

It doesn't know. That's why donkey sperm fertilizes horse eggs, even though it's going to produce a dead end. Mules are infertile because the conflicting instructions from the two species are not adapted to working together.

How does nature as a purely "random, evolutionary and mathematical phenomenon" understand "kinds?"

Nature doesn't understand "kinds". Heck, I'm a biologist and I don't understand kinds. If you know what kinds are, please let me know.

Why/how would nature "know" to make a mule sterile? What does/has speciation of the mule said such that it is a given the genetics of a donkey-horse product is best to produce a sterile product not fit for procreation?

Nature doesn't say any of those things. If you randomly combine instructions for making two different animals, you're likely to end up with a mess. If the two are closely related enough, the product may sort of work, but will probably have some problems, like being sterile.

 

[mathetes123]

:::::BLIND POST:::::


I am guessing the OP is asking a profound question on how does nature know to write a specific code that is unique to, say an apple seed, that the apple seed should, when introduced to proper conditions produce a tree that produces more progeny of apples. A "randomness of existence" vs. "complexity of life" issue. How did complexity of instruction with such precision form from chemical reactions? (You almost need near-infinite time to do this, like the statistical problem of monkeys rewriting a Shakespearean novel on a typewriter.)

Another somewhat converse example: how does donkey sperm know that a horse's egg is not suitable for combination and proceation from the product of the two for future generations beyond the mule that is produced? How does nature as a purely "random, evolutionary and mathematical phenomenon" understand "kinds?" Why/how would nature "know" to make a mule sterile? What does/has speciation of the mule said such that it is a given the genetics of a donkey-horse product is best to produce a sterile product not fit for procreation?


Go on.

And OP, correct me if I am wrong in my assumptions of your post.

Only intelligence produces information.

 

[Lollerskates]

There's nothing mysterious about why the "code" that's in apple seeds should produce more apple trees when it grows. It is the code for producing apple trees, after all -- that's how it got into the apple seed in the first place. The code for producing apple trees came about by evolution. How the very first code came about is currently unknown, although there are some glimmerings of a answer.

Where did the code come from? Evolution? How? Why is it so precise? Oh, it is currently unknown... how convenient.

Please show your calculations for the time required.

I am not the one that says "however many years transpired" for the genetic code to precisely be able to "lock in" apple seed genetics. So, what do you want calculations for? I said as per evolution (and its "millions of years of development") is typical of any seemingly impossible event. You need "near infinite" time to allow such complex events to occur. Even monkeys typing Shakespearean novels is quantitatively measurable - you just need a lot of time.

It doesn't know. That's why donkey sperm fertilizes horse eggs, even though it's going to produce a dead end. Mules are infertile because the conflicting instructions from the two species are not adapted to working together.

Convenient. Primordial soup produces amino acids that produce eukaryotic life, yet a dead-end is reached when a donkey and horse meet.

Nature doesn't understand "kinds". Heck, I'm a biologist and I don't understand kinds. If you know what kinds are, please let me know.

Nature doesn't understand kinds? Is that why I cannot reproduce with a goat to produce a PAN? Is that why I cannot produce with a bull to produce a Minotaur? Nature is much more than mainstream biology. I cannot even begin to "let you know" what kinds are. Tell you what, tell your employer to give me $30,000,000 in grant money, and I will show why humans cant naturally mate with bulls to create a minotaur, or give me $20,000,000 in grant money and I will show how humans cannot produce offspring between a goat and a human. It is a money issue, not academic issue.

Nature doesn't say any of those things. If you randomly combine instructions for making two different animals, you're likely to end up with a mess. If the two are closely related enough, the product may sort of work, but will probably have some problems, like being sterile.

?

So, if a Male donkey mixes with a female horse, it wont produce a sterile mule? A mule isn't a mess; it is a sterile animal. Do you need a second to ponder about what was actually said?


As I said before, the scoffers will billow. I am hoping you are a biological scientist, and you are not regurgitating what your "lab coats" are telling you. Then, we can truly have an academic argument.

 

[sfs]

Where did the code come from? Evolution? How?

Be more specific. What "code"? The genetic code, which is the mapping from DNA to amino acids? Or the specific DNA that's in an apple?

Why is it so precise?

DNA isn't particularly precise. Again, what exactly are you talking about?

Oh, it is currently unknown... how convenient.

Where apple DNA came from isn't unknown, at least in outline. It came from earlier plants via accumulated mutations.

I am not the one that says "however many years transpired" for the genetic code to precisely be able to "lock in" apple seed genetics.

I don't recall anyone saying that.

So, what do you want calculations for? I said as per evolution (and its "millions of years of development") is typical of any seemingly impossible event. You need "near infinite" time to allow such complex events to occur. Even monkeys typing Shakespearean novels is quantitatively measurable - you just need a lot of time.

I want your calculation for the need for "near infinite" time. That sounds like a whole lot, and I want to know why you think that much is needed.

Convenient. Primordial soup produces amino acids that produce eukaryotic life, yet a dead-end is reached when a donkey and horse meet.

Huh? What's convenient about it? If there's an argument here, I'm failing to see it.

Nature doesn't understand kinds? Is that why I cannot reproduce with a goat to produce a PAN?

Yes, nature doesn't understand kinds -- that's why I said it. Species are real things in nature (if a bit fuzzy around the edges). But I don't know what "kinds" are. It seems to be a creationist term, and it never seems to be defined clearly.

Is that why I cannot produce with a bull to produce a Minotaur?

No, you can't produce a minotaur because you and bulls have incompatible DNA. (Also, you're both males, which pretty much makes it a no go as far as reproduction is concerned.) How does "kind" enter into things?

Nature is much more than mainstream biology. I cannot even begin to "let you know" what kinds are. Tell you what, tell your employer to give me $30,000,000 in grant money, and I will show why humans cant naturally mate with bulls to create a minotaur, or give me $20,000,000 in grant money and I will show how humans cannot produce offspring between a goat and a human. It is a money issue, not academic issue.

The particular reasons why members of different species aren't interfertile are indeed a subject for scientific inquiry. And as it happens, we may recommend that my employer spend some of the $100,000,000 he just got on investigating just that question. But again -- what does this have to do with "kinds"?

So, if a Male donkey mixes with a female horse, it wont produce a sterile mule? A mule isn't a mess; it is a sterile animal. Do you need a second to ponder about what was actually said?

A sterile animal is a slightly messed up animal. Trying to reproduce with even more distantly related species produces even more of a mess. Again, what's your point?

As I said before, the scoffers will billow. I am hoping you are a biological scientist, and you are not regurgitating what your "lab coats" are telling you. Then, we can truly have an academic argument.

The only scoffers I've seen here are those scoffing at evolutionary biology. And I've already told you that I'm a biologist. If you want to have an academic argument, by all means start one.

 

[Setyoufree]

...The code for producing apple trees came about by evolution. How the very first code came about is currently unknown, although there are some glimmerings of a answer..

Magic, right? Shear chance...?

Evolution attempts to do away with simple logic in a creator and attempts to replace it with men's so called intelligence.

Can one explain how a creator created?

No! But nevertheless there had to be a designer of all we see. Things just don't create themselves.

 

[Lollerskates]

Be more specific. What "code"? The genetic code, which is the mapping from DNA to amino acids? Or the specific DNA that's in an apple?

Both: the specificity, and generality of chemical genetic coding of an apple seed. Why is it so complex? Why would "nature" find a reason to increase complexity (especially given the 2nd law of thermodynamics) just so that one little seed can produce more apple trees?

DNA isn't particularly precise. Again, what exactly are you talking about?

DNA is incredibly precise. Have you seen the process that creates DNA? Precision is the name of the game; one chemical off, and you don't have the proper mechanisms to create DNA - the code of life.

Where apple DNA came from isn't unknown, at least in outline. It came from earlier plants via accumulated mutations.

Uh huh. Like you said, it is unknown [to scientists.] So, we revert to evolution, then? [/sarcasm] Faith-based science is amusing to me, especially since many "scientists" do not recognize their own faith in most of their theories. It is the same faith they have that the roof over their heads wont collapse on them, or that they won't fall into a sink hole. Forcing hypothesis into axioms.

I don't recall anyone saying that.

Didn't you answer your own "recall" with the previous response you posted?

Where apple DNA came from isn't unknown, at least in outline. It came from earlier plants via accumulated mutations.

Again, show difinitive, non-decaying proof of these mutations e.g. show that 1) the mutations existed in history up to now and, 2) the mutations are not subject to time-perturbation - that they are not subject to random influence of radioactive decay.

I want your calculation for the need for "near infinite" time. That sounds like a whole lot, and I want to know why you think that much is needed.

You are arguing the science behind this and you haven't even taken P. Chem, or statistical thermodynamics? The "monkeys writing a Shakespearean novel" problem is a trite problem in those disciplines. The point is that given a long enough time period, anything is quantitatively possible. 4.5 billion years is a long time, no? Or, have we gotten used to U.S. currency inflation so much that 4.5 billion doesn't sound like a lot? Given that the universe is *supposedly* only three times the age of the earth, why can't you understand evolution works on *near* infinite time? In order for evolution to claim the things it claims, you need billions of years statistically. It isn't even a matter of philosophy; you need those years to statistically work.

If you want further proof, do the work. Don't wait on me. Ignorance is no excuse. MIT courseworks, I am sure, has the statistical problem. Solve it. Be proud of your own accomplishments - that you don't have to ask people for "proof."

Huh? What's convenient about it? If there's an argument here, I'm failing to see it.

It is convenient that primordial soup produces eukaryotic life (not prokaryotic life,) along with consciousness, reproductive instincts, and other abstractions, but it FAILS at producing potent mules - even though a horse and donkey mate and produce a mule. It can produce all of that complexity (conscious, etc.,) but it can't make a mule fertile... why not?

I know you miss the argument because you see nothing wrong with evolution in the first place.

Yes, nature doesn't understand kinds -- that's why I said it. Species are real things in nature (if a bit fuzzy around the edges). But I don't know what "kinds" are. It seems to be a creationist term, and it never seems to be defined clearly.

A creationist term. Nice dig.

Is a bird and a horse the same kind? Is an elephant and hyena the same kind? Don't play dumb; you know what a "kind" is. That is why, for example above, the horse and donkey can reproduce to produce. Though, their product is not fertile (why not, evolution?) Species are but classifications "scientists" bundle creatures into.

FYI I was being sarcastic. Nature DOES understand kinds. That is why I cannot go and copulate with a goat and produce a bunch on PANs. My sperm is not compatible with goat eggs.

No, you can't produce a minotaur because you and bulls have incompatible DNA. (Also, you're both males, which pretty much makes it a no go as far as reproduction is concerned.) How does "kind" enter into things?

Last time I check in America, male-on-male interactions do not prevent children from being born...

Anyway, why is my DNA not compatible with a "cow?" Why does nature respect that - in all of its random primordial soup forged nativity?

The particular reasons why members of different species aren't interfertile are indeed a subject for scientific inquiry. And as it happens, we may recommend that my employer spend some of the $100,000,000 he just got on investigating just that question. But again -- what does this have to do with "kinds"?

$100,000,000? Wow, see that is the difference between independent (somewhat blacklisted) scientists, and mainstream scientists. I only asked for $30,000,000.

Kinds? The point in the quoted paragraph is that I would show you (with $30,000,000 - you can give me at any time) why I a human cannot procreate with a "cow" (I know I said bull, I was jumping the though thinking of minotaur.) It is to show that for some ridiculous reason, nature won't let me procreate with cows to produce half human-half cow creatures. WHY NOT? What is it in nature - in the code that dictates order of kinds? You still don't understand kinds? Are you being coy, or feigning ignorance?

A sterile animal is a slightly messed up animal. Trying to reproduce with even more distantly related species produces even more of a mess. Again, what's your point?

Why would nature make a slightly messed up animal? Are you feigning ignorance, again?

Why would nature create a sterile animal, especially a sterile animal that is environmentally beneficial (i.e. loading and carrying)?

The only scoffers I've seen here are those scoffing at evolutionary biology. And I've already told you that I'm a biologist. If you want to have an academic argument, by all means start one.

That's right the only you have seen. You are not omnipresent or omniscient. And, that is what you perceive. I am asking you straight up the qualms I have with evolution. I am a physicist; enlighten me. But, don't expect me to let you go with an easy throw-away answer. I asked you questions; I didn't scoff. I started an academic argument a long time ago; accept.

 

[Lollerskates]

Magic, right? Shear chance...?

Evolution attempts to do away with simple logic in a creator and attempts to replace it with men's so called intelligence.

Can one explain how a creator created?

No! But nevertheless there had to be a designer of all we see. Things just don't create themselves.

Just to touch on the "who created the creator" theory, there has to be a prime in all events. So, for mathematical purposes only, we have to entertain that there exists a prime that exists and generates all-space and dimension (The Most High.) Even the number zero is a generator of the null-space.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Have you ever cut open an apple seed? Inside it has an off white color. It's moist, but yet when placed in the soil that seed knows to grow an apple tree. How does it know?

When science can explain this, then, and only then, will I listen to their nonsense on evolution.

You see if they can't tell me how an apple seed works then they have a lot of audacity to tell me how I came into being....

But the Word tells us the spirit of the created kind is the life force that obeys the Creator's command to multiply the kind.

The spirit is alive in every created living thing, and answers to the Creator; and each spirit of each different kind is one single spirit, and each kind answers to the Creator.

We can see the spirit grow the seed come to life/germination and watch the spirit of the kind form the house for that seed, according to the DNA plan for it which the Creator spoke into it in the beginning of creation, in time lapse videos.
Acorn to oak tree time-lapse - YouTube



Radish Time Lapse -- seed to harvest in 33 days - YouTube

 

[WanderingBloom]

Have you ever cut open an apple seed? Inside it has an off white color. It's moist, but yet when placed in the soil that seed knows to grow an apple tree. How does it know?

When science can explain this, then, and only then, will I listen to their nonsense on evolution.

You see if they can't tell me how an apple seed works then they have a lot of audacity to tell me how I came into being....

You have to realize where you are. There are people here who are new earth creationists. That means they will argue you till they're blue in the face that the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
There are real people in the world, not just fans of satire, but real sincere people who will argue the earth is flat. And they are members of the "Flat Earth Society". That was created in all seriousness many years ago. And who's members argue that those who say the earth is not flat are all involved in a conspiracy to lead people astray.
Those types I personally think sir Richard Branson should contact at Flat Earth Society and allow the President of FES to fly for free on the maiden voyage of Virgin Galactic. Just to shut them up!

You have to realize there are people in this forum who think science can take a hike!
So the apple seed thing, how that happens, isn't something that can be answered any other way by those types save for; goddidit.

Where do you think DNA came from?
Pride and hubris are sins. How arrogant is it for people to think God has nothing better to do for eternity than to make every little thing that happens in the world to happen!
And if they don't think that's how it works, then how is it that it is impossible to believe God created DNA, and change, Theistic Evolution, as it's known to be, in order for all that he did create to survive while he goes on and does other things besides obsess with how the world works!

 

[WanderingBloom]

But the Word tells us the spirit of the created kind is the life force that obeys the Creator's command to multiply the kind.

It would be a great help to shrink the width of this thread page if you would edit those You Tube video's URL's.
"Https" distends the thread page. If you paste the https url as you would intend to do in posting the video link, but edit the "s" out of the http prior to committing the post you'll stop the page from distending.
You can edit by cutting the URL https , pasting it on your notepad, deleting the "s" , copy and then paste the new URL.
For some reason, as I found out, if you try to simply edit the https here and then commit to post the edited version it still shows the wide view.

Just a thought to make it easier for people who have small monitors to read pages here without having to scroll right to do so due to the present https you tube video url.

 

[Lollerskates]

Just FYI for any on-lookers reading my particular posts - mine only - I am not a YEC... I believe Earth and Heaven was created before time existed. In other words - I believe Earth is the physical representation of Heaven - and it is before time. Older even, than 4.5 Billion years. Older than the "universe" itself. I get that from Genesis 1:1.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Just FYI for any on-lookers reading my particular posts - mine only - I am not a YEC... I believe Earth and Heaven was created before time existed. In other words - I believe Earth is the physical representation of Heaven - and it is before time. Older even, than 4.5 Billion years. Older than the "universe" itself. I get that from Genesis 1:1.

Can't get that from Genesis 1.

There was no light when the heavens and earth were created.
Then God said "Let there be light", and there was light....and the evening and the morning were echad/one "Day".

There were no heavens stretched out from earth until day 2.
Then God stretched out the heavens between the divided in two waters of creation. Waters He named "Mayim", and the fiirmament He named "sha- mayim". The shin letter was first depicted by the two front teeth/ incisors, and can mean "two". So the waters/mayim are cut in two and the firmament is stretched out between them, and named sha-mayim.

There was no sun or moon until day 4.
Then God made a menorrah/the sun to set in the heavens to rule the light by day, and the moon to rule the light by night.

The stars were made also, and are powers controlling, among other things, the seasons and bringing in the years: hail, lightning, and floods -astronimical events of weather -and they answer to God and He calls them all by name. They also fight God's wars for Him:
Jdg 5:20 They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.

Jos 10:11 And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.


Jdg 5:21 The river of Kishon swept them away, that ancient river, the river Kishon. O my soul, thou hast trodden down strength.

The Bible states many times that the sun goes around the earth, which is called the tebal, which is a globe, translated world; so the world is a globe, and is the center of the stretched out heavens, which were stretched out from the earth on day 2.

The stars will one day fall to the earth, right back to where they have their primal origin, when the heavens which they are in were stretched out from the earth between the divided in two waters of creation..



The stretched out heavens have "stories", and there are at least three stories: the atmosphere is called the face of heaven, where created things fly -Genesis 1.

The third heaven is where Paradise is, in Mount Eden of the stretched out "breadth of the earth", and that is where Adam was taken to, to reign over earth and to tend the Garden of God/Paradise there, and got cast back down to the earth from.

Paradise is in the third heaven, but the stars are in the second heaven, where the sun and moon are.

The light has its primal origin right here on this earth, also, in the heavens, before they were stretched out, and was stretched out with the heavens on day 2.

So there is no possibility that you can get an old earth from Genesis.
You have to believe myths that have no foundation in the Word of God to believe that.

Genesis 1 is a factual account written by God, which Adam read in the Scriptures of Heaven, when he was set there with the angels and fellow shipped with the Creator daily.

Also, the sun itself does not make the light, but governs the light of day 1, and the sun is said in the Word of God to be the place where God set His created temple in the created heaven.

Too bad men believed fallible men about the earth gong round the sun, instead of God's Word, which clearly tells us the heavens themselves go round the earth, making a circle each one day of evening and morning; and the sun, moon, and stars have their own courses/paths to follow in the created heavens which are "the circle of earth which God sits in on His throne which He set in His created sun.


Everything above is in the Word of God, but men who did not believe it made up fables which the unbelieving follow, instead of God's Word.
-and unbelievers who translated the Latin Vulgate to English after Galileo, did not translate what the Latin says, and what the Greek Septuagint says, and what the Hebrew says: "He hath set His tabernacle/dwelling place, in the sun"...
Douay-Rheims Psalm 18 [19 in KJV]
[1] Unto the end.

A psalm for David.
[2] The heavens shew forth the glory of God, and the firmament declareth the work of his hands.
[3] Day to day uttereth speech, and night to night sheweth knowledge. [4] There are no speeches nor languages, where their voices are not heard.

[5] Their sound hath gone forth into all the earth: and their words unto the ends of the world.
[6] He hath set his tabernacle in the sun: and he, as a bridegroom coming out of his bride chamber, Hath rejoiced as a giant to run the way:
[7] His going out is from the end of heaven, And his circuit even to the end thereof: and there is no one that can hide himself from his heat

The sun is not a hydrogen furnace, but is a menorrah, a light refractor made of cut diamond crystals -Enoch said the temple of God in heaven is made of cut crystal and pillars of fire.

Now men do say that the wandering stars/planets [earth is not a planet] have diamond oceans with floating diamond icebergs in them, so God certainly knows how to make the raw materials for His temple/dwelling place, and also, the universe is "electric" from the moment God said "Let there be Light", for that was the moment the the electro-magnetic forces were brought into being, which are the "pillars" of heaven and earth -and also called " stars of dawn", in Job.


Diamond Oceans Possible on Uranus, Neptune : Discovery News



Enoch's trip to the temple of God in heaven:

8And the vision was shown to me thus: Behold, in the vision clouds invited me and a mist summoned me, and the course of the stars and the lightnings sped and hastened me, and the winds in the vision caused me to fly and lifted me upward, and bore me into heaven. 9And I went in till I drew nigh to a wall which is built of crystals and surrounded by tongues of fire: and it began to affright me.

10And I went into the tongues of fire and drew nigh to a large house which was built of crystals: and the walls of the house were like a tesselated floor made of crystals, and its groundwork was of crystal.

11Its ceiling was [like] the path of the stars and the lightnings, and between them were fiery cherubim, and their heaven was clear [as] water.

12A flaming fire surrounded the walls, and its portals blazed with fire. 13And I entered into that house, and it was hot as fire and cold as ice: there were no delights of life therein: fear covered me, and trembling got hold upon me.

14And as I quaked and trembled, I fell upon my face.

The Vision of the Great Glory
15And I beheld a vision, And lo! there was a second house, greater than the former, and the entire portal stood open before me, and it was built of flames of fire.
16And in every respect it so excelled in splendour and magnificence and extent that I cannot describe to you its splendour and its extent. 17And its floor was of fire, and above it were lightnings and the path of the stars, and its ceiling also was flaming fire.
18And I looked and saw therein a lofty throne: its appearance was as crystal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun, and there was the vision of cherubim. 19And from underneath the throne came streams of flaming fire so that I could not look thereon.
20And the Great Glory sat thereon, and His raiment shone more brightly than the sun and was whiter than any snow.
21None of the angels could enter and could behold His face by reason of the magnificence and glory, and no flesh could behold Him.
22The flaming fire was round about Him, and a great fire stood before Him, and none around could draw nigh Him: ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him, yet He needed no counsellor.
23And the most holy ones who were nigh to Him did not leave by night nor depart from Him.
24And until then I had been prostrate on my face, trembling: and the Lord called me with His own mouth, and said to me: "Come hither, Enoch, and hear my word."
25And one of the holy ones came to me and waked me, and He made me rise up and approach the door: and I bowed my face downwards.

 

[Lollerskates]

Can't get that from Genesis 1.

There was no light when the heavens and earth were created.
Then God said "Let there be light", and there was light....and the evening and the morning were echad/one "Day".

There were no heavens stretched out from earth until day 2.
Then God stretched out the heavens between the divided in two waters of creation. Waters He named "Mayim", and the fiirmament He named "sha- mayim". The shin letter was first depicted by the two front teeth/ incisors, and can mean "two". So the waters/mayim are cut in two and the firmament is stretched out between them, and named sha-mayim.

There was no sun or moon until day 4.
Then God made a menorrah/the sun to set in the heavens to rule the light by day, and the moon to rule the light by night.

The stars were made also, and are powers controlling, among other things, the seasons and bringing in the years: hail, lightning, and floods -astronimical events of weather -and they answer to God and He calls them all by name. They also fight God's wars for Him:
Jdg 5:20 They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.

Jos 10:11 And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and were in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which died with hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.


Jdg 5:21 The river of Kishon swept them away, that ancient river, the river Kishon. O my soul, thou hast trodden down strength.

The Bible states many times that the sun goes around the earth, which is called the tebal, which is a globe, translated world; so the world is a globe, and is the center of the stretched out heavens, which were stretched out from the earth on day 2.

The stars will one day fall to the earth, right back to where they have their primal origin, when the heavens which they are in were stretched out from the earth between the divided in two waters of creation..



The stretched out heavens have "stories", and there are at least three stories: the atmosphere is called the face of heaven, where created things fly -Genesis 1.

The third heaven is where Paradise is, in Mount Eden of the stretched out "breadth of the earth", and that is where Adam was taken to, to reign over earth and to tend the Garden of God/Paradise there, and got cast back down to the earth from.

Paradise is in the third heaven, but the stars are in the second heaven, where the sun and moon are.

The light has its primal origin right here on this earth, also, in the heavens, before they were stretched out, and was stretched out with the heavens on day 2.

So there is no possibility that you can get an old earth from Genesis.
You have to believe myths that have no foundation in the Word of God to believe that.

Genesis 1 is a factual account written by God, which Adam read in the Scriptures of Heaven, when he was set there with the angels and fellow shipped with the Creator daily.

Also, the sun itself does not make the light, but governs the light of day 1, and the sun is said in the Word of God to be the place where God set His created temple in the created heaven.

Too bad men believed fallible men about the earth gong round the sun, instead of God's Word, which clearly tells us the heavens themselves go round the earth, making a circle each one day of evening and morning; and the sun, moon, and stars have their own courses/paths to follow in the created heavens which are "the circle of earth which God sits in on His throne which He set in His created sun.


Everything above is in the Word of God, but men who did not believe it made up fables which the unbelieving follow, instead of God's Word.
-and unbelievers who translated the Latin Vulgate to English after Galileo, did not translate what the Latin says, and what the Greek Septuagint says, and what the Hebrew says: "He hath set His tabernacle/dwelling place, in the sun"...
Douay-Rheims Psalm 18 [19 in KJV]
[1] Unto the end.

A psalm for David.
[2] The heavens shew forth the glory of God, and the firmament declareth the work of his hands.
[3] Day to day uttereth speech, and night to night sheweth knowledge. [4] There are no speeches nor languages, where their voices are not heard.

[5] Their sound hath gone forth into all the earth: and their words unto the ends of the world.
[6] He hath set his tabernacle in the sun: and he, as a bridegroom coming out of his bride chamber, Hath rejoiced as a giant to run the way:
[7] His going out is from the end of heaven, And his circuit even to the end thereof: and there is no one that can hide himself from his heat

The sun is not a hydrogen furnace, but is a menorrah, a light refractor made of cut diamond crystals -Enoch said the temple of God in heaven is made of cut crystal and pillars of fire.

Now men do say that the wandering stars/planets [earth is not a planet] have diamond oceans with floating diamond icebergs in them, so God certainly knows how to make the raw materials for His temple/dwelling place, and also, the universe is "electric" from the moment God said "Let there be Light", for that was the moment the the electro-magnetic forces were brought into being, which are the "pillars" of heaven and earth -and also called " stars of dawn", in Job.


Diamond Oceans Possible on Uranus, Neptune : Discovery News



Enoch's trip to the temple of God in heaven:

8And the vision was shown to me thus: Behold, in the vision clouds invited me and a mist summoned me, and the course of the stars and the lightnings sped and hastened me, and the winds in the vision caused me to fly and lifted me upward, and bore me into heaven. 9And I went in till I drew nigh to a wall which is built of crystals and surrounded by tongues of fire: and it began to affright me.

10And I went into the tongues of fire and drew nigh to a large house which was built of crystals: and the walls of the house were like a tesselated floor made of crystals, and its groundwork was of crystal.

11Its ceiling was [like] the path of the stars and the lightnings, and between them were fiery cherubim, and their heaven was clear [as] water.

12A flaming fire surrounded the walls, and its portals blazed with fire. 13And I entered into that house, and it was hot as fire and cold as ice: there were no delights of life therein: fear covered me, and trembling got hold upon me.

14And as I quaked and trembled, I fell upon my face.

The Vision of the Great Glory
15And I beheld a vision, And lo! there was a second house, greater than the former, and the entire portal stood open before me, and it was built of flames of fire.
16And in every respect it so excelled in splendour and magnificence and extent that I cannot describe to you its splendour and its extent. 17And its floor was of fire, and above it were lightnings and the path of the stars, and its ceiling also was flaming fire.
18And I looked and saw therein a lofty throne: its appearance was as crystal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun, and there was the vision of cherubim. 19And from underneath the throne came streams of flaming fire so that I could not look thereon.
20And the Great Glory sat thereon, and His raiment shone more brightly than the sun and was whiter than any snow.
21None of the angels could enter and could behold His face by reason of the magnificence and glory, and no flesh could behold Him.
22The flaming fire was round about Him, and a great fire stood before Him, and none around could draw nigh Him: ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him, yet He needed no counsellor.
23And the most holy ones who were nigh to Him did not leave by night nor depart from Him.
24And until then I had been prostrate on my face, trembling: and the Lord called me with His own mouth, and said to me: "Come hither, Enoch, and hear my word."
25And one of the holy ones came to me and waked me, and He made me rise up and approach the door: and I bowed my face downwards.

You don't need a sun, moon, stars, trees, water, or animals for earth to exist. Moreover, there are plenty of mechanisms that can sustain plant life WITHOUT a sun or moon. The bible says the earth was created in the beginning - BEFORE time itself was designated. Earth was supposed to be physical heaven, and will be when Christ comes back. Genesis 1:1 states specifically earth is older than age. As I said before, there are several mechanisms that will explain the rest of creation in its respective order.