How Old Is The Earth

[trophy33]

As I have stated at least five times that I'm in Great Britain I'm assuming you're being deliberately obtuse?

I am rather not interested, because my point is not that you cannot find any YEC outside the USA. However, they are not "visible", they are not active in public space, they do not take it to court, to schools etc like in the USA. They are a minority and they know it and behave accordingly.

Regarding baptists, there are many kinds and they differ from one to another like day and night. Baptists churches are quite a loose organization and a lot of freedom is allowed to the local churches. So you can know some baptists in England teaching the YEC, while you would not find this teaching in another baptist place, maybe even in the same city.

Wrong according to you!

Wrong according to objective reality we live in. And according to the church that repented from their "scientific" mistakes.

I have shown you that it isn't. Great Britain has a long and undeniable heritage of believers who taught young earth creationism going back centuries and I have shown you from the bible where this comes from. All you have done is give unsubstantiated assertions and goal post changes.

There are many UK based YEC organisations, for example the Creation Science Movement: About Us - CSM

Here's the profile of an English Creationist speaker whom I have heard talk, Dr David Rosevar from the University of Portsmouth, Chair of the European Creationist Congress. So you see it's far more than an American movement:

David Rosevear (biographical information) - Creation SuperLibrary - ChristianAnswers.Net

christiananswers.net

As a former Roman Catholic I know that John Paul 2nd caved on the issue and came up with a fudge. The kind of fudge that empties Churches as the Catholic church is experiencing in this country. But I gave you the example of Baptists, I a member of a Baptist Church. We believe YEC, always have believed YEC and have no connection with the United States. Baptist Churches in the UK predate the United States by a hundred and seventy years. How could their beliefs come from a country that didn't yet exist?

I was also a member of a Pentecostal Church for several years, they had several YEC speakers, none from America. So there's another for you.


That's your opinion. We all have one. My opinion is that your opinion honks!


Nevertheless the Lord Jesus Christ said that at the beginning of Creation God made them male and female (Matthew 19:4). This is a direct statement by the Lord Jesus which is not changed by the context. The Lord Jesus clearly believed YEC. You know better than Him now?



Exodus 20:1 'And God spoke all these words'. So did God speak these words, yes or no?

Besides if the idea is 3,000 years old then it definitely did not come from the USA!


Well, you have been clearly proved wrong on that score. YEC is also found in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and has been for centuries. So I would counsel you to stop repeating that erroneous assertion. And bringing up 'flat earth-ism' is just being disingenuous. I have never met anyone who believed in a flat earth. Nor do I believe that. Maybe you believe aliens from the planet Zog built the great pyramid? God Bless You

It seems you are still missing my point regarding the YEC. The modern YEC originated in the USA, is spread to the world from the USA and is found mostly there. Giving me English examples do not change anything, you can find some YEC probably everywhere (as for example the Seventh Days Adventists are found almost everywhere), but its not the mainstream Christian view globally, only in the USA.

Regarding the Bible, when some text says that God said something that is wrong, then its the text that is wrong. God cannot err by definition and our reality can be tested. So the weak part is the text. And it costs you nothing regarding Christian faith or regarding the reality.

 

[trophy33]

Typical libertarian argument, create a false narrative then proceed to knock it down and pretend you’ve accomplished some sort of victory. YEC is an old tradition not a modern tradition it’s your theology that is new, brought about by people who question the accuracy of the Bible instead of the accuracy of science on matters that are not proven, cannot be observed or tested, and scientists know very little about. I’ve tried to explain to you how scientists can be wrong and your whole argument is basically summed up by saying “nuh uh” instead of actually explaining why I’m wrong. This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in my last post. You say “Oh Exodus isn’t talking about creation it’s talking about the sabbath” which is beyond ridiculous. All this is, is your inability to admit that you’re wrong. FOR GOD CREATED THE EARTH IN 6 DAYS!! That’s not talking about creation? God is quoting Genesis 2:3-4

”For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.“
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭20‬:‭11‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

”By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.“
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭2‬:‭2‬-‭3‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Absolutely ridiculous

When a text says that God said something that is provably wrong, then its the text that is wrong. Neither God nor reality can err, by definition. Bible can err and errs in many places, also provably - because - voila! - it was not written by God and inspiration is not dictation.

 

[trophy33]

I’ve been using concordances and lexicons for years. I’ve demonstrated this numerous times in this very thread when I was explaining the numerous variations of the word Yovm and in countless other posts here in CF. I also demonstrated how your “Hebrew scholar” that you posted from YouTube was a complete dishonest idiot in his translation of the creation account by refuting his errors over and over and over. Telling me that I don’t know enough just because I can refute your claims at every point is an oxymoron. Your whole defense is that the Bible didn’t come from God. Which is to actually say that you can’t actually defend your beliefs with the scriptures because your theology is scripturally indefensible. Thats why you have to say things like “God wasn’t telling us how long the creation process took” and “the genealogies weren’t intended to tell us how old the earth is” because you believe in a theology that you can’t defend. So don’t start making false accusations about me just because you lack the ability to defend your theology, your the one who chooses to believe in it.

Neither concordances or lexicons can give you understanding about the Bible as such. Concordances only give you places in a specific translation where words are used and lexicons tells you what those words mean in English. They only refers you to the text itself.

Your dismissive stance towards Bible dictionaries "anybody can write them" or even confusing them with biblical commentaries shows that you are not well versed in this area.

 

[trophy33]

What does geocentrism have to do with the age of the earth?

Both are pre-scientific errors defended in the church by abusing the Bible (using it for another purpose than for which it was written).

 

[trophy33]

No you’re wrong it’s a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. If I had to take a guess I would say it’s probably the result of a textural criticism of the 70 translations that were composed by Jewish scholars at the order of Alexander the Great after he conquered Judea. It’s said that the scholars had to translate the entire Hebrew Bible from memory. What’s your explanation?

There is no "Hebrew Bible". There are several textual families. The Massoretic text (earliest copy is from the 9th century AD), The Septuagint (a Greek translation of an earlier, pre-massoretic text, having also several variants - Theodotion, Old Greek ...) and for example DSS (Isaiah from the DSS is more similar to the Masoretic text, Jeremiah is more similar to the Septuagint text, some texts do not support any of those two).

It was not translated from memory, you are just using some urban legends or something ("its said"), you really need to begin to use solid, credible sources.

 

[Platte]

verse four says:
4For in Your sight a thousand years are but a day that passes a

Moses is saying a day is 1,000 years.

Since you don’t see the symbolism in the statement…..So if 1000 years to God is like a day. Then a day to God would be like 1/4 of a second.

 

[Diamond72]

Since you don’t see the symbolism in the statement…..So if 1000 years to God is like a day. Then a day to God would be like 1/4 of a second.

There are two words that no one understands and that is why no one understands the Bible. The word beginning and the word for day one. Which actually means unity. Day one is a paradigm. All the other days are a copy of day one.

Because they do not understand what beginning means they have not begun to understand the Bible. If you deny OEC you deny that there was a beginning. Because you deny that the light had to travel to get from there to here. Schroeder and Hughs explains this but no one wants to have the understanding of a fifth grader in science.

Gerald Schroeder - Articles - Age of the Universe

www.geraldschroeder.com

Hugh's Story

reasons.org

 

[BNR32FAN]

God confused language at Babylon for a reason. God’s decision to confuse language at Babel served multiple purposes: to prevent further rebellion, promote humility, and scatter humanity across the earth. It remains a powerful lesson about human pride and God’s sovereignty.

AI tries to overcome this confusion and unite people of different cultures.

I don’t know what this has to do with the Septuagint

 

[Diamond72]

I don’t know what this has to do with the Septuagint

We read the story of the tower of Babylon in the Septuagint. Genesis 11:1-9

 

[BNR32FAN]

When a text says that God said something that is provably wrong, then its the text that is wrong. Neither God nor reality can err, by definition. Bible can err and errs in many places, also provably - because - voila! - it was not written by God and inspiration is not dictation.

Ok you say the Bible has been proven wrong. Wheres your proof? This explore the validity of this statement.

 

[Diamond72]

I don’t know what this has to do with the Septuagint.

We read the story of the tower of Babylon in the Septuagint. Genesis 11:1-9 Otherwise we would still speak the language the Bible is written in. Although some say there were two languages at the time in ancient Mesopotamia.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Your dismissive stance towards Bible dictionaries "anybody can write them" or even confusing them with biblical commentaries shows that you are not well versed in this area.

Oh so then all Bible dictionaries are in agreement with one another? All biblical scholars are in agreement with one another?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Both are pre-scientific errors defended in the church by abusing the Bible (using it for another purpose than for which it was written).

This is completely irrelevant to the discussion of YEC because none of this has in any way impacted the theology of YEC.

 

[Platte]

There are two words that no one understands and that is why no one understands the Bible. The word beginning and the word for day one. Which actually means unity. Day one is a paradigm. All the other days are a copy of day one.

Because they do not understand what beginning means they have not begun to understand the Bible. If you deny OEC you deny that there was a beginning. Because you deny that the light had to travel to get from there to here. Schroeder and Hughs explains this but no one wants to have the understanding of a fifth grader in science.

Gerald Schroeder - Articles - Age of the Universe

www.geraldschroeder.com

Hugh's Story

reasons.org

So how do you explain that God created the world in 6 days - 6000 years ago?

 

[BNR32FAN]

There is no "Hebrew Bible". There are several textual families. The Massoretic text (earliest copy is from the 9th century AD), The Septuagint (a Greek translation of an earlier, pre-massoretic text, having also several variants - Theodotion, Old Greek ...) and for example DSS (Isaiah from the DSS is more similar to the Masoretic text, Jeremiah is more similar to the Septuagint text, some texts do not support any of those two).

It was not translated from memory, you are just using some urban legends or something ("its said"), you really need to begin to use solid, credible sources.

Here we go again, so these Masoretic texts aren’t the 24 authoritative books of the Hebrew Bible? Look up the word Masoretic text.

The Masoretic Text[a] (MT or ; Hebrew: נֻסָּח הַמָּסוֹרָה, romanized: Nūssāḥ hamMāsōrā, lit.'Text of the Tradition') is the authoritative Hebrew and Aramaictext of the 24 books of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) in Rabbinic Judaism.

Masoretic Text - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Just because it wasn’t officially canonized yet doesn’t mean they didn’t exist.

You claim that “I’m just using some urban legend or something” then you actually quote the words “it’s said” which means you did actually see the evidence that I provided in the very same source you used because that “urban legend” is always included in every source that is pertaining to the origin of the Septuagint. Do you know why it’s called the Septuagint? Because it means THE TRANSLATION OF THE 70.

 

[BNR32FAN]

We read the story of the tower of Babylon in the Septuagint. Genesis 11:1-9 Otherwise we would still speak the language the Bible is written in. Although some say there were two languages at the time in ancient Mesopotamia.

What you’re talking about took place in the days of Abraham. The Jews didn’t start speaking Greek until the 3rd century BC.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There is no "Hebrew Bible". There are several textual families. The Massoretic text (earliest copy is from the 9th century AD), The Septuagint (a Greek translation of an earlier, pre-massoretic text, having also several variants - Theodotion, Old Greek ...) and for example DSS (Isaiah from the DSS is more similar to the Masoretic text, Jeremiah is more similar to the Septuagint text, some texts do not support any of those two).

It was not translated from memory, you are just using some urban legends or something ("its said"), you really need to begin to use solid, credible sources.

Cite your source that doesn’t say that the Septuagint is the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

 

[KevinT]

We DO have what God said....unless you don't believe the Bible - then you can nit-pick it. For argument sake - I think it fair that our conversations on this Board accept the Bible.

1 Cor 7:12: To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her.

Did God write this?

Gal 5:12 I wish that the people who are upsetting you would go all the way; let them go on and castrate themselves!

How about this? Jesus and the Father are transmitting messages to Paul for him to write that they wish people who oppose Paul's message to have their d***'s cut off? I don't think so.

I believe in the Bible, as I have posted before. But it would be foolish to not apply our God-give common sense to understanding the Bible.

Best wishes,
Kevin

 

[Diamond72]

I don't think so.

We are told that Paul is difficult to understand. Look at all the lawless people who claim Paul gives them permission for their debauchery.

 

[BNR32FAN]

1 Cor 7:12: To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her.

Did God write this?

Gal 5:12 I wish that the people who are upsetting you would go all the way; let them go on and castrate themselves!

How about this? Jesus and the Father are transmitting messages to Paul for him to write that they wish people who oppose Paul's message to have their d***'s cut off? I don't think so.

I believe in the Bible, as I have posted before. But it would be foolish to not apply our God-give common sense to understanding the Bible.

Best wishes,
Kevin

I don’t see why Galatians 5:12 couldn’t have come from God. Paul just finished saying that they have been severed from Christ and had fallen from grace. So obviously God was very angry with these people. As for 1 Corinthians 7:12 Paul specifically said that it was not from God, does this imply that we can attribute this example to any passage we want? Genesis 1 and 2 could only have come from one of two sources. Either they came from God who was the only One present to witness any of it, or they can from man’s imagination.