Creationists: how close is the Jewish Calandar to the age of the Earth?

[BNR32FAN]

If I tell a story about how I baked a pizza, is it necessary for me to talk about the origins of all matter in the known universe in order to do so?

No.

Whether God created ex nihilo or not, has no bearing on whether or not Genesis (or Moses) has to tell that story.

If Moses wants to tell an ex materia story, then we can't change that just because we might feel uncomfortable with it.

If I want to talk about how I made a pizza in the oven, rather than telling you the story about the material atomic origins of my pizza, then you just have to let me tell the story about my oven baked pizza, rather than trying to force me to talk about the big bang.

Do you see what I mean?

If I'm having a pizza party, and I want to talk about my pizza, then let it be. We don't need to turn it into a discussion about astronomy and how the carbon atoms of my pizza came from a supernova.

Even if it's true that the carbon atoms of my pizza came from a supernova, if that's not the story that I want to tell, then it's not right for someone to barge in and start changing my story into something that it's not.

I’m not saying anything about ex nihilo or ex materia the point that I’m making is that the earth is not 4.5 billion years old. That’s the root of the argument here. The point of my argument is that God created the earth in Genesis 1:1. The creation of the earth had to take place on day one of creation otherwise Genesis 2:2-3 is incorrect.

 

[AlexB23]

Oh I’m pretty much lost in eschatology. To me the end times prophecies are too ambiguous to formulate any sort of solid doctrine on so I don’t even try to.

I do agree with you on that as eschatology is a mess, but we do have some signs of the times. 2 Timothy 3 is describing the world we are currently living in. The wars we have on this Earth have gotten bigger and more dangerous (drone warfare, nuclear threats, guided missiles), and that woke Olympics ceremony of 2024 remind me of this verse. So, we must try to show people how to put on the armor of God. That armor is attained when we give our lives to Christ.

2 Timothy 3:1-5 (NKJV): "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!"

 

[Job 33:6]

I’m not even arguing about ex nihilo or ex materia, just that Genesis 1:1 does include the creation of the earth.

Ephesians 1 says nothing about Genesis. It doesn't even say anything about how God created the foundations of the world.

"He must begin with the creation of the earth before He can form it and it has to be within the 6 day creation process"

This is incorrect. There is no reason that Genesis must begin with God forming the earth ex nihilo, even if we agreed that God did do this.

Just like if I bake a pizza and tell you about how I created the pizza, that doesn't require me to tell you about the atomic material origins of that pizza.

 

[Job 33:6]

I’m not saying anything about ex nihilo or ex materia the point that I’m making is that the earth is not 4.5 billion years old. That’s the root of the argument here. The point of my argument is that God created the earth in Genesis 1:1. The creation of the earth had to take place on day one of creation otherwise Genesis 2:2-3 is incorrect.

The creation of the earth (ex nihilo) does not have to take place in Genesis at all. By what justification must it be described in Genesis?

Just as if I'm hosting a pizza party and if I want to tell my friends a story about how I created a pizza from formless and empty dough, I don't need to give a scientific explanation about the atomic material origins of the dough.

By forcing Genesis to speak on a topic like big bang cosmology, you are forcing Genesis to speak to your modern 21st century concerns about the age of the earth and geology.

But Genesis was written a long time ago. They weren't worried about the age of the earth back then. Geology as a science didn't event exist.

It's not reasonable to force the text to fit our modern interests and concerns. Rather than reading the text on their terms (the ancient isrealites).

 

[BNR32FAN]

If anyone is interested in learning about Egyptian creation theology and comparing them to the Genesis account here’s a video that tells three of the major Egyptian creation stories. I invite anyone to listen to them and conclude for yourself whether or not the Genesis creation account was influenced by these stories.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Ephesians 1 says nothing about Genesis. It doesn't even say anything about how God created the foundations of the world.

"He must begin with the creation of the earth before He can form it and it has to be within the 6 day creation process"

This is incorrect. There is no reason that Genesis must begin with God forming the earth ex nihilo, even if we agreed that God did do this.

Just like if I bake a pizza and tell you about how I created the pizza, that doesn't require me to tell you about the atomic material origins of that pizza.

Now you’re just ignoring the context of my post to avoid continuing the discussion. In both of my last replies I made it clear that it doesn’t matter whether or not God created the earth ex nihilo or ex materia, I’ve told you several times already that’s not what I’m arguing about and that my point is that the earth was made in Genesis 1:1 and that it is not 4.5 billion years old. I’m not arguing about whether it was made from nothing or not I’m arguing about when it was made and whether Genesis 1:1 is referring to the creation of the earth.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The creation of the earth (ex nihilo) does not have to take place in Genesis at all. By what justification must it be described in Genesis?

Just as if I'm hosting a pizza party and if I want to tell my friends a story about how I created a pizza from formless and empty dough, I don't need to give a scientific explanation about the atomic material origins of the dough.

By forcing Genesis to speak on a topic like big bang cosmology, you are forcing Genesis to speak to your modern 21st century concerns about the age of the earth and geology.

But Genesis was written a long time ago. They weren't worried about the age of the earth back then. Geology as a science didn't event exist.

It's not reasonable to force the text to fit our modern interests and concerns. Rather than reading the text on their terms (the ancient isrealites).

Again this is the second post that you replied to talking about the earth being made ex nihilo or ex materia when in the post you are replying to I specifically said that I’m not arguing about whether the earth was made from nothing or not. Can we please continue the discussion on whether or not Genesis 1:1 is referring to the creation of the earth or not?

 

[Job 33:6]

Now you’re just ignoring the context of my post to avoid continuing the discussion. In both of my last replies I made it clear that it doesn’t matter whether or not God created the earth ex nihilo or ex materia, I’ve told you several times already that’s not what I’m arguing about and that my point is that the earth was made in Genesis 1:1 and that it is not 4.5 billion years old. I’m not arguing about whether it was made from nothing or not I’m arguing about when it was made and whether Genesis 1:1 is referring to the creation of the earth.

I never said that earth wasn't created in Genesis. And as noted before, the earth isn't created until day 3. It is not created in day 1, light is created on day 1. Your argument regarding Ephesians 1 really doesn't have anything to do with Genesis.

See here:

Creationists: how close is the Jewish Calandar to the age of the Earth?

Sure it does allow for pre existent things. In many ways. Ive made a pizza ex materia. Does that negate the truth that God made all things? Of course not. But however many pizzas you've made, you (as far as I know) do not claim to have made all things without exception. John says that all...

www.christianforums.com

 

[Job 33:6]

Again this is the second post that you replied to talking about the earth being made ex nihilo or ex materia when in the post you are replying to I specifically said that I’m not arguing about whether the earth was made from nothing or not. Can we please continue the discussion on whether or not Genesis 1:1 is referring to the creation of the earth or not?

Sure. Let's take it from the top:

Genesis 1:1 is not an actual event. It's just an introductory statement. It's like saying:

In the beginning when BNR created a pizza, now the pizza was formless and empty, and then BNR said "let there be a pizza roller and pepperoni".

Verse 1 is just an intro. The actual pizza creating doesn't begin until verse 3 with the spoken word.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I never said that earth wasn't created in Genesis. And as noted before, the earth isn't created until day 3. It is not created in day 1, light is created on day 1. Your argument regarding Ephesians 1 really doesn't have anything to do with Genesis.

See here:

Creationists: how close is the Jewish Calandar to the age of the Earth?

Sure it does allow for pre existent things. In many ways. Ive made a pizza ex materia. Does that negate the truth that God made all things? Of course not. But however many pizzas you've made, you (as far as I know) do not claim to have made all things without exception. John says that all...

www.christianforums.com

If the earth isn’t created until day 3 then why does verse 2 say that the EARTH was without form and void? You can’t have an earth that is formless and void if it hasn’t been created yet. And how do we have evening and morning on both days one and two if there’s no earth rotating? And how do we have water floating in the vacuum of space with no atmosphere. Water boils instantly in space and evaporates into a vapor. Maybe the earth was created in verse 1 which explains why verse 2 says “the earth was without form and void” and also explains why there was evening and morning and explains why the water didn’t instantly boil and evaporate into a vapor because the planet was already created and rotating and had an atmosphere with gravity. To me that seems to make the most sense since verse one specifically says that “in the beginning” or “when God began creating” whichever you prefer doesn’t make any difference at all because both of them say that God began by creating the heavens and the earth. If He waited until day three that’s not exactly the beginning. Not to mention that if you’re going to create things that are going to be on something you might create the thing that everything is going to be on first. It doesn’t make much sense to try to put the walls, windows, doors, and roof on a house that has no foundation yet.

 

[Job 33:6]

If the earth isn’t created until day 3 then why does verse 2 say that the EARTH was without form and void?

Because the creation is ex materia, not ex nihilo.

Just like how I can say:
In the beginning, Job created a pizza, now the pizza was formless and empty, and then Job said "let there be a dough roller".

You can’t have an earth that is formless and void if it hasn’t been created yet.

Yes you can. Just like how Adam wasn't created yet in chapter 2, but the ground he was made of was there, formless.

And how do we have evening and morning on both days one and two if there’s no earth rotating?

The earth is there, it just hadn't been created yet. It was formless. Remember, Genesis isn't a science textbook.

And how do we have water floating in the vacuum of space with no atmosphere. Water boils instantly in space and evaporates into a vapor.

Genesis isn't a science textbook. You're thinking too much like a climate scientist here.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The earth is there, it just hadn't been created yet. It was formless. Remember, Genesis isn't a science textbook.

If the earth exists then it has already been created because I’ve already demonstrated that it didn’t always exist according to Ephesians 1:4. Your statement that the earth is there but hasn’t been created yet doesn’t make any sense. How can it be there if God didn’t create it yet? That’s absurd.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Because the creation is ex materia, not ex nihilo.

Just like how I can say:
In the beginning, Job created a pizza, now the pizza was formless and empty, and then Job said "let there be a dough roller".

But the pizza wasn’t empty according to your explanation because it already has sauce on it before the dough is created. You’re saying the earth wasn’t created until day 3 but the water already exists on the earth.

 

[David Lamb]

The earth is there, it just hadn't been created yet. It was formless. Remember, Genesis isn't a science textbook.

That doesn't make any sense at all. If the earth is there, how can it not have been created yet? To use your pizza illustration, that would be like saying, "There's a home-baked pizza in Job's kitchen, but he hasn't made it yet."

 

[BNR32FAN]

That doesn't make any sense at all. If the earth is there, how can it not have been created yet? To use your pizza illustration, that would be like saying, "There's a home-baked pizza in Job's kitchen, but he hasn't made it yet."

I think he’s trying to muddy the waters by saying that the earth is there but it hasn’t been formed yet which I would agree with but he’s trying to avoid saying that God had created the unformed earth on day 1. He absolutely doesn’t want to admit that and that’s why he’s making this confusing statement.

 

[David Lamb]

I think he’s trying to muddy the waters by saying that the earth is there but it hasn’t been formed yet which I would agree with but he’s trying to avoid saying that God had created the unformed earth on day 1. He absolutely doesn’t want to admit that and that’s why he’s making this confusing statement.

Thanks! That would make sense.

 

[Job 33:6]

That doesn't make any sense at all. If the earth is there, how can it not have been created yet? To use your pizza illustration, that would be like saying, "There's a home-baked pizza in Job's kitchen, but he hasn't made it yet."

Because the Hebrew word "bara" does not mean ex nihilo creation. Just like when Adam was created. The matter that Adam was created out of, was already there. It was just formless.

Regarding pizza, it's more like having pizza that hasn't been baked yet. The pizza is there, it just hasn't been made yet.

Or, think about backyard football. I need to create a football team. Ok, all the kids line up and pick teams schoolyard style.

You can create things without them needing to appear out of thin air.

And if you do a word study of bara, you'll find that in the Bible, there are no places anywhere that it clearly means ex nihilo. However it is common to find instances where it means ex materia.

 

[Job 33:6]

I think he’s trying to muddy the waters by saying that the earth is there but it hasn’t been formed yet which I would agree with but he’s trying to avoid saying that God had created the unformed earth on day 1. He absolutely doesn’t want to admit that and that’s why he’s making this confusing statement.

If you agree with me, that bara is ex materia throughout the 6 days of Genesis, then my point is made.

You will never find a single case, anywhere in the old testament, of bara involving matter appearing out of nothing.

 

[Job 33:6]

But the pizza wasn’t empty according to your explanation because it already has sauce on it before the dough is created. You’re saying the earth wasn’t created until day 3 but the water already exists on the earth.

What sauce? You mean Tohu? Or "nothingness"? We've already covered this topic too.

"The deep" is similar to how we think about darkness today. In ex materia creation, it is "nothing".

God doesn't ever create darkness in the old testament. On Day 1 God creates light. And darkness is there just by default because it's an absence of light.

Water of the deep is similar. It's not something that God ever creates. It's simply there as an absence of that which is created.

Jeremiah is a good book to read in understanding this and the meaning of "Tohu" or "nothing" and bohu "void".

"The deep" is kind of like the complete opposite of that which is created. That's why during Noah's flood, God releases "the deep" Genesis 7:11, and re-contains it Genesis 8:11, when God un-created the earth during Noah's flood. And that's why the Genesis flood story parallels Genesis 1 with so many passages. And if you would like more details on this, feel free to ask.

The deep is much more than mere "water" in the old testament. It's not just "sauce".

And I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Bible is not a science textbook. When it says "the deep", it's not merely talking about water.

Look at how the deep is used in the Bible. Everywhere in the old testament. It's the antithesis of creation. It is dangerous. It is mysterious. It is, dark. It is...

The sea creatures in Daniel. Monsters of the apocalypse rise out of it.

Jonah, when he is thrown into the deep, he doesn't merely drown, he sinks down to sheol, the underworld.

The psalmist, when he describes the deep, he says that God would search his heart and would follow him to the deepest reaches of tehom. Or the waters.

The deep, in the old testament is far far more than mere water.

And so, the earth, covered with tehom. It's not about sauce over pizza. It's more like, an enemy of God, or complete disorder and chaos, between God and establishment of creation.

That's why proverbs says:
He made strong the skies above, When the springs of the deep became fixed, When He set for the sea its boundary So that the water would not transgress His command, When He marked out the foundations of the earth;
Proverbs 8:28-‬29

It may not transgress his command. It's about God's protective hand, being risen against chaos and disorder.

In the book of Job: job chapter 7,
Am I the sea, or the monster of the deep, that you put me under guard?

The deep is way way more than mere "water".

That's part of what makes creation, creation. God's establishment of order. God's defeat of disorder. Tohu wa bohu.

 

[David Lamb]

Because the Hebrew word "bara" does not mean ex nihilo creation. Just like when Adam was created. The matter that Adam was created out of, was already there. It was just formless.

Regarding pizza, it's more like having pizza that hasn't been baked yet. The pizza is there, it just hasn't been made yet.

Or, think about backyard football. I need to create a football team. Ok, all the kids line up and pick teams schoolyard style.

You can create things without them needing to appear out of thin air.

And if you do a word study of bara, you'll find that in the Bible, there are no places anywhere that it clearly means ex nihilo. However it is common to find instances where it means ex materia.

Well if you start with the presupposition that God did not create ex nihilo, then obviously you will say that there are no places anywhere that bara clearly means ex nihilo. In fact I have just looked up the occurrences of bara, and in most cases, either it is clearly stated that by commanding, God brought something into existence, or there is no particular indication that God used pre-existent materials. For example:

“Let them praise the name of the LORD, For He commanded and they were created.” (Ps 148:5 NKJV)

“So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that [it was] good.” (Ge 1:21 NKJV)

If God needed pre-existent material before creating the earth, where did that material come from?

Going back to your pizza, whether or not the pizza has been baked yet, it's still a pizza. An uncooked pizza exists. You don't bring a pizza into existence by baking it; you just make it edible. The earth, in Genesis 1:1, was "without for and void" but that doesn't mean it did not exist.