6,000 Years?

[Platte]

But there's nothing in there about the earth bringing forth trees with annual rings already in them.

I've never seen or heard of a 50 foot tree (or any tree) without tree rings - that is a characteristic of a tree...just like leaves and branches are. I assume Adam had hair even though most babies don't have hair when born. If you drew me a picture of a 20 year old man - you'd draw one with all the characteristics of a 20 year old - internally they would have the organs and features of a 20 year old.

When you create a Man you would know the life cycle of a person...and you would then create them at that state in their life cycle that you deem most functional....thus a 20 year old man (perhaps) with all the characteristics of a 20 year old man.

Same with trees or any the other animals created.

 

[tampasteve]

Even if God made Adam as a fully grown man as you believe, that doesn't mean therefore God made trees with annual rings already in them, plus all the other manipulations that would have to occur.

Wait, are you saying God did not make Adam as a grown man?

 

[Job 33:6]

What is it that you're having trouble with? A particular word, or?

 

[Apple Sky]

What is it that you're having trouble with? A particular word, or?

Nothing now, I get what you posted - Thanks

 

[Frank Robert]

Let review one of those chipped stone tools together - I'm not just gonna take what some archaeologists says...I want to see the data.

Why do you want to talk to me, I am not an archaeologist. If you want more information, here is an archaeology report on Göbekli Tepe from 2012 and 2013

Lets look at one of those chipped stone tools together and see who they extracted an age from it. I"m not going to take their word for it - I want to see what they and how they based it.

Are you an archaeologist? If so look at the report and let us know what you think. Otherwise I don't think you will fault me for not wanting to waste my time with non-archaeologist's opinion.

 

[River Jordan]

I've never seen or heard of a 50 foot tree (or any tree) without tree rings - that is a characteristic of a tree

But again, there's nothing in Genesis about 50 foot trees.

 

[River Jordan]

Wait, are you saying God did not make Adam as a grown man?

I don't believe so. I read Genesis as using "Adam" to refer to "mankind", not a single individual. I realize others read it differently and that's to be expected.

 

[com7fy8]

Does anybody have proof that the earth and the entire universe really is 6,000 - ish years old beyond the usual arguments that science has debunked over and over again? Arguments like the rocks in the Grand Canyon or some other such weak examples? I’m looking for reputable scientists who’ve written peer reviewed papers on the subject and gained the support of other reputable scientists?

Scientists still are changing from things that were considered proven. And I am sure that I would not be knowledgeable enough to know for sure which ones to trust, anyway.

And I am not Melchizedek.

I consider Romans 8:20-21.

 

[Job 33:6]

On Adam and Eve.

 

[David Lamb]

"Let the earth bring forth" does not mean that they were instantaneously mature in a seed bearing state. Only that the earth brought them forth.

In fact, the Hebrew term there for "bring forth" or dasha, is also the same word used for "sprout" or to "put forth green shoots" elsewhere in the Bible.

Genesis 1:11 NASB1995
[11] Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so.

Joel 2:22 LEB
[22] Do not fear, wild animals of the field, because the pastures of the desert have put forth new green shoots, because the tree has produced its fruit, the fig tree and the vine have yielded their produce.

Joel 2:22 NIV
[22] Do not be afraid, you wild animals, for the pastures in the wilderness are becoming green. The trees are bearing their fruit; the fig tree and the vine yield their riches.

Genesis 1:11 ESV
[11] And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so.

If the earth is sprouting vegetation, then you can just observe that these trees aren't fully mature when introduced. Sprouting is something a plant does when it comes out of the earth.

And in Joe's 2:22 the wilderness or the desert sprouts or brings forth green shoots or turns green etc. but in Joel we also understand that it's not describing fully mature trees appearing out of nothing.

My point was that Genesis specifies God creating trees (and other plants) with seed already in them, not creating seeds, sowing then and waiting for them to mature before creating Adam and Eve and putting them in the Garden of Eden. Joel 2:22 isn't talking about Creation, so of course it's not describing fully mature trees appearing out of nothing.

 

[Job 33:6]

My point was that Genesis specifies God creating trees (and other plants) with seed already in them, not creating seeds, sowing then and waiting for them to mature before creating Adam and Eve and putting them in the Garden of Eden. Joel 2:22 isn't talking about Creation, so of course it's not describing fully mature trees appearing out of nothing.

But it doesn't.

Genesis 1:11 NRSVUE
[11] Then God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.” And it was so.

Let's think about the English language.

Let the Earth put forth vegetation, or sprout vegetation.

This first verse tells us that the earth will sprout it. But it doesn't say what kind of process is used to reach that state. Nor how long it will take.

Plants yielding seed. It tells us that these plants will yield seed, but it doesn't say When the seeds appeared, whether they were present initially when the plants sprouted or whether they developed later. Same with fruit trees. It tells us that the earth will sprout fruit trees. But there is no specification about the process or timing of that.

I could say "hey, I'm going to go plant a garden with trees bearing fruit!".

But that doesn't entail that I'm saying trees bearing fruit are just going to rip out of the ground with the fruit already formed.

In fact, the point that it says this vegetation will sprout from the earth, indicates that there is a process involved, with the timing unknown.

Regarding Joel, the point is about the Hebrew term and what it means. Green shoots, turning green, sprouting. Etc. these concepts do not indicate that the vegetation in question was fully mature at the onset. Only that it would eventually become so.

Here is another translation:

Genesis 1:11 NIV
[11] Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: (colon) seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so.

It merely says that the land will produce these things. No further details is given on the process or timing.

Genesis 1:12 NIV
[12] The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Same here. The land sprouted or produced vegetation. But no clarity is given for a process or timing.


You could say, if the Genesis days were 24 hours long, then the fruit and seeds must have appeared within 24 hours. But that position would depend on someone viewing the 7 days of creation as an earth history textbook rather than something like a temple inauguration.

 

[David Lamb]

But it doesn't.

Genesis 1:11 NRSVUE
[11] Then God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.” And it was so.

Let's think about the English language.

Let the Earth put forth vegetation, or sprout vegetation.

This first verse tells us that the earth will sprout it. But it doesn't say what kind of process is used to reach that state. Nor how long it will take.

Plants yielding seed. It tells us that these plants will yield seed, but it doesn't say When the seeds appeared, whether they were present initially when the plants sprouted or whether they developed later. Same with fruit trees. It tells us that the earth will grow fruit trees. But there is now specification about the process or timing of that.

I could say "hey, I'm going to go plant a garden with trees bearing fruit!". But that doesn't entail that I'm saying trees bearing fruit are just going to rip out of the ground with the fruit already formed.

In fact, the point that it says this vegetation will sprout from the earth, indicates that there is a process involved, with the timing unknown.

The point is that according to Genesis, God created the earth, and He created plants. The plants were there for a reason - to provide food for Adam and Eve and the animals. God is almighty, so it is nothing for Him to create full-grown trees and plants, just as He would later create a fully adult Adam, not a baby or a foetus.

 

[Job 33:6]

The point is that according to Genesis, God created the earth, and He created plants. The plants were there for a reason - to provide food for Adam and Eve and the animals. God is almighty, so it is nothing for Him to create full-grown trees and plants, just as He would later create a fully adult Adam, not a baby or a foetus.

I agree with the point. But of course the text doesn't indicate the timing or process in the growth of those fruit trees. And Genesis 1 doesn't even mention Adam and Eve, so let's try not to veer too far off course.

 

[David Lamb]

I agree with the point. But of course the text doesn't indicate the timing or process in the growth of those fruit trees. And Genesis 1 doesn't even mention Adam and Eve, so let's try not to veer too far off course.

Granted, Adam and Eve are not named until the next chapter, but man was created on Day 6, so I don't think that's off course.

 

[Job 33:6]

@David Lamb and nobody is denying that God could make 500 foot trees by snapping His fingers if He wanted to. But rather, that's just not what the Bible says:

Genesis 1:11 NASB1995
[11] Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so.

It says "let the earth sprout vegetation". Which indicates that these plants are growing from baby plants just like any other. No further details are given to us with respect to things like how fast they grew or their age or anything like that.

And it especially doesn't say anything about tree rings.

 

[Job 33:6]

Granted, Adam and Eve are not named until the next chapter, but man was created on Day 6, so I don't think that's off course.

It's possible they were a part of that group. We don't really know, Adam and Eve may have come at some later point in time. But again, no further details are given on whatever timing was involved for the growth of these trees. Nor the process involved. Only that they sprouted or in some fashion were produced by the earth.

 

[Job 33:6]

@David Lamb the only thing I would grant you is that, if someone interpreted the Genesis days as literal 24 hours, and not something like a 7-day temple inauguration, then that would force the seeds and fruit to appear within 24 hours.

But of course this argument wouldn't make sense to people who are not young earth creationists.

 

[David Lamb]

@David Lamb and nobody is denying that God could make 500 foot trees by snapping His fingers if He wanted to. But rather, that's just not what the Bible says:

Genesis 1:11 NASB1995
[11] Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so.

It says "let the earth sprout vegetation". Which indicates that these plants are growing from baby plants just like any other. No further details are given to us with respect to things like how fast they grew or their age or anything like that.

And it especially doesn't say anything about tree rings.

I agree that no mention is made of tree rings. As for the rest, it seems to me that it boils down to whether we believe the days of Genesis 1 were actual days, or long periods of time.

 

[Job 33:6]

I agree that no mention is made of tree rings. As for the rest, it seems to me that it boils down to whether we believe the days of Genesis 1 were actual days, or long periods of time.

Or a third option, that they were actual days in relation to a 7 day temple inauguration (that isn't about the age of the earth). Among other options.

 

[stevevw]

Not exactly 3500BCE. The Ziggurat at Ur was built by Shulgi, a mighty man in 2100BCE. Ishtar's gate in about 600BCE, last one looks like a statue from Nimrud in 1000BCE.

I'm just going by the mainstream date for the birth of civilization around 6,000 years ago. Wiki mentions the first tect dates back to 4,000BCE. So cultures like Gobekli Tepe who are located above Mesopotamia Did not have writing but glyphs and look more primitive. But then we have even more primitive glyphs and structures before GT. So theres a whole history of cultural development even before Mesopotamia.

The world's earliest known texts come from the Sumerian cities of Uruk and Jemdet Nasr, and date to between c. 3350 – c. 2500 BC, following a period of proto-writing c. 4000 – c. 2500 BC.
Sumer - Wikipedia

Once you get to 3500BCE the amount of architecture is very limited. Important things were beginning to be build with bricks but the vast majority of the structures are still mud bricks and reeds which had been in use since around 15,000BCE. Before that it was a rough place(cold) for humans outside of caves. Which explains why ancient humans didn't invent civilization building technologies at some arbitrary point before 15,000BCE.

Thats the point I am making recent dicoveries or I should say rediscoveries for many of them are being dated well before 3500BCE and the architecture is amazing. Its megalithic and precision works. The strange thing is that the later cultures claim they did not make these works but found them and say they were from the gods.

Then they try and copy the works and thats when you actually see the limited architecture coming in. When I say limited its sort of rough looking and smaller. Most often represented by the mud bricks or mortar. Like the pre dynastic and earliest Egyptians built all the great pyramids at the beginning and then disappeared and this was then replaced with the mud bricks of the later dynasties.

Its like history went backwards for a while and we had the best works all over the world and then more or less disappeared only to start again with basic works gradually building the later Egyptians and Sumariens and all other cultures around the world like in Puru and North American and Asia who did the same. In some ways I don't think modern knowledge has caught up with these ancient megalithic cultures.

In 2200BCE or so the city Eridu was considered ancient ruins correctly by the Sumerians. They excavated the mudbrick temple which was about 2300 years old at the time. Ancient civs had their own "ancient civs" to do archaeology on. Then the site becomes somewhat of a tourist attraction. Which is something people who compress the timelines don't seem to understand. Of course, these ancient people got the dating wrong. They didn't know the difference between 2000 years and 400000(which is the date they had since creation of Eridu).

Its like Gobekli Tepe. The small brick walls in between the 18' T pillars were a later addition. So obviously they found GT abandoned and in ruin. This seems to be a common themes around the world where later cultures find ruins and then try to repair or honor these earlier works.