6,000 Years?

[Amo2]

There's nothing to debate. You just read what it says:

Genesis 1:1-2 CEB
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth— [2] the earth was without shape or form, it was dark over the deep sea, and God’s wind swept over the waters—

The earth was formless when God began. How long it was formless, we don't know. So where do YECs get their YEC beliefs from? Obviously not the Bible.

Did YECs decide to take on the fight against the world's scientists before actually reading the Bible?

Unfortunately so. Therein lies the simple issue. They didn't start with God's Word.

No, verse 2 of Genesis 1, does not negate all the rest of Genesis 1. Or the rest of holy scripture which backs up the testimony of the Genesis creation account throughout. Not to mention the testimony of God Himself. Spoken audibly to all of Israel from the mount in a most awesome display of divinity, and written with His own finger in tables of stone for Israel with His own finger. This is simply what you choose to believe, not at all what holy scripture teaches or supports.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

The beginning Genesis is addressing is the beginning of the creation of this world, not what was before it. This included the creation of at least our galaxy in any case, as our sun, moon, solar system no doubt, and stars were created as well. Perhaps the entire universe also, though I am not necessarily convinced of such.

James Webb Telescope's New Discoveries Seemingly Contradict Long-Held Beliefs About Galaxy Formation

James Webb Telescope's new findings challenge galaxy formation theories, suggesting rapid galaxy creation and questioning the role of dark matter.

www.sciencetimes.com

According to the article at the above link, galaxies formed much faster than previously thought. Which is to say that complexity within the universe developed much earlier than thought. Which has been a theme of discovery concerning many different scientific disciplines in recent years. Complexity further and further back in time is of course indicative of complexity from the beginning, as in design. For YEC's of course this makes perfect sense. Since God created everything complex from the beginning. No deep time slow processes of change according to the false theories of evolution. He created the galaxies as well. The Genesis account may very well be an account of the creation of one of many galaxies.

 

[Job 33:6]

No, verse 2 of Genesis 1, does not negate all the rest of Genesis 1. Or the rest of holy scripture which backs up the testimony of the Genesis creation account throughout. Not to mention the testimony of God Himself. Spoken audibly to all of Israel from the mount in a most awesome display of divinity, and written with His own finger in tables of stone for Israel with His own finger. This is simply what you choose to believe, not at all what holy scripture teaches or supports.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

The beginning Genesis is addressing is the beginning of the creation of this world, not what was before it. This included the creation of at least our galaxy in any case, as our sun, moon, solar system no doubt, and stars were created as well. Perhaps the entire universe also, though I am not necessarily convinced of such.

James Webb Telescope's New Discoveries Seemingly Contradict Long-Held Beliefs About Galaxy Formation

James Webb Telescope's new findings challenge galaxy formation theories, suggesting rapid galaxy creation and questioning the role of dark matter.

www.sciencetimes.com

According to the article at the above link, galaxies formed much faster than previously thought. Which is to say that complexity within the universe developed much earlier than thought. Which has been a theme of discovery concerning many different scientific disciplines in recent years. Complexity further and further back in time is of course indicative of complexity from the beginning, as in design. For YEC's of course this makes perfect sense. Since God created everything complex from the beginning. No deep time slow processes of change according to the false theories of evolution. He created the galaxies as well. The Genesis account may very well be an account of the creation of one of many galaxies.

Yes, for in 6 days, God created the heavens and the earth. Just as for in 6 hours I created a pot of clay. But the text never says how long the earth was formless before God began to create it, just like I never said how long the pot was formless before I began to create it.

Genesis 1:1-2 CEB
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth— [2] the earth was without shape or form, it was dark over the deep sea, and God’s wind swept over the waters—

We can read Genesis days 1 through 6, and can see the waters being separated, and the waters being gathered and we can read about the creation of the heavens and the earth in those passages. But nothing in the text says how long the earth was formless and under the waters before they were gathered to form the seas, before God began to create it in those 6 days.

The way YECs respond to this obvious statement in the Bible is to either ignore it, or to act as if they've never read it before. Like they've never read the Bible. It's just silly. They want to take on the world's scientists, but they can't even get past the very first verse in the Bible.

 

[River Jordan]

No, I think scientists like all of us, base their pursuits upon their chosen beliefs or world views. Aligning their speculations regarding that which they observe, with those faiths and or world views.

How do you know that? I'm a scientist and I don't align my work with my faith, and I've never seen any of my coworkers do it either. If any of us actually altered a single bit of our work to align with a faith, we would be immediately called out for it and there would be consequences.

So I'm wondering where you got your impression from.

I don't just think that they do, I observe that they do. More than just a few of them stating these exact intentions. Others simply going where their predetermined world views lead them. Some simply not interested in that which contradicts or brings their views into question. Others intentionally ignoring or downplaying them. There are scientists who have stated it as their exact intention to leave God completely out of the scenario.

Can you please post some examples?

 

[Job 33:6]

"The beginning Genesis is addressing is the beginning of the creation of this world, not what was before it. "

Yes, just like I can say "when I began to create a pot" without saying how long the pot was formless and lumpy before I began to create it.

In the beginning when I created a pot, the pot was lumpy, formless and empty. And in 6 days I gave it form (days 1-3) and filled it up (days 4-6). So that in 6 days all my work was done and I had completed my work. It was good. The pot was with form and filled with water when I had finished after 6 days of creation.

But none of this says anything about how long the pot was lumpy, formless and empty, before I began to create it.

So Young Pot Creationists have no basis for saying how old my pot is, because they don't know how long it was lumpy and formless before I began to create it.

Genesis 1:1-2 CEB
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth— [2] the earth was without shape or form, it was dark over the deep sea, and God’s wind swept over the waters—

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSV
[1] In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

Genesis 1:1-2 NABRE
[1] In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth—[2] and the earth was without form or shape, with darkness over the abyss and a mighty wind sweeping over the waters—

Genesis 1:1-2 NRSVUE
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth, [2] the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.

Verdict:
YECs are ignoring what the Bible says.

@Amo2

 

[Amo2]

Yes, for in 6 days, God created the heavens and the earth. Just as for in 6 hours I created a pot of clay. But the text never says how long the earth was formless before God began to create it, just like I never said how long the pot was formless before I began to create it.

Genesis 1:1-2 CEB
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth— [2] the earth was without shape or form, it was dark over the deep sea, and God’s wind swept over the waters—

We can read Genesis days 1 through 6, and can see the waters being separated, and the waters being gathered and we can read about the creation of the heavens and the earth in those passages. But nothing in the text says how long the earth was formless and under the waters before they were gathered to form the seas, before God began to create it in those 6 days.

The way YECs respond to this obvious statement in the Bible is to either ignore it, or to act as if they've never read it before. Like they've never read the Bible. It's just silly. They want to take on the world's scientists, but they can't even get past the very first verse in the Bible.

Yes, YEC's do center around scientifically defending that which Genesis says about the creation of this world and its surroundings. Not what it does not say anywhere regarding what was before it, save the one verse you seem to be preoccupied with. Scripture does not address how whatever that one verse refers to, came about. While it does exactly address and state that this world and its surroundings were brought about by the word of God. Though it does not scientifically address how that works.

In any case, whatever was meant by verse 2, is no longer. Being replaced by what now is, as described in the Genesis creation account. This physical earth and its surroundings. The evidence we all have before us, which may be examined. What you speak of may no longer be observed and or examined, having been changed into or replaced by what now is. Therefore do YEC"s move on from verse 2, as Genesis itself and the rest of scripture do.

Again, creationists are not the ones claiming to know what deep time scenarios of pre earth, galaxy, or universe existence were. Save that which scripture itself reveals. These scientific guesses are more for and or from deep timers than YEC's. We simply debate that the evidences which we can now all observe, are not as old as deep timers claim in contradiction to the plain testimony of holy scripture. It has and continues to be observed, that what deep timers once claimed took millions of years to develop, can be reproduced right in front of our faces in laboratories supplying the right conditions conducive unto such. Conditions which a global flood and later catastrophic events would readily and abundantly supply. So that deep time scenarios are no longer necessary mechanisms of development regarding that which we presently see and exist within.

These are separate issues of course for YEC's, than that of what existed and how, before creation. The beginning from which holy scripture goes forth.

 

[Amo2]

How do you know that? I'm a scientist and I don't align my work with my faith, and I've never seen any of my coworkers do it either. If any of us actually altered a single bit of our work to align with a faith, we would be immediately called out for it and there would be consequences.

So I'm wondering where you got your impression from.


Can you please post some examples?

Sure. I'll work on that one.

 

[The Barbarian]

As far as I and anyone I know knows, all the supposed scientific evidence that you are not seeking , i.e. evidence the earth is over ten thousand years old, has been disproven time and time again , and the story men made up keeps changing to try not to be proven wrong. They keep blacklisting the truth, and silencing those who are telling the truth.

That's just a story dishonest people tell you. Even honest YE creationists admit the evidence shows a very old Earth. They don't deny the evidence, they just put a higher value on their understanding of scripture. Dr. Harold Coffin, for example:

In December 1981, Coffin and Ariel Roth, also employed by GRI, served as expert witnesses on behalf of the defense during the Arkansas Creation trial (McLean et al. vs State Board of Education). They referred to things like rapid fossilization and massive depth of coal beds as bases for believing in a worldwide flood. Under cross-examination, however, Coffin noted that his belief in a young earth was based on the Bible; he said the scientific evidence alone would lead him to believe the earth was very old.

He's not alone. Would you like to learn about more honest YECs?

 

[Amo2]

How do you know that? I'm a scientist and I don't align my work with my faith, and I've never seen any of my coworkers do it either. If any of us actually altered a single bit of our work to align with a faith, we would be immediately called out for it and there would be consequences.

So I'm wondering where you got your impression from.


Can you please post some examples?

Here is one article addressing such.

“We Cannot Allow a Divine Foot in the Door”

“Oh no! Someone is letting God in the door!” Is that the meaning of the quote in the title? Evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin made a rather interesting comment that has become inf…

hoasrc.com

 

[Amo2]

That's just a story dishonest people tell you. Even honest YE creationists admit the evidence shows a very old Earth. They don't deny the evidence, they just put a higher value on their understanding of scripture. Dr. Harold Coffin, for example:

In December 1981, Coffin and Ariel Roth, also employed by GRI, served as expert witnesses on behalf of the defense during the Arkansas Creation trial (McLean et al. vs State Board of Education). They referred to things like rapid fossilization and massive depth of coal beds as bases for believing in a worldwide flood. Under cross-examination, however, Coffin noted that his belief in a young earth was based on the Bible; he said the scientific evidence alone would lead him to believe the earth was very old.

He's not alone. Would you like to learn about more honest YECs?

Hello Barbarian. Long time no see, or debate. Yes, I would like to examine more of your claims, as I intend to more closely examine your above claim or quote. Could you please provide the source of your above quote? Thank you.

 

[River Jordan]

Here is one article addressing such.

“We Cannot Allow a Divine Foot in the Door”

“Oh no! Someone is letting God in the door!” Is that the meaning of the quote in the title? Evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin made a rather interesting comment that has become inf…

hoasrc.com

I've read his quote many, many times and I agree with it!

In science all of our explanations for things have to be testable. We can't scientifically test God. So if I'm at work and after we discovered something or saw something new in the lab and I proposed "God did that", how would we test it?

The answer is we can't, and that's why we "can't allow a divine foot in the door". It's not an anti-God sentiment, it's about how things in science have to be testable.

 

[Job 33:6]

Yes, YEC's do center around scientifically defending that which Genesis says about the creation of this world and its surroundings. Not what it does not say anywhere regarding what was before it, save the one verse you seem to be preoccupied with. Scripture does not address how whatever that one verse refers to, came about. While it does exactly address and state that this world and its surroundings were brought about by the word of God. Though it does not scientifically address how that works.

In any case, whatever was meant by verse 2, is no longer. Being replaced by what now is, as described in the Genesis creation account. This physical earth and its surroundings. The evidence we all have before us, which may be examined. What you speak of may no longer be observed and or examined, having been changed into or replaced by what now is. Therefore do YEC"s move on from verse 2, as Genesis itself and the rest of scripture do.

Again, creationists are not the ones claiming to know what deep time scenarios of pre earth, galaxy, or universe existence were. Save that which scripture itself reveals. These scientific guesses are more for and or from deep timers than YEC's. We simply debate that the evidences which we can now all observe, are not as old as deep timers claim in contradiction to the plain testimony of holy scripture. It has and continues to be observed, that what deep timers once claimed took millions of years to develop, can be reproduced right in front of our faces in laboratories supplying the right conditions conducive unto such. Conditions which a global flood and later catastrophic events would readily and abundantly supply. So that deep time scenarios are no longer necessary mechanisms of development regarding that which we presently see and exist within.

These are separate issues of course for YEC's, than that of what existed and how, before creation. The beginning from which holy scripture goes forth.

What do you mean, they move on from verse 2? The earth was there before verse 2. So how does that make sense to YEC? They just start the age of the earth after it has form but for whatever reason ignore whatever time the earth was around without form?

I could argue that the earth is 1 week old, and simply say that I count last Wednesday (my birthday) and forward and don't count any time before that. But how does that actually make any sense if I were to argue that the earth was 1 week old?

 

[The Barbarian]

Hello Barbarian. Long time no see, or debate. Yes, I would like to examine more of your claims, as I intend to more closely examine your above claim or quote. Could you please provide the source of your above quote? Thank you.

Dr. Coffin was a devout Seventh-Day Adventist, a firm believer in a young Earth, based on his religious beliefs.

https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=AAGA

The actual statement was as a witness in McLean vs. Arkansas Board of Education.
McLean v. Arkansas Bd. of Ed., 529 F. Supp. 1255 (E.D. Ark. 1982)

 

[The Barbarian]

(staff edit)

OT writers. By Jesus' time, they knew the Earth was round. A few hundred years earlier, someone actually found the circumference of the Earth.

 

[The Barbarian]

In December 1981, Coffin and Ariel Roth, also employed by GRI, served as expert witnesses on behalf of the defense during the Arkansas Creation trial (McLean et al. vs State Board of Education). They referred to things like rapid fossilization and massive depth of coal beds as bases for believing in a worldwide flood. Under cross-examination, however, Coffin noted that his belief in a young earth was based on the Bible; he said the scientific
evidence alone would lead him to believe the earth was very old.16 He testified that his reading of the Bible and the results of his scientific studies convinced him that the Genesis Flood had taken place five to seven thousand years ago.

https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/assets/pdf/article-AAGA.pdf

“Deposition of Harold G. Coffin,” 75.

 

[Amo2]

I've read his quote many, many times and I agree with it!

In science all of our explanations for things have to be testable. We can't scientifically test God. So if I'm at work and after we discovered something or saw something new in the lab and I proposed "God did that", how would we test it?

The answer is we can't, and that's why we "can't allow a divine foot in the door". It's not an anti-God sentiment, it's about how things in science have to be testable.

It is one thing to agree that one's faith or world view should be left out of the realm of scientific fact. It is another altogether, to predetermine that there is no God, and intentionally use the field of science as a method to prove and or deny such according to one's chosen faith. Especially while demanding that your own faith based theories built upon presumptions are to be considered scientifically tested and proved facts. Which they are not. Deep time scenarios regarding that which cannot be observed and or tested, are necessarily then, every bit as faith based as that of YEC's faith in a literal or historical rendering of the Genesis creation account. YEC's faith is in God's word as plainly stated. Deep time evolutionary faith, is in the speculations of fallen humanities best guesses concerning that which cannot be observed or tested. Which speculations are and have been proved wrong over and again, and are heavily supported and or influenced by a great many non bible believers and atheists.

Nevertheless, for professed bible believing Christians, the Apostle Paul makes a very clear and pointed statement.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Those who choose to ignore God regarding that which He has made, are in fact without excuse for doing so. Today we see much more clearly, the once invisible things of creation, and they unquestionably point to a level of complexity that screams design very loudly and clearly. So loudly and clearly, that those who reject this most obvious truth, are without excuse before God. As guilty today of changing "the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things", as the idol worshippers of old were.

 

[River Jordan]

It is one thing to agree that one's faith or world view should be left out of the realm of scientific fact. It is another altogether, to predetermine that there is no God, and intentionally use the field of science as a method to prove and or deny such according to one's chosen faith.

But that doesn't happen in the everyday work of science. We don't go in to work each day having "pre-determined that there is no God".

Especially while demanding that your own faith based theories built upon presumptions are to be considered scientifically tested and proved facts. Which they are not. Deep time scenarios regarding that which cannot be observed and or tested, are necessarily then, every bit as faith based as that of YEC's faith in a literal or historical rendering of the Genesis creation account.

No that's not how science works. We don't have to observe something before it can be studied and tested. That's why archaeologists can draw conclusions about past civilizations and events even though they didn't observe them themselves.

YEC's faith is in God's word as plainly stated. Deep time evolutionary faith, is in the speculations of fallen humanities best guesses concerning that which cannot be observed or tested. Which speculations are and have been proved wrong over and again, and are heavily supported and or influenced by a great many non bible believers and atheists.

Really? Where can I see this groundbreaking work?

Nevertheless, for professed bible believing Christians, the Apostle Paul makes a very clear and pointed statement.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Those who choose to ignore God regarding that which He has made, are in fact without excuse for doing so. Today we see much more clearly, the once invisible things of creation, and they unquestionably point to a level of complexity that screams design very loudly and clearly. So loudly and clearly, that those who reject this most obvious truth, are without excuse before God. As guilty today of changing "the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things", as the idol worshippers of old were.

Are you actually saying someone like me, a Christian and a scientist, isn't actually a Christian because I'm not a YEC?

 

[Amo2]

What do you mean, they move on from verse 2? The earth was there before verse 2. So how does that make sense to YEC? They just start the age of the earth after it has form but for whatever reason ignore whatever time the earth was around without form?

I could argue that the earth is 1 week old, and simply say that I count last Wednesday (my birthday) and forward and don't count any time before that. But how does that actually make any sense if I were to argue that the earth was 1 week old?

I already explained what I mean. They do not attempt to explain that which the scriptures do not address. They move on to the creation account which Genesis does actually address and describe. The creation which replaced whatever one might imagine the earth was before the creation described in Genesis. This is not rocket science. They simply do not speculate regarding that which cannot be scientifically observed, tested, and or revealed from holy scripture. Not that I know of in any case. If they do, they no doubt leave all speculations, in that exact category. Since that is all they can ever be.

I say again, it is those of the deep time faith, who seek to explain such unobservable or testable theories. YEC's address the young earth described in holy scripture according to their faith. As opposed of course to deep time and or old earth faith. Deep timers are of course free to try and impose their faith upon or within holy scripture, though such must be conjecture only, as scripture nowhere plainly states any such thing regarding the present creation within which we exist. Which scripture declares replaced that which you seem to be so very interested in. Please do continue your chosen persuit of knowledge in this area as you wish.

I simply am not very interested in a time when the earth was formless and void. What is there to be interested in? Much ado about nothing it seems.

Void - a large hole or empty space:

void

adjective​

1. Containing no matter; empty.
2. Not occupied; unfilled.
3. Completely lacking; devoid: synonym: empty

Void - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms

A void is empty space, nothingness, zero, zilch. A place that's void of all life forms has no sign of animals, plants, or people.

www.vocabulary.com

A void is empty space, nothingness, zero, zilch. A place that's void of all life forms has no sign of animals, plants, or people.

You may recognize void from the Old Testament passage describing creation: "The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep." In other words, nothing was there: pure emptiness. When you void something or make it void, you make it legally invalid, and that kind of void often goes with null. You might tell Cinderella, "If you're not back by midnight, that arrangement with the pumpkin and the mice is null and void."

 

[Amo2]

Dr. Coffin was a devout Seventh-Day Adventist, a firm believer in a young Earth, based on his religious beliefs.

https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=AAGA

The actual statement was as a witness in McLean vs. Arkansas Board of Education.
McLean v. Arkansas Bd. of Ed., 529 F. Supp. 1255 (E.D. Ark. 1982)

Thank you.

 

[The Barbarian]

Deep time scenarios regarding that which cannot be observed and or tested, are necessarily then, every bit as faith based as that of YEC's faith in a literal or historical rendering of the Genesis creation account.

Findings of very old Earth not only can be tested, they are tested regularly. Would you like some examples?

 

[Job 33:6]

I already explained what I mean. They do not attempt to explain that which the scriptures do not address. They move on to the creation account which Genesis does actually address and describe. The creation which replaced whatever one might imagine the earth was before the creation described in Genesis. This is not rocket science. They simply do not speculate regarding that which cannot be scientifically observed, tested, and or revealed from holy scripture. Not that I know of in any case. If they do, they no doubt leave all speculations, in that exact category. Since that is all they can ever be.

I say again, it is those of the deep time faith, who seek to explain such unobservable or testable theories. YEC's address the young earth described in holy scripture according to their faith. As opposed of course to deep time and or old earth faith. Deep timers are of course free to try and impose their faith upon or within holy scripture, though such must be conjecture only, as scripture nowhere plainly states any such thing regarding the present creation within which we exist. Which scripture declares replaced that which you seem to be so very interested in. Please do continue your chosen persuit of knowledge in this area as you wish.

I simply am not very interested in a time when the earth was formless and void. What is there to be interested in? Much ado about nothing it seems.

That's not actually true. YECs argue that the earth is 6,000 years old, which is to say that they assume the earth did not exist before the 6 days of Genesis. However, if we look directly at scripture:

Genesis 1:1-2 CEB
[1] When God began to create the heavens and the earth— [2] the earth was without shape or form, it was dark over the deep sea, and God’s wind swept over the waters—

We see that the text doesn't say that the earth began to exist when God began to create it. Rather the text only tells us that it was formless. And to that we can see that it doesn't tell us how long it was formless before that time. Or how long it had aged before God began to create it.