6,000 Years?

[Platte]

Mammoths did not exist, because they did not write anything about their history.

You agree that Recorded History only goes back ~5500 years though I take it.

 

[FaithT]

There is no proof or logical evidence that the earth was created 6000 years ago? Is that what you are saying?

Are you ignoring Recorded History?

First of all, the Bible doesn’t say the universe is 6000 years old that’s an incomplete genealogy. Second, apart from that incomplete genealogy in the Bible, there is no evidence for this.

 

[Platte]

First of all, the Bible doesn’t say the universe is 6000 years old that’s an incomplete genealogy. Second, apart from that incomplete genealogy in the Bible, there is no evidence for this.

That is a rather bizarre reply. Are you debating who created the universe - or when the universe was created?

 

[FaithT]

That is a rather bizarre reply. Are you debating who created the universe - or when the universe was created?

When the universe was created. Obviously.

 

[Platte]

When the universe was created. Obviously.

Recorded history - including Moses's writings are how we know who created the universe. There is no recorded History prior to 6000 years ago....not proof but very interesting and strong evidence....If the geneologies added up to Creation occuring 5000 years ago - Recorded History would be by far your strongest evidence against Creation. You can't simply ignore that...and even worse...dismiss it as no evidence.

Looking at the geneologies from Noah to Abraham....where are the incomplete geneologies?

For when Adam was 130 years old he begat Seth.
Seth being 105 years, begat Enos.
Enos, being 90 years, begat Cainan.
Cainan, being 70 years, begat Mahaleel.
Mahaleel, being 65 years, begat Jared.
Jared, at the age of 162, begat Enoch.
Enoch, being 65 years, begat Methuselah.
Methuselah, at the age of 187, begat Lamech.
Lamech, being 182 years, begat Noah.
Noah, at the coming of the flood, was 600 years old, as appeareth in the 7th chap. of Genesis.
Shem (which was Noah’s son) begat Arphaxad two years after that.
Arphaxad begat Salah when he was 35 years old.
Salah, being 30 years old, begat Eber.
Eber, at the age of 34, begat Peleg.
Peleg, being 30 years, begat Reu.
Reu, being 32 years, begat Serug.
Serug, being 30 years, begat Nahor.
Nahor, being 29 years, begat Terah.
Terah, being 130 years, begat Abram.
And Abraham departed from Chaldea when he was 70 years old.

 

[FaithT]

Recorded history - including Moses's writings are how we know who created the universe. There is no recorded History prior to 6000 years ago....not proof but very interesting and strong evidence....If the geneologies added up to Creation occuring 5000 years ago - Recorded History would be by far your strongest evidence against Creation. You can't simply ignore that...and even worse...dismiss it as no evidence.

Looking at the geneologies from Noah to Abraham....where are the incomplete geneologies?

For when Adam was 130 years old he begat Seth.
Seth being 105 years, begat Enos.
Enos, being 90 years, begat Cainan.
Cainan, being 70 years, begat Mahaleel.
Mahaleel, being 65 years, begat Jared.
Jared, at the age of 162, begat Enoch.
Enoch, being 65 years, begat Methuselah.
Methuselah, at the age of 187, begat Lamech.
Lamech, being 182 years, begat Noah.
Noah, at the coming of the flood, was 600 years old, as appeareth in the 7th chap. of Genesis.
Shem (which was Noah’s son) begat Arphaxad two years after that.
Arphaxad begat Salah when he was 35 years old.
Salah, being 30 years old, begat Eber.
Eber, at the age of 34, begat Peleg.
Peleg, being 30 years, begat Reu.
Reu, being 32 years, begat Serug.
Serug, being 30 years, begat Nahor.
Nahor, being 29 years, begat Terah.
Terah, being 130 years, begat Abram.
And Abraham departed from Chaldea when he was 70 years old.

You can’t dismiss the scientific evidence that God gave us a brain to analyze and deduce what’s what.

 

[Platte]

You can’t dismiss the scientific evidence that God gave us a brain to analyze and deduce what’s what.

I agree - but first lets agree that the Bible is teaching that Creation was ~6000 years ago and took 6 days to complete.

 

[FaithT]

I agree - but first lets agree that the Bible is teaching that Creation was ~6000 years ago and took 6 days to complete.

I disagree with that.

 

[Job 33:6]

I agree - but first lets agree that the Bible is teaching that Creation was ~6000 years ago and took 6 days to complete.

Platte, didn't you yourself admit that the Bible doesn't actually say this? At least not in any unambiguous way.

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.

I'm pretty sure we agreed that the Bible, particularly the family of translations that use the dependent clause, do not say how long the earth was formless before God began to create it.

 

[Platte]

Platte, didn't you yourself admit that the Bible doesn't actually say this? At least not in any unambiguous way.

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.

I'm pretty sure we agreed that the Bible, particularly the family of translations that use the dependent clause, do not say how long the earth was formless before God began to create it.

No I didn’t. The chronology of the Bible clearly teaches that creation was ~6000years ago

The earth was created without form (no topography) and void (no life). A logical starting point of creation.

 

[Job 33:6]

No I didn’t. The chronology of the Bible clearly teaches that creation was ~6000years ago

The earth was created without form (no topography) and void (no life). A logical starting point of creation.

The Bible says:

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.

And the text doesn't say how long it was formless and void before God began to create it.

So by what logic do you then claim that the earth is 6,000 years old based on geneologies?

Are you one of those KJV only-ists?

 

[David Lamb]

The Bible says:

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.

And the text doesn't say how long it was formless and void before God began to create it.

So by what logic do you then claim that the earth is 6,000 years old based on geneologies?

Are you one of those KJV only-ists?

But even in the NRSVUE, which you quote, it tells us when the earth was dark and formless. It says this was "when God began to create the heavens and the earth." It doesn't say, "Before began to create the heavens and the earth, the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep."

 

[Job 33:6]

But even in the NRSVUE, which you quote, it tells us when the earth was dark and formless. It says this was "when God began to create the heavens and the earth." It doesn't say, "Before began to create the heavens and the earth, the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep."

Yes. Dark and formless. The earth was there, but was dark and without light, because the light wasn't created yet.

I don't see what your counter point here is.

And yes, it doesn't say how long the earth was dark leading up to God beginning to create it. Because the story isn't about the earth, it's about God.

I'm sorry but YECs just can't seem to come to terms with what the Bible plainly says. And it's just awful. You guys aren't being honest about the text. And anyone can see this in about 5 seconds of reading translations outside of the KJV.

 

[David Lamb]

Yes. Dark and formless. The earth was there, but was dark and without light, because the light wasn't created yet.

I don't see what your counter point here is.

And yes, it doesn't say how long the earth was dark leading up to God beginning to create it. Because the story isn't about the earth, it's about God.

I'm sorry but YECs just can't seem to come to terms with what the Bible plainly says. And it's just awful. You guys aren't being honest about the text. And anyone can see this in about 5 seconds of reading translations outside of the KJV.

My point was that in the verse you quoted, we are told, not that the earth was already dark leading up to the time when God began to create it, but rather, "When God began to create the heavens and the earth, the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep." It does not say that the earth was already in existence and dark for some unspecified time before God created it. You have to assume that. The bible does not "plainly say" that the earth existed in darkness before God created it. And notice, I have not quoted the KJV (I rarely do here); I have quoted the version you used in your post.

 

[Job 33:6]

My point was that in the verse you quoted, we are told, not that the earth was already dark leading up to the time when God began to create it, but rather, "When God began to create the heavens and the earth, the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep."

That's right. It doesn't say whether the Earth was there a billion prior or two seconds prior. It merely says that when God began to act on it, it was.

It does not say that the earth was already in existence and dark for some unspecified time before God created it. You have to assume that. The bible does not "plainly say" that the earth existed in darkness before God created it. And notice, I have not quoted the KJV (I rarely do here); I have quoted the version you used in your post.

If I said "when I began to drive my car to work, it was raining outside"

No one would rush to the door arguing "wow! It began raining the instant you started driving to work!" Even though it is a possibility.

The point being that the text doesn't say either way. It's ambiguous as to how long, even if at all, the earth was present before God began to create it.

And I'm fine agreeing that I have to assume something. Because I acknowledge that the text is ambiguous.

Alternatively, you are also assuming something, but you aren't acknowledging your assumption. You're saying "no, it's not actually ambiguous and there is no possibility that the earth was present before God began to create it".

 

[David Lamb]

That's right. It doesn't say whether the Earth was there a billion prior or two seconds prior. It merely says that when God began to act on it, it was.



If I said "when I began to drive my car to work, it was raining outside"

No one would rush to the door arguing "wow! It began raining the instant you started driving to work!" Even though it is a possibility.

The point being that the text doesn't say either way. It's ambiguous as to how long, even if at all, the earth was present before God began to create it.

The idea of the earth being present before God created it doesn't make sense, unless you assume that it was present because some other being created it, or it was just somehow "there".

 

[Job 33:6]

That's right. It doesn't say whether the Earth was there a billion prior or two seconds prior. It merely says that when God began to act on it, it was.



If I said "when I began to drive my car to work, it was raining outside"

No one would rush to the door arguing "wow! It began raining the instant you started driving to work!" Even though it is a possibility.

The point being that the text doesn't say either way. It's ambiguous as to how long, even if at all, the earth was present before God began to create it.

And I'm fine agreeing that I have to assume something. Because I acknowledge that the text is ambiguous.

Alternatively, you are also assuming something, but you aren't acknowledging your assumption. You're saying "no, it's not actually ambiguous and there is no possibility that the earth was present before God began to create it".

Or even if we changed the subject of my analogy:

When I began to drive my car to work, my car had a flat tire...

It's possible that the car having a flat tire is a product of me beginning to drive it. But it's also a possibility that the tire had a flat since yesterday.

The point being that the text just doesn't say.

And saying "well I only read the KJV" is merely a lost point that implies that people aren't actually willing to engage the many translations that exist, and more plainly, the Hebrew grammar. Which in-fact is 100% ambiguous.

And anyone who denies this, quite frankly, is denying the Bible. As a fact of grammar.

 

[Job 33:6]

The idea of the earth being present before God created it doesn't make sense, unless you assume that it was present because some other being created it, or it was just somehow "there".

I believe that God created it but that Genesis just isn't about that story.

And saying "well that doesn't make sense" isn't a valid response. Just because doesn't it make sense "to you", doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense to the majority of Christian Evangelical Bible scholars that talk about this in old testament commentaries.

It's not my fault that you don't get it, despite me talking about it over and over and over and over again with you.

But the fact remains, the text factually is ambiguous. And there is nothing YECs can do about it. It is the Bible.

 

[David Lamb]

Or even if we changed the subject of my analogy:

When I began to drive my car to work, my car had a flat tire...

It's possible that the car having a flat tire is a product of me beginning to drive it. But it's also a possibility that the tire had a flat since yesterday.

But you, your car (including its tyres/tires), your place of work, your home, and the road(s) between were all unquestionably in existence before the time your analogy refers to. That is different to saying that something (in this case, the earth) was in existence before it was created.

The point being that the text just doesn't say.

And saying "well I only read the KJV" is merely a lost point that implies that people aren't actually willing to engage the many translations that exist, and more plainly, the Hebrew grammar. Which in-fact is 100% ambiguous.

As I have already said, I rarely quote the KJV here. I occasionally read it, but more often, I use the NKJV.

And anyone who denies this, quite frankly, is denying the Bible. As a fact of grammar.

I certainly do not deny the bible. I believe it to be God's inspired word.

 

[Job 33:6]

Here's the thing. I acknowledge that the KJV could be interpreted as an ex nihilo creation. But I also know that many translations, highlight the fact that the Hebrew text need not actually say that. The construct form translation, and hybrids of the dependent and independent clause translations, can be found in the NRSV, the NABRE, the CEB, the JPS, the NRSVue, and in the Hebrew BHS based on the masoritic texts, and it's described in footnotes in others.

But you, your car (including its tyres/tires), your place of work, your home, and the road(s) between were all unquestionably in existence before the time your analogy refers to. That is different to saying that something (in this case, the earth) was in existence before it was created.

Grammatically it's not different at all. And this is about what the text says.

As I have already said, I rarely quote the KJV here. I occasionally read it, but more often, I use the NKJV.

I certainly do not deny the bible. I believe it to be God's inspired word.

If you acknowledge what the Bible says, and you want to be honest about this topic. Then you have to acknowledge ambiguity of the text. Because it's grammatically factually ambiguous. And every Hebrew scholar that exists, at least that I've heard talk about this, that has studied Genesis and the old testament, knows this.