Young earth vs Old earth?

[Job 33:6]

Again, no one is saying that God didn't create ex nihilo. The question is, is that the specific creation event that Genesis is describing? Hebrews is not a retelling of Genesis. It's a completely different book of the Bible written several hundred years later by a different author. So it's an assumption that because the idea is in Hebrews, that Genesis therefore is saying that specific idea.

And Psalm 33:9 says nothing of ex nihilo creation. It just says that God spoke and it was done, which we all agree on. Also when Psalm 33:9 states "it stood fast" that does not imply ex nihilo creation, rather it implies that God spoke and something that already existed stood fast.

As a matter of fact, just read the passage:

Psalms 33:6-9 NASB1995
[6] By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, And by the breath of His mouth all their host. [7] He gathers the waters of the sea together as a heap; He lays up the deeps in storehouses. [8] Let all the earth fear the Lord; Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. [9] For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.

The passage parallels Genesis, but as we can see, in creation of the heavens, the waters were separated and restrained just like in Genesis day 2, and the earth stood fast when He spoke.

The objects of creation are already present in these verses. And you can search the entire old testament high and low, this is how it is always described, as including pre existing material.

I'll just add clarity for any YEC that is actually willing to engage the text.

Many YECs will look at passages such as:

Psalm 68:18
When you ascended on high,
you took many captives;
you received gifts from people,
even from[a] the rebellious—
that you,[b] Lord God, might dwell there.

And Ephesians 4:8
This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]

And theyll say "wow, He Ascended on High", I guess that means that Ephesians 4 and Psalm 68 are describing the same event and the same concepts and meanings.

Or they'll look at
Hosea 11:1
1 “When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.

and Mathew 2:15
15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”[a]

And they'll say "out of egypt I have called my son, I guess this is talking about the same thing".

And they'll stretch that logic between Hebrews or John and Genesis, and they'll say, well Hebrews sounds a lot like Genesis, therefore Hebrews must be re-telling Genesis. Hebrews describes ex nihilo creation, therefore Genesis must also be.

All the while they're failing to acknowledge that the new testament was written centuries later by different authors describing different concepts and events. So quoting Hebrews 11:3 and saying "well that sounds like ex nihilo creation to me" is not a valid argument for why Genesis should be interpreted that same way. That's out of context reading of the old testament. @throughfierytrial

The new testament authors, when they quote the old testament (and Hebrew's doesnt even quote Genesis, but I'm spelling out the point for you), when the new testament authors quote or reference the old testament, they never actually re-tell the original story, rather they tell a new story in light of the one who is to come (Jesus). And as an example above, Hosea 11:1 is about the Isrealites leaving Egypt while Mathew 2:15 is about Jesus leaving egypt. Psalms and Ephesians are similarly different.

All this to say, it's actually an unreasonable assumption to say that because Hebrews describes a concept, that Genesis must therefore be saying the same thing. Especially when Hebrews doesnt even quote Genesis.

 

[CoreyD]

I gave you that answer too. Hebrews 4:8

You never did give me Hebrews 4:8. This is the first time you mentioned Hebrews 4:8.
Before, you gave me Hebrews 11:3 and Hebrews 11:9-10.
You said...

Hebrews 4 iexpounds this and Hebrews 11:3 upholds this interpretation. In my view it reaffirms the literal account of Genesis creation. There too can be found the illustration this provides for heaven in Hebrews 11:9-10.

These refer to God's rest that began after creation, and continues till now.
The seventh day is actually then about 5,995 years long.

Therefore that rules out the erroneous view that each day in Genesis is 24 hours long, thus disproving any claim that the earth is only 6,000 years young.
It also disproves the claim that the "7th day became the Israelites Sabbath Day", because since the seventh day, is actually nearly 5,995 years today, it could not possibly be a single day. The Israelites Sabbath was a single 24 hour day.

So, your answer says you are incorrect. Thank you.


Thank you for the scripture.
Hebrews 4:8 reads... For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken later about another day.
This refers to the designated day, in Hebrews 4:7.

God again designated a certain day as “Today,” when a long time later He spoke through David as was just stated: “Today, if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts

What day are you saying that is? Thank you.

 

[CoreyD]

I'll just add clarity for any YEC that is actually willing to engage the text.

Many YECs will look at passages such as:

Psalm 68:18
When you ascended on high,
you took many captives;
you received gifts from people,
even from[a] the rebellious—
that you,[b] Lord God, might dwell there.

And Ephesians 4:8
This is why it[a] says:
“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people.”[b]

And theyll say "wow, He Ascended on High", I guess that means that Ephesians 4 and Psalm 68 are describing the same event and the same concepts and meanings.

Or they'll look at
Hosea 11:1
1 “When Israel was a child, I loved him,
and out of Egypt I called my son.

and Mathew 2:15
15 where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.”[a]

And they'll say "out of egypt I have called my son, I guess this is talking about the same thing".

And they'll stretch that logic between Hebrews or John and Genesis, and they'll say, well Hebrews sounds a lot like Genesis, therefore Hebrews must be re-telling Genesis. Hebrews describes ex nihilo creation, therefore Genesis must also be.

All the while they're failing to acknowledge that the new testament was written centuries later by different authors describing different concepts and events. So quoting Hebrews 11:3 and saying "well that sounds like ex nihilo creation to me" is not a valid argument for why Genesis should be interpreted that same way. That's out of context reading of the old testament. @throughfierytrial

The new testament authors, when they quote the old testament (and Hebrew's doesnt even quote Genesis, but I'm spelling out the point for you), when the new testament authors quote or reference the old testament, they never actually re-tell the original story, rather they tell a new story in light of the one who is to come (Jesus). And as an example above, Hosea 11:1 is about the Isrealites leaving Egypt while Mathew 2:15 is about Jesus leaving egypt. Psalms and Ephesians are similarly different.

All this to say, it's actually an unreasonable assumption to say that because Hebrews describes a concept, that Genesis must therefore be saying the same thing. Especially when Hebrews doesnt even quote Genesis.

I may be wrong here, but I think you are missing what @throughfierytrial is saying.
Also, the Bible is authored by a single Person - God,
God used different writers to create one unified message in one book. In the same way a company uses different programmers to create one movie, or game.
Each programmer gets a script, or a part to work on, but all these portions when combined is one project.
This is the way it is with the Bible.

It has one message; and one theme, that is related from Genesis to Revelation.
I think now that this has come up, I will create a thread to cover this.
I can let you know when I do, if it is of interest to you.

Regarding ex nihilo, we already established, by several posters in this thread, that is not relevant to the question of young earth vs old earth.
@throughfierytrial is using Hebrews in an effort to prove the earth is young.
Paul refers to the scriptures in the Psalms and Genesis, so we cannot ignore the fact that these books were used as references by both Jesus and his apostles.

The scriptures are from God - 2 Timothy 3:16.
They are not different works by different men, as if men wrote unrelated stories, and someone collected them into one book.
The Bible is a package of little book, that are all about God, and his purpose from beginning to end.
More on that, when I create the thread.

 

[Job 33:6]

I may be wrong here, but I think you are missing what @throughfierytrial is saying.
Also, the Bible is authored by a single Person - God,
God used different writers to create one unified message in one book. In the same way a company uses different programmers to create one movie, or game.

I agree, but I would say that the one story, that one unified story, doesnt somehow force the old testament to therefore say what the new testament says. Hosea 11:1 and Mathew 2:15 both say "out of egypt I have called my son", and Mathew explicitly quotes hosea. But that doesnt mean that Hosea is therefore about Jesus. In fact it was just about the exodus. There is a context that differs between the two books, and so we cant simply force the old testament to say what the new testament says, any time the new testament authors speak about something similar to the OT.

This is context 101, you cant force the old testament to say exactly what the new testament says, just because the Bible is a unified story. We still have to acknowledge that these are different books and they say different things, even if they sometimes use the same words or similar words.

Regarding ex nihilo, we already established, by several posters in this thread, that is not relevant to the question of young earth vs old earth.
@throughfierytrial is using Hebrews in an effort to prove the earth is young.
Paul refers to the scriptures in the Psalms and Genesis, so we cannot ignore the fact that these books were used as references by both Jesus and his apostles.

But it is of course relevant, because if its not ex nihilo creation being described in Genesis, then that would suggest that earth was present before God began to create it. Much like a pizza can be formless before I began to create it, so too can the earth be such. And that means that we wouldnt know how long the earth was formless before God began to make it.

And as noted above, just because the new testament authors reference the old testament, that doesnt necessarily mean that they are telling the same story or re-telling it. And I gave a couple examples above where the new testament authors reference the OT but are in fact telling completely different stories, thats actually what they typically do.