Was the Great Pyramid Built Before Noah's Flood?

Job 33:6 · Jun 8, 2020

KomatiiteBIF said:
Nothing stopping me? Why would I spend my time trying to resolve their own dispute? I suppose I could try, but I'd likely be wasting my time. I don't think there is a solution for the dilemma they hold.

Also @Tolworth John , investigating the dilemma of global flood believers, and I made this analogy before, it is honestly like playing a game of wack-a-mole.

The moment we begin unpacking an idea, they swiftly jump to another idea. They'll say "I believe X, Y, and Z."

But the moment you target those items, theyll say well no, that's not what I believe, and they'll switch. And you can read it in some of the language in the creation article discussing the topic.

Kt boundary flood 1 - creation.com

Check out this language:
"the location of the Flood/post-Flood boundary should be subject to the principle of multiple working hypotheses. There is no doubt that it is an important question and stratigraphic locations abound. One of the most popular locations is the K/T boundary. Evidence has been presented to support that choice, one of which is a change from worldwide/continental to local/regional sedimentation. However, a close analysis of this evidence suggests that it raises more questions than it answers, supporting the idea that the end of the Flood corresponds to the Late Cenozoic."

This isn't affirming language. It's broad, it's ready to jump like a fly ready to move from a swatter. Multiple hypotheses, many questions etc.

And then the article, instead of clarifying, switches gears and goes on to broadly attack science.

What better way to explain your own position than to just attack others in broad and unclear ways?

And some global flood believers have attempted to resolve this dilemma by suggesting multiple giant intermittent waves (basically multiple independent floods) or waters that come and go multiple times.

Like Kurt Wise for example, he knows that one flood can't logically account for the "1000 pyramids", so he tries out this idea of many floods. Or many "waves" that come and go (where they go, nobody knows, they just come and go over and over).

See around 50 minutes in:

But he doesn't say anything about angular unconformities that are mid "mega sequence". He acts as if there isn't bioturbation of strata anywhere below the Holocene, and oddly enough he doesn't talk about the countless fining up sequences found withing what he calls megasequences either. He doesn't talk about fossil nests or complex burrow networks or tracks being observed literally in the middle of strata suggested to have been deposited by independent giant waves.

But Kurt Wise's ideas are still different than others still. So we go continuing on with our game of wack-a-mole, trying to figure out exactly what it is that global flood believers actually believe.

We will likely never know, because they do not provide clarity. Why isn't clarity found? Because clarity cannot be found in ideas that are wrong.

Job 33:6 · Jun 8, 2020

Here is another case of the same thing:

The geologic setting of the Green River Formation - creation.com

"This article is primarily a response to Oard’sJournal of Creation 20(1):50–54, 2006." style="box-sizing: inherit; color: rgb(34, 139, 246); background-color: transparent; border-bottom: none; margin-bottom: 4px; cursor: pointer;">1 first submission of this forum. It is impossible to respond to every point in his original article because of the focus of this forum and space limitations. I will respond to what I believe are his most serious objections to the Green River Formation (GRF) being post-Flood. Additional evidences will be presented that the GRF and its associated basin fills are post-Flood. Several solutions are suggested for the apparent contradiction between the warm post-Flood environment indicated by the GRF and the cool post-Flood climate model developed by Oard. In this paper, I develop criteria which can be used to define the post-Flood boundary independently of index fossils. This approach may be a significant step forward in understanding the ‘geologic column’ and its associated fossils in other areas of the world, and may help to resolve some of the controversy related to the post-Flood boundary."

It's the same "1000 pyramid" dilemma. One guy says post flood strata starts at pyramid 217, another guy comes along and says no no, it's not until pyramid number 162.

Typical geologists of mainstream science cannot target any individual idea, because they can move and bounce around and can and don't really have a firm grasp of their own position.

And I'm sure these global flood believers are nice people. I'd probably enjoy grabbing a beer or talking about the latest sports game with them, but their ideas are just broken.

Dale · Jun 8, 2020

coffee4u said:
Of course I am, I quoted it up thread, or maybe that was another thread, it gets confusing with so many going.

That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years (which causes all sorts of issues with scripture such as no death before sin) Then why even say to the ancient Israelites in Exodus that he created in six days and that the seventh is the Sabbath? Why not simply say he created it if it was really millions of years. The point was he created time for us, in Genesis. Not just evening and moring but the stars, moon and sun too.
Genesis 1
14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

I do not see how this is a convincing argument against the days being literal.
We are already in God's rest. We are to rest in him every day.
Matthew 11:28-30
28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

This book was not written the way that Hebrew poetry or parable was written.
There is nothing about the early verses of Genesis that in any way suggest another meaning for the word day.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
And so on.

Yom followed by evening and morning and number only ever means literal 24 hour day.
Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? | GotQuestions.org

Then we are told in Genesis 5 that Adam died
5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.

Only literal people have literal children and literally die. Or are you suggesting this is somehow symbolic as well? If he died 930 years after day 6, how can we still be in it?

Exodus says twice that God created everything in 6 days. He is talking about their week because they understood the seventh was the Sabbath.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Exodus 31:17

It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labour, and was refreshed.”

These can't just be ignored. If you believe these are saying something other than what they appear to be saying there needs to be scriptural backup.

This here is the whole crux of the matter. Every single person who quibbles with the plain reading of Genesis does not do so because of the Bible but because of sources from outside of scripture, mostly science. It's always the Bible +
If God intended it to be read any other way there would be something, even one verse in the New Testament suggesting it might be an allegory or a parable or should be taken some other way, there isn't.

Jesus quotes from Genesis.
Matthew 19:4-5

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female'
He talks about Abel, Adam's son as a real person.
Matthew 23:35

35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
He even says when he comes again it will be like the days of Noah
Matthew 24:37-39

37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
No hint that any of what he talks about is not literal.

Both Paul and Peter carried it on through scripture showing they believed it literally as well.
Romans 5:12–19; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45–47
2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13–14
Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4–9, and 2 Peter 3:3–7

If scripture interprets scripture where is the scripture that supports any other reading?

1 Corinthians 1:25
For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Why do you assume science has it all correct? How about the fact they are fallible men and woman only working with what they can see and analysis in the here and now. That they have to work on assumptions. Who says those assumptions continue to be correct when talking about the beginning of the world or the fact that God changed some of the worlds governing laws not once but twice. Mankind thought thalidomide was a great cure for morning sickness and that a pigs tooth was a human. Humans make mistakes, God doesn't.

Coffee4u in post #70: "That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years (which causes all sorts of issues with scripture such as no death before sin) "

I don't get your comment about "no death before sin." If Adam and Eve were not subject to death before the Expulsion from Eden, isn't that because they had access to the Tree of Life? That wouldn't apply to animals.

You seem to be saying that Psalms has nothing to do with creation. On the contrary, Psalm 104 recapitulates the creation story. It does this with no mention of creation "days" and no mention of Adam, Eve or the Garden of Eden.

Psalm 104

1 Praise the Lord, my soul.
Lord my God, you are very great;
you are clothed with splendor and majesty.
2 The Lord wraps himself in light as with a garment;
he stretches out the heavens like a tent
3 and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters.
He makes the clouds his chariot
and rides on the wings of the wind.
4 He makes winds his messengers,[a]
flames of fire his servants.
5 He set the earth on its foundations;
it can never be moved.
6 You covered it with the watery depths as with a garment;
the waters stood above the mountains.
7 But at your rebuke the waters fled,
at the sound of your thunder they took to flight;
8 they flowed over the mountains,
they went down into the valleys,
to the place you assigned for them.
9 You set a boundary they cannot cross;
never again will they cover the earth.
10 He makes springs pour water into the ravines;
it flows between the mountains.
11 They give water to all the beasts of the field;
the wild donkeys quench their thirst.
12 The birds of the sky nest by the waters;
they sing among the branches.
13 He waters the mountains from his upper chambers;
the land is satisfied by the fruit of his work.
14 He makes grass grow for the cattle,
and plants for people to cultivate—
bringing forth food from the earth:
15 wine that gladdens human hearts,
oil to make their faces shine,
and bread that sustains their hearts.
16 The trees of the Lord are well watered,
the cedars of Lebanon that he planted.
17 There the birds make their nests;
the stork has its home in the junipers.
18 The high mountains belong to the wild goats;
the crags are a refuge for the hyrax.

19 He made the moon to mark the seasons,
and the sun knows when to go down.
20 You bring darkness, it becomes night,
and all the beasts of the forest prowl.
21 The lions roar for their prey
and seek their food from God.
22 The sun rises, and they steal away;
they return and lie down in their dens.
23 Then people go out to their work,
to their labor until evening.

24 How many are your works, Lord!
In wisdom you made them all;
the earth is full of your creatures.
25 There is the sea, vast and spacious,
teeming with creatures beyond number—
living things both large and small.
26 There the ships go to and fro,
and Leviathan, which you formed to frolic there.

27 All creatures look to you
to give them their food at the proper time.
28 When you give it to them,
they gather it up;
when you open your hand,
they are satisfied with good things.
29 When you hide your face,
they are terrified;
when you take away their breath,
they die and return to the dust.
30 When you send your Spirit,
they are created,
and you renew the face of the ground.
31 May the glory of the Lord endure forever;
may the Lord rejoice in his works—
32 he who looks at the earth, and it trembles,
who touches the mountains, and they smoke.
33 I will sing to the Lord all my life;
I will sing praise to my God as long as I live.
34 May my meditation be pleasing to him,
as I rejoice in the Lord.
35 But may sinners vanish from the earth
and the wicked be no more.
Praise the Lord, my soul.
Praise the Lord.[b]

--Psalm 104 NIV

Footnotes:

Psalm 104:4 Or angels
Psalm 104:35 Hebrew Hallelu Yah; in the Septuagint this line stands at the beginning of Psalm 105.

Dale · Jun 8, 2020

coffee4u said:
Of course I am, I quoted it up thread, or maybe that was another thread, it gets confusing with so many going.

That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years (which causes all sorts of issues with scripture such as no death before sin) Then why even say to the ancient Israelites in Exodus that he created in six days and that the seventh is the Sabbath? Why not simply say he created it if it was really millions of years. The point was he created time for us, in Genesis. Not just evening and moring but the stars, moon and sun too.
Genesis 1
14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

I do not see how this is a convincing argument against the days being literal.
We are already in God's rest. We are to rest in him every day.
Matthew 11:28-30
28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.”

This book was not written the way that Hebrew poetry or parable was written.
There is nothing about the early verses of Genesis that in any way suggest another meaning for the word day.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
And so on.

Yom followed by evening and morning and number only ever means literal 24 hour day.
Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? | GotQuestions.org

Then we are told in Genesis 5 that Adam died
5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.

Only literal people have literal children and literally die. Or are you suggesting this is somehow symbolic as well? If he died 930 years after day 6, how can we still be in it?

Exodus says twice that God created everything in 6 days. He is talking about their week because they understood the seventh was the Sabbath.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Exodus 31:17

It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labour, and was refreshed.”

These can't just be ignored. If you believe these are saying something other than what they appear to be saying there needs to be scriptural backup.

This here is the whole crux of the matter. Every single person who quibbles with the plain reading of Genesis does not do so because of the Bible but because of sources from outside of scripture, mostly science. It's always the Bible +
If God intended it to be read any other way there would be something, even one verse in the New Testament suggesting it might be an allegory or a parable or should be taken some other way, there isn't.

Jesus quotes from Genesis.
Matthew 19:4-5

4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female'
He talks about Abel, Adam's son as a real person.
Matthew 23:35

35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
He even says when he comes again it will be like the days of Noah
Matthew 24:37-39

37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
No hint that any of what he talks about is not literal.

Both Paul and Peter carried it on through scripture showing they believed it literally as well.
Romans 5:12–19; 1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45–47
2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13–14
Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4–9, and 2 Peter 3:3–7

If scripture interprets scripture where is the scripture that supports any other reading?

1 Corinthians 1:25
For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Why do you assume science has it all correct? How about the fact they are fallible men and woman only working with what they can see and analysis in the here and now. That they have to work on assumptions. Who says those assumptions continue to be correct when talking about the beginning of the world or the fact that God changed some of the worlds governing laws not once but twice. Mankind thought thalidomide was a great cure for morning sickness and that a pigs tooth was a human. Humans make mistakes, God doesn't.

Coffee4u:"That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years ..."

I could also mention that the Second Epistle of Peter makes the same point.

8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day

2 Peter 3:8 NIV

This shows Peter to be less of a literalist than you would make him out to be.

Dale · Jun 8, 2020

Tolworth John said:
Yes by holding to the slow and gradual formulae you are quite right.

Except in a global flood with the abundance of chemicals,d ood elements and the heat from volcanic action you are saying there cannot have been a bloom of algy etc.

Whether this is possible or not is just not considered by anyone other than yec scientists.

John,
the Bible says nothing about chemicals, "odd elements" and volcanoes suddenly erupting. At best, you are adding to the Bible when you say these things.

I discovered some years ago that one of the reasons that creationists insist on the King James Bible is that it says there were "high hills" before the Flood. The Revised Standard version and many others say there were mountains. In the KJV there were hills but no mountains. One of the pet ideas of the creationists is that there were no volcanoes and no mountains before the Flood. This has some unfortunate implications. The Himalayas, for instance, were formed by a collision of tectonic plates but the creationists fight against this because it isn't their idea.

Suppose that there were no volcanoes before the Flood. That's interesting because Genesis says that Noah and the Ark landed on Mt. Ararat. Mt. Ararat is actually a range of mountains and it is volcanic. If Mt Ararat was created by a volcano during the Flood, Noah would have stepped out of the Ark onto solid lava. Genesis says that Noah got out of the Ark and promptly planted a vineyard. It doesn't mention that Noah had to travel a great distance to find land that could be farmed.

The story of Noah and the Flood is a parable about the kind of obedience that God wants. Noah is living the right way while the rest of the world is going to wrong way. That's what God wants, someone who will buck the crowd when necessary.

I believe that God inspired the story of Noah and the Flood but He did not dictate the details. It is obvious to me that the reason that the Ark lands on Mt. Ararat, in modern Turkey, is that the people who composed this story thought that Mt. Ararat was the tallest and largest mountain in the world. When the Flood waters recede, the peak of the tallest mountain will be the first to be exposed and become dry land again. If they had known about Mt. Everest, Noah would have landed on Mt. Everest.

Dale · Jun 8, 2020

Tolworth John said:
Yes by holding to the slow and gradual formulae you are quite right.

Except in a global flood with the abundance of chemicals,d ood elements and the heat from volcanic action you are saying there cannot have been a bloom of algy etc.

Whether this is possible or not is just not considered by anyone other than yec scientists.

John, I notice that you refer to "yec scientists." Is there such a thing a creation science? I have been forced to conclude that there is not. If you know anything about science, modern science constantly uses mathematics. There wouldn't be much science without mathematics. Do creation scientists use mathematics? Not in the same sense and here is why.

I have pointed out that the speed of light is a problem for creationists. Many of the stars and groups of stars that we see through telescopes are tens of thousands of light years away, even in our own galaxy. We can see other galaxies that are millions and even billions of light years away--it takes light and radio waves that long to get here. If the earth and the universe were only a few thousand years old we wouldn't be able to see them. Creationists instantly brush this problem aside. The speed of light isn't fixed, they tell me, it is wherever God left it the last time He got finished fiddling with it.

The same thing goes for other constants such as the rate of radioactive decay and the universal gravitational constant. My physics text gives constants like Planck's constant and the permittivity of free space. To creationists, none of these things are constant, God fiddles with all of them from time to time.

That's one reason that there is no creation science that can be taken seriously. There isn't much science without mathematics, and the calculations scientists do almost always depend on constants. If there are no constants then calculations are of little or no value.

Here is a verse that I don't believe is consistent with the creationist assumption that God fiddles with the physical world all the time. James describes God as a God of stability who "does not change" (NIV) or as the KJV puts it, shows no "shadow of turning."

17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.
James 1:17 NIV

17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
James 1:17 KJV

Andrewn · Jun 8, 2020

Since biblical literalists consider that a catastrophic global Flood in the year 2304 BC, I had assumed that they believed Neanderthals were extinct by that time. But the following article shows that they actually concede that Neanderthals lived after the Flood:

Neanderthals pre-flood? - creation.com

Scientific evidence shows numerous Neanderthal fossils after 130,000 years ago. They became extinct approximately 40,000 years ago.

Of course, it is impossible to imagine a Flood that took place over 130,000 years ago and remained in human memory.

James A · Jun 8, 2020

Dale said:
John, I notice that you refer to "yec scientists." Is there such a thing a creation science? I have been forced to conclude that there is not. If you know anything about science, modern science constantly uses mathematics. There wouldn't be much science without mathematics. Do creation scientists use mathematics? Not in the same sense and here is why.

I have pointed out that the speed of light is a problem for creationists. Many of the stars and groups of stars that we see through telescopes are tens of thousands of light years away, even in our own galaxy. We can see other galaxies that are millions and even billions of light years away--it takes light and radio waves that long to get here. If the earth and the universe were only a few thousand years old we wouldn't be able to see them. Creationists instantly brush this problem aside. The speed of light isn't fixed, they tell me, it is wherever God left it the last time He got finished fiddling with it.

The same thing goes for other constants such as the rate of radioactive decay and the universal gravitational constant. My physics text gives constants like Planck's constant and the permittivity of free space. To creationists, none of these things are constant, God fiddles with all of them from time to time.

That's one reason that there is no creation science that can be taken seriously. There isn't much science without mathematics, and the calculations scientists do almost always depend on constants. If there are no constants then calculations are of little or no value.

Here is a verse that I don't believe is consistent with the creationist assumption that God fiddles with the physical world all the time. James describes God as a God of stability who "does not change" (NIV) or as the KJV puts it, shows no "shadow of turning."

17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.
James 1:17 NIV

17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
James 1:17 KJV

Not all Creationists believe in 4000 years old Earth. I don't see anything in Genesis which reject the Scientific claim that our Universe is 14 billion years old and Earth id 4 billion years old.

On another note, Cosmologists dont know what 94% of the Universe is made of yet. They call it Dark Matter and Dark Energy but how do we know for sure light propagates through these media in the same way it does through ordinary matter?

Job 33:6 · Jun 8, 2020

James A said:
Not all Creationists believe in 4000 years old Earth. I don't see anything in Genesis which reject the Scientific claim that our Universe is 14 billion years old and Earth id 4 billion years old.

On another note, Cosmologist dont know what 94% of the Universe is made of yet. They call it Dark Matter and Dark Energy but how do we know sure light propagates through these media in the same way it does through ordinary matter?

There is a combinations of evidences, including observation of the speed of light in deep space.

How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments: Additional Topics

I think it's important to note though, that much like plate tectonics or radiometric dating, there isn't scientific evidence or even reason to believe that things in the past moved thousands of times faster than today.

People look at rock layers in the geologic column that have angled fractures, and young earthers at times have suggested that sediment would instantaneously lithify during a global flood.

Rather than just recognizing an old earth or old universe, literally every field of science is manipulated to make sense of their beliefs. In biology they believe in super evolution aka bariminology. In geology it's super chaotic catastrophic plate tectonics. In astronomy it's an expedited speed of light.

To account for young earth beliefs, they basically just throw math out the window and hit the fast forward button on the video recording of history.

It's a classic case of bending math around beliefs, rather than bending beliefs around math.

Job 33:6 · Jun 8, 2020

@James A

I would recommend the article below. Written by a former young earthers who went and got a degree in physics.

Path Across the Stars

I'll quote a piece:

ESO 137–001 is a barred spiral galaxy, not unlike our own, 2.1 quintillion kilometers away. It’s plunging into the center of the Norma Galaxy Cluster at 20,000 times the speed of sound. Inside tight clusters of galaxies, like Norma, the intergalactic medium contains concentrated hydrogen gas much thicker than average. The impact of ESO 137–001’s spiral arms into this gigantic gas cloud is tearing them away in pieces like a dandelion in a hurricane. Clouds of dust and hot gas trail behind in brilliant blue and brown streaks.

The question, for me, was obvious. How long had this been happening? This image, of course, is coming from 220 million light-years away and thus dates to the earliest dinosaurs…but even if we handwave the starlight problem and pretend the light is reaching us in real time, it is still a challenge. This is real motion and change taking place on an intergalactic scale. If the universe is only 6,000 years old, how far could this galaxy have traveled?

It turned out I still only had part of the story.

The first image I’d seen was merely visible light, captured by Hubble. Astronomers had also imaged the Norma Cluster using the Chandra X-ray Observatory, an enormous telescope launched into low Earth orbit in 1999.

The image from Chandra, combined with the one from Hubble, shows a vast trail of superheated gas in the wake of the galaxy, stripped away by the shock of plunging into the core of the galaxy cluster. The trail stretches unbroken for a distance of 280,000 light-years.

This was the moment when everything broke down. To claim that light could somehow move infinitely fast to reach us was fantastic enough, but this was an example showing that it didn’t matter how fast light might move. I couldn’t conceive any way for an entire galaxy to traverse 280,000 light-years in just 6,000 years. The universe simply could not be young, and my whole edifice crumbled.

coffee4u · Jun 8, 2020

Dale said:
Coffee4u in post #70: "That passage has nothing to do with Genesis but how God is outside of time. If Genesis days were really millions of years (which causes all sorts of issues with scripture such as no death before sin) "

I don't get your comment about "no death before sin." If Adam and Eve were not subject to death before the Expulsion from Eden, isn't that because they had access to the Tree of Life? That wouldn't apply to animals.

You seem to be saying that Psalms has nothing to do with creation. On the contrary, Psalm 104 recapitulates the creation story. It does this with no mention of creation "days" and no mention of Adam, Eve or the Garden of Eden.

Psalm 104

1 Praise the Lord, my soul.
Lord my God, you are very great;
you are clothed with splendor and majesty.
2 The Lord wraps himself in light as with a garment;
he stretches out the heavens like a tent
3 and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters.
He makes the clouds his chariot
and rides on the wings of the wind.
4 He makes winds his messengers,[a]
flames of fire his servants.
5 He set the earth on its foundations;
it can never be moved.
6 You covered it with the watery depths as with a garment;
the waters stood above the mountains.
7 But at your rebuke the waters fled,
at the sound of your thunder they took to flight;
8 they flowed over the mountains,
they went down into the valleys,
to the place you assigned for them.
9 You set a boundary they cannot cross;
never again will they cover the earth.
10 He makes springs pour water into the ravines;
it flows between the mountains.
11 They give water to all the beasts of the field;
the wild donkeys quench their thirst.
12 The birds of the sky nest by the waters;
they sing among the branches.
13 He waters the mountains from his upper chambers;
the land is satisfied by the fruit of his work.
14 He makes grass grow for the cattle,
and plants for people to cultivate—
bringing forth food from the earth:
15 wine that gladdens human hearts,
oil to make their faces shine,
and bread that sustains their hearts.
16 The trees of the Lord are well watered,
the cedars of Lebanon that he planted.
17 There the birds make their nests;
the stork has its home in the junipers.
18 The high mountains belong to the wild goats;
the crags are a refuge for the hyrax.

19 He made the moon to mark the seasons,
and the sun knows when to go down.
20 You bring darkness, it becomes night,
and all the beasts of the forest prowl.
21 The lions roar for their prey
and seek their food from God.
22 The sun rises, and they steal away;
they return and lie down in their dens.
23 Then people go out to their work,
to their labor until evening.

24 How many are your works, Lord!
In wisdom you made them all;
the earth is full of your creatures.
25 There is the sea, vast and spacious,
teeming with creatures beyond number—
living things both large and small.
26 There the ships go to and fro,
and Leviathan, which you formed to frolic there.

27 All creatures look to you
to give them their food at the proper time.
28 When you give it to them,
they gather it up;
when you open your hand,
they are satisfied with good things.
29 When you hide your face,
they are terrified;
when you take away their breath,
they die and return to the dust.
30 When you send your Spirit,
they are created,
and you renew the face of the ground.
31 May the glory of the Lord endure forever;
may the Lord rejoice in his works—
32 he who looks at the earth, and it trembles,
who touches the mountains, and they smoke.
33 I will sing to the Lord all my life;
I will sing praise to my God as long as I live.
34 May my meditation be pleasing to him,
as I rejoice in the Lord.
35 But may sinners vanish from the earth
and the wicked be no more.
Praise the Lord, my soul.
Praise the Lord.[b]

--Psalm 104 NIV

Footnotes:

Psalm 104:4 Or angels

Psalm 104:35 Hebrew Hallelu Yah; in the Septuagint this line stands at the beginning of Psalm 105.

My comment about no death before sin.
Romans 5:12-21
12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned
Is just one of the verses that does not gell with evolutions millions of years of death, is what I was saying.I do not believe that death, Nephesh chayyāh came to be until after the fall.

There are many psalms that talk about creation, but they are psalms, which is poetry and song.
Psalm 98:8
Let the rivers clap their hands, let the mountains sing together for joy;

Verses Exodus
20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

They are completely different literary styles. The first is poetry designed to make us picture a moving river splashing against the rocks and a blooming mountain of flowers blowing in the breeze. Obviously rivers don't have hands and mountains don't sing.
Genesis and Exodus are not poetry. Not to say they don't contain some, but you know when you are reading Miriam's song versus the Ten Commandments.

God tells us very plainly that he took 6 days and you have no rebuttal for it but to quote poetry?

You don't want to accept the Bible says 6 days due to science, but creation was a supernatural event, it can't be tested with science.
You can believe whatever you want, but don't try and pretend the Bible itself teaches millions of years, that is as believable as Paul teaching break dancing.

coffee4u · Jun 9, 2020

James A said:
Not all Creationists believe in 4000 years old Earth.

None of us do, where did that number come from?

coffee4u · Jun 9, 2020

Dale said:
John, I notice that you refer to "yec scientists." Is there such a thing a creation science? I have been forced to conclude that there is not. If you know anything about science, modern science constantly uses mathematics. There wouldn't be much science without mathematics. Do creation scientists use mathematics? Not in the same sense and here is why.

I have pointed out that the speed of light is a problem for creationists. Many of the stars and groups of stars that we see through telescopes are tens of thousands of light years away, even in our own galaxy. We can see other galaxies that are millions and even billions of light years away--it takes light and radio waves that long to get here. If the earth and the universe were only a few thousand years old we wouldn't be able to see them. Creationists instantly brush this problem aside. The speed of light isn't fixed, they tell me, it is wherever God left it the last time He got finished fiddling with it.

The same thing goes for other constants such as the rate of radioactive decay and the universal gravitational constant. My physics text gives constants like Planck's constant and the permittivity of free space. To creationists, none of these things are constant, God fiddles with all of them from time to time.

That's one reason that there is no creation science that can be taken seriously. There isn't much science without mathematics, and the calculations scientists do almost always depend on constants. If there are no constants then calculations are of little or no value.

Here is a verse that I don't believe is consistent with the creationist assumption that God fiddles with the physical world all the time. James describes God as a God of stability who "does not change" (NIV) or as the KJV puts it, shows no "shadow of turning."

17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.
James 1:17 NIV

17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
James 1:17 KJV

I will tell you what your issue with this is. It's that you continually look for naturistic explanations. Creation was not a natural event, it was a supernatural event. A miracle.

1)You talk about stars and mention tens of thousands of light years away as if this were a huge problem.

Isaiah 45:12
It is I who made the earth and created mankind on it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshalled their starry hosts.

If God stretched them out into their present positions, tens of thousands of light-years away why is this an issue?
Or are you saying that was too hard or impossible for God to do?

2) "God fiddles with the physical world all the time."
I've never said that unless you are referring to the fall and during and after the flood. God certainly 'fiddled' with things then.

3) Radioactive decay may be constant now but this does not mean it always was. If you are referring to 4 billion-year-old rocks, that has nothing to do with the creation week anyway. Those are two separate things.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was only a formless hunk of rock. This rock may be a very different age from the creation upon it, if something that was made outside of time can be even be dated at all.

Time was not created until day 1
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
Verse 2 could either be with verse 1 or with verse 3.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
Time started with the turning of the earth and the light source shining upon it.

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

Dale said:
I don't believe that Genesis says that God created only one large land mass at the beginning.

Actually, the Bible DOES say that but that matter is an off-topic subject any way.

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

fwGod said:
The date of creation is based on the calculating of all pertinent names from Adam to Abraham and his descendants.
Since other genealogies in the Bible leave out non-pertinent names.. then there would be an inaccurate tally. Because of that, the genealogy record should not be used to determine the date of creation.. it wasn't intended to imply the date of creation, but rather to provide the line of Abraham from Adam. To show that God didn't just choose some random pagan man named Abram in Ur to make covenant with Him.

There is no textual evidence that the Bible left out any names in the genealogical records.

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

coffee4u said:
I came to faith through reading the Bible.

I then found Ken Ham and changed from being an evolutionist to a creationist some 30 years ago. We aren't all 'grown-up brainwashed into creationism' lol. Nope, I use to be an evolutionist and a non-Christian. Probably what makes me more unbending lol, although I came to the 10-15 thousand years only a few years ago.

While I believe the 10-15 thousand year range is incompatible with the genealogical and historical records, I first became a Christian before I became a Young Earth Creationist myself. Granted that whether one views Genesis as an actual historical record may not be a salvation issue, it still remains a vital credibility issue to the Gospel since if the first book Bible cannot be believed, then neither can the rest of it for as our Lord says, "If I tell you earthly things and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, If I tell you of heavenly things?" (John 3:12)

While we cannot expect the theology of those who first come to the Lord to be as complete as those whom you might call seasoned saints, what we ought to expect is that they should not want to continue walking in the same lies that they once walk in before they had come to Christ. To discard all things, including any manner of thinking, that runs contrary to the authority of scripture always serves as evidence of spiritual growth and a transformed life in Christ which is why I am deeply troubled by those who profess Christ yet persist in living in sin from which they were supposed to have repented and cling to doctrines running contrary to scripture.

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

Dale said:
It is generally agreed that Abraham lived around 2,000 BC (or about 4,000 years ago). Archaeologists and historians tell us that the Great Pyramid of Egypt was built around 2,500 BC (or 4,500 years ago). So the Great Pyramid was about five hundred years old when Abraham came out of the city of Ur.

Creationists, or at least those who claim that the world is only six thousand years old, say that there are only 400 years between Noah's Flood and Abraham -- or even less, as we shall see. This is unworkable.

For instance, one website gives the following dates.*

Creation 4004 BC

Flood 2348 BC

Tower of Babel 2234 BC Only 114 years after the Flood????

Abraham 1996 BC Only 352 years after the Flood????

As you can see, this creationist date of 1996 BC for Abraham is very close to the generally accepted figure of around 2000 BC. Yet they claim that the Tower of Babel, an immense project requiring tens of thousands of workers, happened only a trifle over a hundred years after the Flood. These workers would have to be supported by millions of farmers or herders. Keep in mind that after the Flood, Genesis says there were only eight people in the world.

There is solid evidence that the Great Pyramid and others nearby were built around 2500 BC, about 500 years before Abraham. Creationist reckoning seems to put the Great Pyramid before the Flood.

*www.biblehistory.com/timeline

One thing that secular archeologists and historians fail to take into account is that Pharaohs did appoint co-regents to help them govern the land of Egypt which makes it possible that some of these co-regent Dynasties may have been mistaken for the Dynasties of Pharaohs. A co-regent was second in command to the Pharaoh and possessed almost as much authority. We also have to remember is that Egypt, in its glory days, was much larger than it presently is today.

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

HARK! said:
I would like to understand how anyone with reason, knowledge of the Bible, and credibility, can put a number on this.

If we believe the Bible, Adam was created, lived in the Garden, and was endowed with eternal life; so long as he was obedient to YHWH. I have found absolutely no Biblical reference for how much time elapsed, from the time that YHWH created Adam, until Adam disobeyed YHWH.

Until I see a number in scripture, any number greater than zero, up to infinity, is a possibility.

The six thousand year number is but a rough estimate based upon listed lifespans of names listed in the genealogical records and historical records.

Contenders Edge · Jun 9, 2020

Andrewn said:
I'm a creationist (as every Christian must be) and have read some of Creation Ministries books and magazines. I think these give great evidence about the wonderful creation of God and the supreme intelligence He showed in designing every detail in every creature. I highly recommend their publications but I cannot believe in a 6000 year old earth. From my understanding, objections to Evolution are as follows:

1) The world could not have started on its own. I agree and believe God created the universe. Why couldn't He have created the universe 14 billion years ago?

2) Life could not have evolved on its own and progressed from one species to another. I agree and believe that God created different kinds of life. Amoeba did not progress to humans. Horses were created as horses, cows as cows, kangaroos were created as kangaroos, apes as apes, and humans as humans, etc.

3) The 24 hour periods mentioned in Genesis. They cannot be 24 hour periods because the 6th day in which animal and human life is created and in which we still live has been going on for at least 6000 years so far, according to the Bible.

4) The problem of death before Adam's Fall. This is a relatively big theological issue but I think some saints like Thomas Aquinas believed there was animal death in the Garden. So, it doesn't have to be a deal breaker.

5) Adding up ages of Adam's descendants. There are conceivably huge gaps between one generation and the next.

So, why do Bible believers have to believe in a 6000 or 15,000 year earth? I'm posting this in 2 threads. You may choose to respond in the thread you think is most appropriate.

Can you post a link to the other thread that these questions are in? I could answer them here, but I am afraid that if I did, it might lead us off topic.

coffee4u · Jun 9, 2020

Contenders Edge said:
Can you post a link to the other thread that these questions are in? I could answer them here, but I am afraid that if I did, it might lead us off topic.

I think that one got closed by a mod. Since I replied to that same post you just quoted which is why I was getting confused as to what thread I was on. It was in the open
Creation & Evolution area, not the Christian area.
I think maybe this thread The Bible Proves Evolution

Was the Great Pyramid Built Before Noah's Flood?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads