6,000 Years?

Job 33:6 · Saturday at 11:01 AM

Amo2 said:
YEC's mainly address that described in Genesis regarding the last in and around 6000 years.

Well, if the Bible doesn't say how long the earth was formless and empty before God began to create it, that is before the 6,000 years, then on what basis are they even YEC?

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—

If I said, when I began to make a clay pot, the pot was formless, lumpy and empty and then I said, someone hand me a puddy knife, and I made the pot in 6 hours (molded it in the first 1-3 hours and filled it with water in hours 4-6).

You wouldn't logically then turn to me and say that the pot was only 6 hours old, because I never said how long the pot was formless and empty before I began to mold it and fill it with water.

Amo2 · Saturday at 11:06 AM

Job 33:6 said:
The earth was obviously without shape and form when God began, without any further details on how long it was in that state beforehand. What it was, as the Bible plainly states, is the earth:
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—

It's still the earth, even when it was formless. It's not as though it was something else.

I have feel no compulsion to debate that which scripture has given us so very little information about. I do however believe the following scriptures.

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. 13 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Job 33:6 · Saturday at 11:11 AM

Amo2 said:
I have feel no compulsion to debate that which scripture has given us so very little information about. I do however believe the following scriptures.

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. 13 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

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.

Amo2 · Saturday at 11:42 AM

Job 33:6 said:
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 · Saturday at 11:45 AM

Amo2 said:
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 · Saturday at 11:53 AM

Amo2 said:
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 · Saturday at 12:24 PM

"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 · Saturday at 1:07 PM

Job 33:6 said:
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 · Saturday at 1:08 PM

River Jordan said:
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 · Saturday at 1:12 PM

Aaron112 said:
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 · Saturday at 1:19 PM

River Jordan said:
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 · Saturday at 1:24 PM

The Barbarian said:
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 · Saturday at 1:25 PM

Amo2 said:
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 · Saturday at 1:48 PM

Amo2 said:
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?

Kris.R.79 · Saturday at 1:48 PM

2PhiloVoid said:
Your historical research in regard to the bible is a little off here, particularly in respect to the role the Council of Nicaea had in "creating" the bible. You might want to lower your tone so as not to appear overly assured about details that not only may not be quite accurate, but are also misplaced in relevance.

While you're at it, it may do you some good to grab a copy of the book, The Canon Debate - editors Lee Martin McDonald and James A Sanders.

If I am wrong about something please prove it. I base my opinions on the research I have done. Now the writers of the bible believed the earth was flat, the earth was the center of the universe, bad weather and sickness was caused by spirits, all things we have proven to be not true. Much of the stories of the devil come from Dante Alighieri's, Dante's Inferno. The simple fact is the writers all religious text did not take into account the advancements of Medical Science, Archeology, Geology, Astronomy. Copernicus and Galileo proved the earth was not the center of the universe and the church fought like cats and dogs to shut them up. The church used superstition and god to control the ignorant masses. Its why Islam is were Christianity was 500 years ago.

2PhiloVoid · Saturday at 2:05 PM

Kris.R.79 said:
If I am wrong about something please prove it. I base my opinions on the research I have done. Now the writers of the bible believed the earth was flat, the earth was the center of the universe, bad weather and sickness was caused by spirits, all things we have proven to be not true.

Yes and no. It's not clear that all ancient Christians thought all sickness was caused by 'spirits.'

Secondly, you can't demand that others "prove" their points when you, yourself, do little to academically substantiate your own points. So, please reinforce your own points by citing your work. We don't just want to barrage each other with unsubstantiated banter and ambiguous generalities, so doing so citing your sources will help others out in seeing the sufficiency and poignancy of your points.

Kris.R.79 said:
Much of the stories of the devil come from Dante Alighieri's, Dante's Inferno. The simple fact is the writers all religious text did not take into account the advancements of Medical Science, Archeology, Geology, Astronomy. Copernicus and Galileo proved the earth was not the center of the universe and the church fought like cats and dogs to shut them up. The church used superstition and god to control the ignorant masses. Its why Islam is were Christianity was 500 years ago.

And what specific research have you undertaken, Kris, by which I mean to imply which books, sources, classes and/or undergraduate studies in specific fields have you engaged?

As an educated person who extols the value of the entire train of thought that has come out of the Copernican Revolution, I actually agree with a number of things you've said, but only to a certain extent. Where do you think we should place our beginning point in our engagement with the historical nuances of the Christian Faith? Is there an exacting criterion and resulting method we all must use and adhere to in order to do this?

The Barbarian · Saturday at 4:55 PM

Amo2 said:
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)

Kris.R.79 · Saturday at 9:55 PM

2PhiloVoid said:
Yes and no. It's not clear that all ancient Christians thought all sickness was caused by 'spirits.'

Secondly, you can't demand that others "prove" their points when you, yourself, do little to academically substantiate your own points. So, please reinforce your own points by citing your work. We don't just want to barrage each other with unsubstantiated banter and ambiguous generalities, so doing so citing your sources will help others out in seeing the sufficiency and poignancy of your points.

And what specific research have you undertaken, Kris, by which I mean to imply which books, sources, classes and/or undergraduate studies in specific fields have you engaged?

As an educated person who extols the value of the entire train of thought that has come out of the Copernican Revolution, I actually agree with a number of things you've said, but only to a certain extent. Where do you think we should place our beginning point in our engagement with the historical nuances of the Christian Faith? Is there an exacting criterion and resulting method we all must use and adhere to in order to do this?

I base my research on reading the bible, reading books on Archeology, Geology, Archeology, and if I was less lazy I would be as articulate as you. But I actually spent a few hours researching today so I could better argue and I realized I do not want to do the work, I have know desire to copy and paste varies quotes and such. I am on disability and one of my problems is arthritis in my hands and it hurts and I do not want to lol....thats the truth. I research and post my findings and then you do the same, then I do the same thing and my knuckles are swollen and sore and I jus tdo not want to...so you win...I am to tired and sore to keep it up.

The Barbarian · Sunday at 8:07 AM

Kris.R.79 said:
Now the writers of the bible believed the earth was flat, the earth

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

2PhiloVoid · Sunday at 8:28 AM

Kris.R.79 said:
I base my research on reading the bible, reading books on Archeology, Geology, Archeology, and if I was less lazy I would be as articulate as you. But I actually spent a few hours researching today so I could better argue and I realized I do not want to do the work, I have know desire to copy and paste varies quotes and such. I am on disability and one of my problems is arthritis in my hands and it hurts and I do not want to lol....thats the truth. I research and post my findings and then you do the same, then I do the same thing and my knuckles are swollen and sore and I jus tdo not want to...so you win...I am to tired and sore to keep it up.

That's a rough spot to be in, having arthritis like you do. Because of that, I can see you'd prefer I offer you a bit of leniency where specificity and documentation is crucial. OK. I'll grant you some leeway.

Just try to avoid describing instances in your critiques with over generalizations.

6,000 Years?

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

*****

Crabby Old White Guy

Active Member

Crabby Old White Guy

*****

Similar threads