Before the Flood.

[AV1611VET]

(this sounds reminiscent of the people that claim that yom or 'day' should be understood as many many years in Genesis 1)

A lot of those who are too quick (or lazy) to study it out, jump on that Day-Age Theory, then find themselves in a mess trying to explain how the plants existed for so long before the sun was created --- not to mention Original Sin. By changing the meaning of one simple word in Genesis 1, they find themselves having to deny a host of doctrines after that.

 

[Mallon]

A lot of those who are too quick (or lazy) to study it out, jump on that Day-Age Theory, then find themselves in a mess trying to explain how the plants existed for so long before the sun was created

I don't imagine this is a problem for people who appeal to miracles at the drop of a hat.

 

[BeforeTheFoundation]

A lot of those who are too quick (or lazy) to study it out, jump on that Day-Age Theory, then find themselves in a mess trying to explain how the plants existed for so long before the sun was created --- not to mention Original Sin. By changing the meaning of one simple word in Genesis 1, they find themselves having to deny a host of doctrines after that.

Right, I am certainly not a day ager (I am a theistic evolutionist, but that is for another thread) my point is that you guys are changing the definition of the word shenah. I know that you are not a day ager, presumably because you recognize the folly of randomly changing a words definition to fit a preconceived idea. Well this is the same thing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Right, I am certainly not a day ager (I am a theistic evolutionist, but that is for another thread) my point is that you guys are changing the definition of the word shenah. I know that you are not a day ager, presumably because you recognize the folly of randomly changing a words definition to fit a preconceived idea. Well this is the same thing.

Paul warns against making changes --- like adding an ess on to a word --- it could change the whole meaning.

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

I see a lot of my fellow Christians doing that with Genesis 1:1*, and ending up not understanding things.

* The Bible does not say, "In the beginning, God created the heavens..." in Genesis 1:1 --- that's in Genesis 2:1.

 

[RobertByers]

In the bible it says that people lived to be "hundreds" years old... What made people live that long then but not now... I know that the flood came and God told him that no one would live longer then hundred something. What all changed?

YEC here.
The old idea was that closer to creation week everything was stronger even though the fall was in place. after the flood the ages of man decreased until we were given our 70-80 allowance.
A dying world meant less and less health. Of coarse a healthy world allowed more rapid population increase in man and creatures.
There is a verse in the bible that says we will have 120 years or so and it will be though normal. The future I guess.

 

[BeforeTheFoundation]

Paul warns against making changes --- like adding an ess on to a word --- it could change the whole meaning.

Ok, so do you think that the interpretation that these are cycles of the moon are correct or are you actually interpreting the word as years?

 

[Assyrian]

Or a brand new 30-year-old bicycle --- as this thread demonstrates?

Those are not new just recycled.

But radiometric dating tells us when the rock was assembled from magma not the age of individual atoms which could have been formed in the heart of a supernova billion of year before that. If components in the rock like zircon crystals survived unmelted from earlier rock when the present rock formed it can tell how old they were too.

You problem is not that the earth was assembled from older parts but that it had been assembled over billions of years.

 

[Assyrian]

Paul warns against making changes --- like adding an ess on to a word --- it could change the whole meaning.I see a lot of my fellow Christians doing that with Genesis 1:1*, and ending up not understanding things.

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

I wonder if Paul is playing with words here. Seed is one of those words that is the same plural and singular. It would be like saying:
Jesus said I am the good shepherd, and I know my sheep, He saith not, I know my sheeps, as of many; but as of one, for all Jesus' sheeps though many are one sheep.

* The Bible does not say, "In the beginning, God created the heavens..." in Genesis 1:1 --- that's in Genesis 2:1.

I wonder how the writers of Hebrew text got it so wrong, they use the same word in both verses.
בראשׁית ברא אלהים את השׁמים ואת הארץ׃ Gen 1:1
ויכלו השׁמים והארץ וכל־צבאם׃ Gen 2:1

Maybe they should have checked the AV.

 

[theFijian]

* The Bible does not say, "In the beginning, God created the heavens..." in Genesis 1:1 --- that's in Genesis 2:1.

Hint: Genesis 2:1 is also in the Bible

PS - so to remind you of my earlier question was it the authors of the original manuscripts or the translators of the KJV who were inspired?

 

[Assyrian]

I remember reading somewhere that the lifespans in Genesis were actually number of "Moons" and not "years". Thus Methuselah was 80 at his death and not 969. Adam was 77.5, not 930. Noah was 79, not 950. Etc.

However, the numbers still show a trend of decrease. I think this must mean something important.

Only that IndiPirate gave a random selection of ages. You get you decreasing trend because he mentions Methuselah before Adam...

 

[artybloke]

I said VERBAL PLENARY INSPIRATION, not MECHANICAL DICTATION.

Whatever you call it, it's still codswallop.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ok, so do you think that the interpretation that these are cycles of the moon are correct or are you actually interpreting the word as years?

Years --- definitely years.

 

[AV1611VET]

Seed is one of those words that is the same plural and singular.

We call them collective nouns.

I wonder how the writers of Hebrew text got it so wrong, they use the same word in both verses.

How do you know?

 

[shernren]

How do you know?

בראשׁית ברא אלהים את השׁמים ואת הארץ׃ Gen 1:1
ויכלו השׁמים והארץ וכל־צבאם׃ Gen 2:1

Maybe they should have checked the AV.

Man, God must've gotten so fed up waiting for King James and 1611 to roll around.

 

[AV1611VET]

Man, God must've gotten so fed up waiting for King James and 1611 to roll around.

Let's go over this again.

Some words in the Hebrew language are what we call uniplural words. Elohim, for instance, is a uniplural word. In the English language, the word "you" is uniplural, as are collective nouns like "fish" and "sheep" and "family" and "school".

IF this word that Assyrian posted is the very same word that Moses used, and IF that very word for "heaven" is uniplural, then there is no error in the Hebrew.

On the other hand, I'm talking about the English words used, not the Hebrew word(s).

There is too much assuming I have to do to accept Assyrian's answer.

ETA: Okay, I just looked it up, and the Hebrew word (in Strong's Concordance) for both "heaven" and "heavens" is exactly the same - (number 8064).

Thus, when translating into English, Someone in the know is going to have to make the differentiation --- and did.

 

[shernren]

ETA: Okay, I just looked it up, and the Hebrew word (in Strong's Concordance) for both "heaven" and "heavens" is exactly the same - (number 8064).

Thus, when translating into English, Someone in the know is going to have to make the differentiation --- and did.

Well, the Septuagint has both singular. Somebody screwed up somewhere and either way you cut it the implications aren't pretty.

 

[theFijian]

IF this word that Assyrian posted is the very same word that Moses used, and IF that very word for "heaven" is uniplural, then there is no error in the Hebrew.

Well would you look at this raving liberal call into quesiton the accuracy of the original manuscripts all for the sake of the errorneous KJV-onlyism doctrine!

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, the Septuagint has both singular.

Well, the NIV --- that book that's supposed to be so close to the originals that Al Turing couldn't tell them apart --- has both words plural.

Big deal.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well would you look at this raving liberal call into quesiton the accuracy of the original manuscripts all for the sake of the errorneous KJV-onlyism doctrine!

"Raving liberal" --- --- that was a good one!

 

[shernren]

Paul warns against making changes --- like adding an ess on to a word --- it could change the whole meaning.I see a lot of my fellow Christians doing that with Genesis 1:1*, and ending up not understanding things.

* The Bible does not say, "In the beginning, God created the heavens..." in Genesis 1:1 --- that's in Genesis 2:1.

Well, the NIV --- that book that's supposed to be so close to the originals that Al Turing couldn't tell them apart --- has both words plural.

Big deal.

Self-contradiction in 7 hours, this guy deserves an award.