Creation Date

BNR32FAN · Jun 17, 2022

d taylor said:
You have a verse stating that

yes

“Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a third day.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1:11-13‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Halbhh · Jun 17, 2022

BNR32FAN said:
I think one reason many people don’t accept YEC is because they keep forgetting that creation is a miracle. It’s not supposed to be explainable by science and to believe something that’s not backed by scientific evidence takes more faith than to require scientific evidence in order to believe something.

Imagine if a person had never read a bible (most have not much), and one day found a New Testament. They would be able to come to faith, I know you'd agree. Full faith.

They could also read, with faith, that God created all that is, even if they have a different understanding of whatever else. And that's already a full miraculous level. I'd even say it's more miraculous than YEC.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

That's just the same or perhaps even a higher level of supernatural miraculous miracle, there.

So, if believers start talking about a mere side topic that is for a lot of people only a mere science question like geology, or the age of the Earth, they needn't have much concern about it. After all, it's not the Age of the Earth we believe in, for our salvation. It's Christ.

So, if I find/notice/discern that someone has based their faith primarily just on some particular doctrine instead of the only solid foundation --> Matthew 7:24-27 the only Foundation that is sure.... then I'd have to take much care or even perhaps refrain from even talking with them much about their doctrine except that I'm speaking Christ's words instead. Because they'd be someone not on solid ground, right. So, often in a YEC discussion, I start asking people if they know Matthew 7:24-27, and if they are doing it -- to find out if they have that safety of real solid standing that won't collapse.

I need to know if they suddenly found out absolute proof the Earth is older tomorrow, they would not lose faith! They would need a more important thing: the more full gospel.

d taylor · Jun 17, 2022

BNR32FAN said:
yes

“Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a third day.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1:11-13‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

But there was already light, these plants, etc... had the light of verse 3

BNR32FAN · Jun 17, 2022

Halbhh said:
Imagine if a person had never read a bible (most have not much), and one day found a New Testament. They would be able to come to faith, I know you'd agree. Full faith.

They could also read, with faith, that God created all that is, even if they have a different understanding of whatever else. And that's already a full miraculous level. I'd even say it's more miraculous than YEC.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

That's just the same or perhaps even a higher level of supernatural miraculous miracle, there.

So, if believers start talking about a mere side topic that is for a lot of people only a mere science question like geology, or the age of the Earth, they needn't have much concern about it. After all, it's not the Age of the Earth we believe in, for our salvation. It's Christ.

So, if I find/notice/discern that someone has based their faith primarily just on some particular doctrine instead of the only solid foundation --> Matthew 7:24-27 the only Foundation that is sure.... then I'd have to take much care or even perhaps refrain from even talking with them much about their doctrine except that I'm speaking Christ's words instead. Because they'd be someone not on solid ground, right. So, often in a YEC discussion, I start asking people if they know Matthew 7:24-27, and if they are doing it -- to find out if they have that safety of real solid standing that won't collapse.

I need to know if they suddenly found out absolute proof the Earth is older tomorrow, they would not lose faith! They would need a more important thing: the more full gospel.

The reason I believe that YEC is important is not because it’s important to know how old the world is for salvation but because it’s important that we can believe what the Bible actually says. You’ll have so many people who can’t believe in YEC because it defies what science teaches us but the Bible is completely filled with numerous miracles that defy science. So if a person can’t believe what the Bible specifically states about how God created the universe because it defies what science tells us then how can they believe any of the other miracles in the Bible that equally defy science? A miracle is by definition a supernatural event that cannot be explained by science and is most often contributed to a god or deity. Jesus’ incarnation and resurrection are both miracles that defy science that are fundamental to having faith in the gospel. So it’s not just about YEC it’s about can you believe the word of God over what this world it telling you?

essentialsaltes · Jun 17, 2022

inquiring mind said:
All I’m saying, for example, is that the Flood was before Egyptian dynasties, no matter what dates they’re thought to be, and whether they're based on an interpretation of biblical chronologies or archaeological finds. Evolutionists feel free to comment too.

If there were a Great Flood, as described in Genesis, then I agree it would have to come before Egyptian civilization. And in that case, I agree that Ussher's chronology would have to be off by thousands of years.

BNR32FAN · Jun 17, 2022

d taylor said:
But there was already light, these plants, etc... had the light of verse 3

The sun also regulates the temperature of the earth.

Halbhh · Jun 17, 2022

BNR32FAN said:
we can believe what the Bible actually says.

This we agree on totally, and it's crucially important for that reason not to preach Flat Earth for example as being scripture (it's not anywhere in the Bible) but as only a theory, which is the accurate reality. It's a construct made using scripture and added ideas not in scripture.

So, if someone preached Flat Earth as Bible Scripture (it is not), then I'd point out the exactly same thing to them: that it is only merely a theory made up by combining reading some verses in a certain way, and ignoring others, and adding ideas not in the text at all, and so it just a theory, just like YEC.

For instance, and there are millions, Old Earth Creationism (OEC) also fully believes in scripture 100% without a single thing left out, and believing in every miracle (but at times reading I think more fully carefully), but not making all the same extraneous (to the text) added assumptions and also not interpreting 'day' to be having the added assumptions of being consecutive and without time gaps and so on added ideas, and so OEC is another theory, in that way like the theory YEC.

It's part of why I point out that the Age of Earth is not important.

inquiring mind · Jun 17, 2022

essentialsaltes said:
If there were a Great Flood, as described in Genesis, then I agree it would have to come before Egyptian civilization. And in that case, I agree that Ussher's chronology would have to be off by thousands of years.

I don't think it would be thousands, maybe hundreds. 3100 B.C. for beginning of Egypt's civilization according to Wikipedia anyway. General accepted date for the Flood is 2350 B.C. Septuagint had it a few hundred years older I think, so you might be talking 400-500 years difference.

BNR32FAN · Jun 17, 2022

Halbhh said:
For instance, and there are millions, Old Earth Creationism (OEC) also fully believes in scripture 100% without a single thing left out, and believing in every miracle (but at times reading I think more fully carefully), but not making all the same extraneous (to the text) added assumptions and also not interpreting 'day' to be having the added assumptions of being consecutive and without time gaps and so on added ideas, and so OEC is another theory, in that way like the theory YEC.

But the heart of the issue is WHY don’t they believe that the interpretation of the word day in the creation account is the same as every other use in the Old Testament? Why is the word “day” interpreted differently in the creation account than it is in every other time it is used in the Old Testament? When you get to the heart of the answer to that question you’ll see what I’m talking about. It always comes full circle back to science because there’s nothing in the scriptures that indicate a different definition of the word “day” in the creation account.

inquiring mind · Jun 17, 2022

essentialsaltes said:
If there were a Great Flood, as described in Genesis, then I agree it would have to come before Egyptian civilization. And in that case, I agree that Ussher's chronology would have to be off by thousands of years.

So, YEC have a little wiggle room there… Creation 4004 B.C.; Flood maybe 3200-3500 B.C.; Egyptian civilization starting around 3100 B.C. Who knows, it’s all estimated, and the world that was, was no longer.

Maria Billingsley · Jun 17, 2022

inquiring mind said:
Ussher seemed to assume a lot with his 4004 B.C. creation date (evidently based on the first day of creation week). Personally, I think Creation week was in a different time zone altogether from the one we know. For example, why would the days before Day 4 and the creation of the sun be the same length as we know them? And really, it was God’s work, so how could we assume to know the length of any of them anyway? And, as far as chronology back to Adam, that’s crossing Day 7 of Creation Week??? God said it was finished on Day 6 (but doesn’t say when He set it in motion that I can find), and Day 7 was a day of rest for Him, but never-the-less in the Creation week time zone. I’m not wanting to argue against YEC, or anything really, just curious what others think. Could the adherence to hard dates, even when they cross from our time zone to an unknown one, be a reason for the time problem when dating the Flood or archeological finds and making comparisons? I’m not saying the archeological dating is exact either, it’s generally all estimated. All I’m saying, for example, is that the Flood was before Egyptian dynasties, no matter what dates they’re thought to be, and whether they're based on an interpretation of biblical chronologies or archaeological finds. Evolutionists feel free to comment too.

Personally, I believe Genesis is only showing the order of creation and not the time frame. We are so focused on a timeline that we forget the order in which God created! That has to have more importance in the scheme of things. Blessings.

d taylor · Jun 17, 2022

Creation date is Genesis 1:1

Genesis 1:3 - 26 is the recreating for the current, humanity, animals, fish, bugs, etc..

Astrid · Jun 17, 2022

inquiring mind said:
Ussher seemed to assume a lot with his 4004 B.C. creation date (evidently based on the first day of creation week). Personally, I think Creation week was in a different time zone altogether from the one we know. For example, why would the days before Day 4 and the creation of the sun be the same length as we know them? And really, it was God’s work, so how could we assume to know the length of any of them anyway? And, as far as chronology back to Adam, that’s crossing Day 7 of Creation Week??? God said it was finished on Day 6 (but doesn’t say when He set it in motion that I can find), and Day 7 was a day of rest for Him, but never-the-less in the Creation week time zone. I’m not wanting to argue against YEC, or anything really, just curious what others think. Could the adherence to hard dates, even when they cross from our time zone to an unknown one, be a reason for the time problem when dating the Flood or archeological finds and making comparisons? I’m not saying the archeological dating is exact either, it’s generally all estimated. All I’m saying, for example, is that the Flood was before Egyptian dynasties, no matter what dates they’re thought to be, and whether they're based on an interpretation of biblical chronologies or archaeological finds. Evolutionists feel free to comment too.

Kinda hard to date a flood when you can't
find any sign of it.

Astrid · Jun 17, 2022

Maria Billingsley said:
Personally, I believe Genesis is only showing the order of creation and not the time frame. We are so focused on a timeline that we forget the order in which God created! That has to have more importance in the scheme of things. Blessings.

Why does it give a time frame ifn it ain't important?
And give two different orders if order is important?

inquiring mind · Jun 17, 2022

Estrid said:
Kinda hard to date a flood when you can't find any sign of it.

Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished 2 Peter 3:6

Astrid · Jun 17, 2022

inquiring mind said:
Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished 2 Peter 3:6

You think.that is a sign?

You somehow are not aware that there is nothing to see
of the "flood" in the real world, outside that book?

AV1611VET · Jun 17, 2022

inquiring mind said:
For example, why would the days before Day 4 and the creation of the sun be the same length as we know them?

You don't need the sun for a day to occur.

A day would be one rotation of the earth on its axis.

It's called a sidereal day, as opposed to a solar day.

inquiring mind · Jun 17, 2022

Estrid said:
You think.that is a sign?

You can read every word of it... what do you think it means?

Estrid said:
You somehow are not aware that there is nothing to see of the "flood" in the real world, outside that book?

Maybe you began looking in the wrong place.
Colossians 3:2
Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth.

Astrid · Jun 17, 2022

inquiring mind said:
You can read every word of it... what do you think it means?

Maybe you began looking in the wrong place.
Colossians 3:2
Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth.

Every Christian reads your book to mean something different.
What difference does it make how I read it

Look anywhere you like, there is no flood- sign to date.

As per my original statement!!

You go find some, get a Nobel and win some souls.

inquiring mind · Jun 17, 2022

AV1611VET said:
You don't need the sun for a day to occur.

A day would be one rotation of the earth on its axis.

It's called a sidereal day, as opposed to a solar day.

But a sidereal day requires stars doesn't it?

Creation Date

He’s a Way of life

Everything You say is Life to me

Well-Known Member

He’s a Way of life

Fact-Based Lifeform

He’s a Way of life

Everything You say is Life to me

and a discerning heart

He’s a Way of life

and a discerning heart

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

and a discerning heart

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

and a discerning heart

Well-Known Member

and a discerning heart

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency