ECFs and agreement on age of the Earth question.

[LittleLambofJesus]

Hi. There is a thread on the C&E concerning the age of the earth and there appears to be both YECs and OECs concerning that.

I would like to ask those knowledgable in the early writings of the ECFs if they all were of the same agreement as far as how old this planet was, and if you could lead me to some of their views on it. Thanks

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7263017
How old is the Earth

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Any thoughts on this? Thanks

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Is this thread that boring?

 

[ArnautDaniel]

I don't recall them ever really talking about it.

The whole flap about "creation" and "creationism" (in the sense of assigning exact timelines and so forth) is really a quite modern issue (innovation).

For the most part they likely took for granted that something along the lines of Genesis happened, but never let this stop them from reading those portions (and the rest of the Bible for that matter) as allegories applying to entirely unrelated issues.

It certainly wasn't a dreadfully important issue to them.

 

[simonthezealot]

Here is one that seems to hint at YEC, don't ya think?



The Epistle of Barnabas
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.vi.ii.xv.html?highlight=then%20shall%20he%20truly%20rest%20on%20the%20seventh%20day#highlight

"The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation thus: 'And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it.' Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, 'He finished in six days.' This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth, saying, 'Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years.' Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. 'And He rested on the seventh day.' This meaneth: when His Son, coming again, shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day." - The Epistle of Barnabas (15)

 

[simonthezealot]

Here's another...Victorinus
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.vi.i.html?highlight=seventh%20millenary#highlight

"And in Matthew we read, that it is written Isaiah also and the rest of his colleagues broke the Sabbath -that that true and just Sabbath should be observed in the seventh millenary of years....Wherefore, as I have narrated, that true Sabbath will be in the seventh millenary of years, when Christ with His elect shall reign." (On the Creation of the World)

 

[simonthezealot]

Is this thread that boring?

Nope just gots ta get the right participants in it...

 

[ArnautDaniel]

In both those quotes, the writer is rather more concerned about when the world was going to end as opposed to when it began.

 

[simonthezealot]

In both those quotes, the writer is rather more concerned about when the world was going to end as opposed to when it began.

One suggests the longevity of the earth at 6,000 years and one at 7,000
not 2 billion or whatever...

 

[ArnautDaniel]

One suggests the longevity of the earth at 6,000 years and one at 7,000
not 2 billion or whatever...

Nevertheless they are already interpreting the "six days" as not being six "literal" days.

Even these people aren't taking Genesis literally.

And since the assumption 1 "day" equals "one thousand years" came from nowhere, they are giving the age of the earth by a wild guess based on nothing.

 

[wmssid]

1) Barnabas wrote, "The creation was ABOUT 4,000 years before Christ" [4 BC.]

2) Bishop Ussher, "The creation was 4,000 years before Christ or, in 4,004 BC."

3) Sid Willliams: "These two writers had confused, 'The Beginning of Time' (Gen 5; 4,148 BC) with the 'Creation'."

A) "Mathematics is the most exact science known to man"" - Unknown.
B) The answer is found by correct "reading comphrehesion" and "grade school math." No science is more dogmatic than "grade school math."

C) There are only "two gaps" in the Bible story. These are (1) the time before "the beginning of time" (4,148 BC) to the "Creation of Earth"; and, the time after "Revival 2015" to the "Final Resurrection."

D) Genealogies and Periods of Prophecy and History of Kings of Israel and Judah add up to the correct date; 4,148 BC.

Barnabas must have added these figures up to arrive at his conclusion, "about 4,000 years before Christ [4 BC]."

Bishop Ussher, possible, merely quoted Barnabas.

Sid Williams added the numbers up.

"The Beginning of Time" (Gen 5) was the first mention of dates in the Bible.

wmssid

 

[huldah153]

Yeah, the belief in a 6,000 year old earth seems to have originated with Barnabas. But Justin Martyr, Origen, Irenaeus, St. Cyprian and Clement of Alexandria didn't necessarily subscribe to a literal six-day creation.

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/churchfathers.htm

 

[wmssid]

Nevertheless they are already interpreting the "six days" as not being six "literal" days.

Even these people aren't taking Genesis literally.

And since the assumption 1 "day" equals "one thousand years" came from nowhere, they are giving the age of the earth by a wild guess based on nothing.

"But, in this you will not escape notice of you, Extremely Loving ones (agape), that one day with Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day .." - 2Pet 3.8; quoting Ps 90.4.

This means promise of New Jerusalem (verse 3.13), by Moses (1600 BC), was as "one day with Lord"; written AD 66.

1600 + 66 = 1666 Years as "One Day."

But then, I have erred with the tongue, as you have done. I read that Barnabas had written, "Four thousand years from Creation to Christ [4 BC]." But my surfing the web could not establish this fact.

I have dated the "Beginning of Time" (Gen 5) to be 4,148 BC.

4,148 + 2,008 years = 6,156 Years

And the earth has not ended as Barnabas wrote would happen in 6,000 years.

wmssid

 

[artybloke]

Who cares what they thought? None of them were exactly trained in any kind of science.

 

[ArnautDaniel]

Who cares what they thought? None of them were exactly trained in any kind of science.

The question is how much what is called "creationism" is an innovation of the 19th and 20th centuries with no deep historical background.

 

[jckstraw72]

the ECFs unanimously believed in a young earth.

 

[ArnautDaniel]

the ECFs unanimously believed in a young earth.

Have you considered how much more interesting to people a remark like that would be if you gave specifics and supported it?

 

[archierieus]

Certainly the Genesis account may be understood as a six literal day Creation week, with God resting on the seventh literal day and sanctifying it as the weekly Sabbath. There is nothing inconsistent linguistically in the account with that understanding. And we recognize that God most certainly is able to create the world and every living thing in six literal days, and create them 'mature.' As for the idea of Christ's return being six thousand years after Creation, I have read a somewhat different version of that, which is Christ's return, bringing an end to this wicked world, six thousand years after the Fall of man, after the beginning of the reign of sin and death. How long after Creation did that occur? We do not know. But we may reasonably conclude that the signs of the times point to the soon return of Jesus--as in, very soon.

Dave

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

the ECFs unanimously believed in a young earth.

What translation did they use

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

[KJV] Matthew 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what [shall be] the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Matthew 24:3 He is yet sitting on the mount of the Olives, the disciples toward-came to Him according to own, saying, `Tell us, when shall these-things be? and what the Sign of the Thy ParousiaV , and of the together-finish/sun-teleiaV <4930> of the Age?' [Daniel 12/Revelation 19]

Textus Rec.) Matthew 24:3 kaqhmenou de autou epi tou orouV twn elaiwn proshlqon autw oi maqhtai kat idian legonteV eipe hmin pote tauta estai kai ti to shmeion thV shV parousiaV kai thV sunteleiaV tou aiwnoV

 

[Atlantians]

Here is one that seems to hint at YEC, don't ya think?



The Epistle of Barnabas
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.vi.ii.xv.html?highlight=then%20shall%20he%20truly%20rest%20on%20the%20seventh%20day#highlight

"The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation thus: 'And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it.' Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, 'He finished in six days.' This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth, saying, 'Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years.' Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. 'And He rested on the seventh day.' This meaneth: when His Son, coming again, shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day." - The Epistle of Barnabas (15)

That kind of reasoning is exactly why that Epistle was never on the table for Canonization.

Nevertheless they are already interpreting the "six days" as not being six "literal" days.

Even these people aren't taking Genesis literally.

And since the assumption 1 "day" equals "one thousand years" came from nowhere, they are giving the age of the earth by a wild guess based on nothing.

They are eisegeting the text by taking multiple unrelated verses and comboblying them together to form some arbitrary idea.

The question is how much what is called "creationism" is an innovation of the 19th and 20th centuries with no deep historical background.

In a sense you are right.

But that is more a reaction to the large rejection of the Bible.

The vast majority of Christians, including all the founding scientists of every scientific field, before the 19th century were Young Earth literal Genesis 1 believers.