How Old Is The Earth

[tdidymas]

It’s Exodus 20:11 where God said that creation took 6 days. What was written after verse 17 is irrelevant to the discussion. Why would verses after God spoke have any effect on what He said in the 10 commandments?

It was relevant to your claim that God dictated the scriptures to Moses. I was reiterating that Moses quoted God in some passages, and wrote his own commentary in others. This is why I think your idea of dictation is ludicrous.

Genesis 1 coincides with what God said in Exodus 20:11. Therefore since God doesn’t lie and no one else was there to witness the creation process the only logical conclusion is that the creation account came from God.

Yet there remains a discrepancy between what you claim Gen. 1 & Ex. 20:11 MEANS, and the astronomical observations that indicate a much older universe. You've yet to explain that. Your feeble attempt that God "spread out the heavens" means an expanding universe not only is incorrect, but is woefully inadequate.

 

[Apple Sky]

Since the Bible is completely silent about the distance of stars from the earth I strongly disagree with your opinion.

The distance of the stars is made up by men as is the age of the earth.

 

[trophy33]

Since the Bible is completely silent about the distance of stars from the earth I strongly disagree with your opinion.

If you actually accept the biblical cosmology, with the firmament and the stars in it, as literally inspired, you have no space to maneuver regarding the modern view of the universe and distant stars.

Its inconsistent to just cherrypick - "yes, days are literal, yes, dust is literal, yes, genealogies are literal, no, firmament is not literal, no, leviathan is not literal, no, the earth does not have columns, no, the firmament is not held by mountains".

 

[Apple Sky]

firmament is not literal, no, leviathan is not literal, no, the earth does not have columns, no, the firmament is not held by mountains".

So why are all these in the Bible ? And who's suggesting that the firmament is held up by mountains ?

 

[Ace777]

Ok, great! But how is this conversation relevant to the OP?

The post is about the age of the earth, That means how OLD is the EARTH. When did the earth begin.

 

[Strong in Him]

So why are all these in the Bible ?

I would suggest either poetry or because that's how people regarded the world then.

It was said, several years ago on these forums, that the Hebrews thought in pictures. I don't know when Genesis was written, but if you have a nation that can barely read or write, have no knowledge of cosmology, biology, zoology etc. etc, what are you going to do? Give them a lengthy scientific explanation for the origins of the world - which they don't need, won't understand and which will be of no help at all? Or say "In the beginning, God created ..... God spoke .... ?
And many people write poetry - "the purple headed mountain", for example; "the sun emerging from a tent in the sky like a bridegroom eager to meet his bride", for example. It doesn't mean these things are literal.

As for them being in the Bible; why is the instruction from Paul to bring the cloak and scrolls that he had left behind, in the Bible? It's not like we can do anything about it.
Scripture does not have to all be taken literally - indeed, it shouldn't be because it wasn't intended to be taken that way.

 

[Apple Sky]

I would suggest either poetry or because that's how people regarded the world then.

It was said, several years ago on these forums, that the Hebrews thought in pictures. I don't know when Genesis was written, but if you have a nation that can barely read or write, have no knowledge of cosmology, biology, zoology etc. etc, what are you going to do? Give them a lengthy scientific explanation for the origins of the world - which they don't need, won't understand and which will be of no help at all? Or say "In the beginning, God created ..... God spoke .... ?
And many people write poetry - "the purple headed mountain", for example; "the sun emerging from a tent in the sky like a bridegroom eager to meet his bride", for example. It doesn't mean these things are literal.

As for them being in the Bible; why is the instruction from Paul to bring the cloak and scrolls that he had left behind, in the Bible? It's not like we can do anything about it.
Scripture does not have to all be taken literally - indeed, it shouldn't be because it wasn't intended to be taken that way.

It was Moses who wrote the first five books of Bible which are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. These five book were dictated to Moses by God himself, so are you calling God a fairy tale teller ?

 

[trophy33]

So why are all these in the Bible ?

Because Bible has human authors and this was their worldview in the bronze/iron age.

And who's suggesting that the firmament is held up by mountains ?

Not sure what you mean by "who". Its how they viewed it. The solid firmament was supposed to be held by the highest mountains in the ends of the world. Remember, its supposed to be solid, so they logically also thought something is holding it, similarly to a tent roof.

These mountains are called "the pillars of the heavens" or "the foundations of heavens" (a different thing from the pillars of the earth) in the Bible. It was supposed to look like this:

 

[BNR32FAN]

It was relevant to your claim that God dictated the scriptures to Moses. I was reiterating that Moses quoted God in some passages, and wrote his own commentary in others. This is why I think your idea of dictation is ludicrous.

A quote is always dictated by the one who is being quoted, not by the one who is citing the quote. You’re just trying to find any excuse you can to justify your unwillingness to accept what is written in the Bible but the way the scriptures are written it’s absolutely undeniable that God Himself revealed the creation account to Moses.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It was relevant to your claim that God dictated the scriptures to Moses. I was reiterating that Moses quoted God in some passages, and wrote his own commentary in others. This is why I think your idea of dictation is ludicrous.

Yet there remains a discrepancy between what you claim Gen. 1 & Ex. 20:11 MEANS, and the astronomical observations that indicate a much older universe. You've yet to explain that. Your feeble attempt that God "spread out the heavens" means an expanding universe not only is incorrect, but is woefully inadequate.

Ok so I gave you an explanation why we can observe supernovas 10 billion light years away and your rebuttal is basically saying “nuh uh”. Is that the best argument you can bring to the discussion or can you actually point out why my explanation is flawed?

“Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1‬:‭14‬-‭19‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

According to this passage where did God put the sun, the moon, and the stars?

 

[BNR32FAN]

If you actually accept the biblical cosmology, with the firmament and the stars in it, as literally inspired, you have no space to maneuver regarding the modern view of the universe and distant stars.

Its inconsistent to just cherrypick - "yes, days are literal, yes, dust is literal, yes, genealogies are literal, no, firmament is not literal, no, leviathan is not literal, no, the earth does not have columns, no, the firmament is not held by mountains".

I find it really hard to believe that you’re not aware that the Hebrew word Raqa is typically translated to expanse. i would figure that someone who engages in discussions on this particular topic would already know this.

 

[Apple Sky]

Ok so I gave you an explanation why we can observe supernovas 10 billion light years away and your rebuttal is basically saying “nuh uh”. Is that the best argument you can bring to the discussion or can you actually point out why my explanation is flawed?

“Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭1‬:‭14‬-‭19‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

According to this passage where did God put the sun, the moon, and the stars?

He set them in the firmament read

King James Bible
And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

 

[Apple Sky]

I find it really hard to believe that you’re not aware that the Hebrew word Raqa is typically translated to expanse.

Raqa means;

The KJV translates Strong's H7554 in the following manner: spread... (6x), stamp (2x), stretch (1x), beat (1x), made broad (1x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

1. to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out, stretch
   1. (Qal)
      1. to stamp, beat out
      2. one who beats out (participle)
   2. (Piel) to overlay, beat out (for plating)
   3. (Pual) beaten out (participle)
   4. (Hiphil) to make a spreading (of clouds)

Strong’s Definition;
רָקַע râqaʻ, raw-kah'; a primitive root; to pound the earth (as a sign of passion); by analogy to expand (by hammering); by implication, to overlay (with thin sheets of metal):—beat, make broad, spread abroad (forth, over, out, into plates), stamp, stretch.

 

[BNR32FAN]

He set them in the firmament read

King James Bible
And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

I don’t prefer the KJV it isn’t as accurate as the NASB. I prefer a version that sticks to a more literal translation of what was written over a version that has embedded interpretations.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Raqa means;

The KJV translates Strong's H7554 in the following manner: spread... (6x), stamp (2x), stretch (1x), beat (1x), made broad (1x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

1. to beat, stamp, beat out, spread out, stretch
   1. (Qal)
      1. to stamp, beat out
      2. one who beats out (participle)
   2. (Piel) to overlay, beat out (for plating)
   3. (Pual) beaten out (participle)
   4. (Hiphil) to make a spreading (of clouds)

Strong’s Definition;
רָקַע râqaʻ, raw-kah'; a primitive root; to pound the earth (as a sign of passion); by analogy to expand (by hammering); by implication, to overlay (with thin sheets of metal):—beat, make broad, spread abroad (forth, over, out, into plates), stamp, stretch.

You have the wrong word above. The word used in Genesis 1:17 in reference to the heavens is H7549. What does Strong’s Concordance say about that particular usage?

Genesis 1:17 Lexicon: God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth,

 

[BNR32FAN]

So then, the U is 3.25B years old, and not 6k years old as the YECs claim?

No it just depends on how God chose to make the light visible to man within 2 days after creating the stars. If He accelerated the speed of light and these supernovas took place during that time then that would explain why we’re seeing them. We’ve only actually witnessed 4 that I know of. The first one is from the second century. The second is from the 11th century. The third is from the 16th century. And the last one was in 1987. So we can’t even verify that the first two even took place. Nobody knew what a supernova was back then and they didn’t even have telescopes yet. If supernovas were happening while the speed of light was accelerated then it would explain why we are seeing them take place.

 

[trophy33]

I find it really hard to believe that you’re not aware that the Hebrew word Raqa is typically translated to expanse. i would figure that someone who engages in discussions on this particular topic would already know this.

Therefore? What is your reasoning here, that such English translations are inspired, but not the ones that translate it as a dome, canopy or firmament?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Therefore? What is your reasoning here, that such English translations are inspired, but not the ones that translate it as a dome, canopy or firmament?

I would think that it’s quite obvious that my point here is that Raqa doesn’t only mean firmament. Expanse can mean a surface or an open area.

 

[trophy33]

I would think that it’s quite obvious that my point here is that Raqa doesn’t only mean firmament. Expanse can mean a surface or an open area.

First, its raqia, not Raqa.

Second, how does it help your case? What do you want to do with an expanse between two masses of water and with stars in it?

It can only switch the conversation to "does it mean the firmament or the space between the firmament and the earth", but it changes nothing about the Hebrew cosmology.

 

[Strong in Him]

It was Moses who wrote the first five books of Bible which are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. These five book were dictated to Moses by God himself, so are you calling God a fairy tale teller ?

Don't be silly.

a) where does it say that God dictated anything to Moses - never mind the events that happened before Moses was born and after he died?
b) If Genesis 1 is God's dictation, it says only, "then God said ...... and it was so." God would been perfectly capable of giving us exact details - e.g "then I chose to place the stars x miles from the earth", "then I chose to make the earth a globe", "then I made trees that were fully grown" etc. etc.
He doesn't and what's more he wrote about himself in the 3rd person.

The whole point of Genesis 1 is to say that GOD created - not an angel or an alien. Nor did the earth "just happen."
There is a purpose, and personal God, behind the creation of the earth - it wasn't chance, fate, kismet, an accident or anything else. GOD created, GOD spoke, GOD saw that it was good.
How GOD created, we are not told. And we don't need to know - not for salvation or spiritual growth, anyway.
The Bible contains God's word and is about God. If something isn't it it; we don't need to know it.