Old Earth Creation

[KTatis]

well that may be, but not so with hebrews.
6 is the number of man and 7 is completeness -,8 is new beginnings ,-9 finality

If it were true i would-but it is not

And how do you prove your THEORIES?

Deep down I know it is right.
I sincerely believe that you should realise that you believe a lie.

peace to you anyway.

Deep down you think that it's right. Deep down you hope that it's right. You have nothing but the Bible to back your theory. Without the Bible your theories are nothing but speculation. You must know this. Agian you have to let go of your pride sometimes. Pride can blind you and keep you from knowing the truth of nature. Why are you so stubborn? You havr to be a little more open minded and see things for what they are in a more scientific way. But then agian you won't listen you will continue to ignore what people like me have to say and claim that you are always right regardless. Which is why you probably don't understand mainstream science. And incase you didn't notice YEC is nothing more than the use of science to explian or verify the Bible which is taking things out of proportion and just confusing people. Obvious you must know this. Since when do you take a final exam and the answer is God did it or God said it.

 

[jeffweeder]

Have you considered that you might be full of pride-you might be the stubborn one?

These shoes might fit your feet better than mine.
Anyway it makes more sense to me that the earth is young, there is much more evidence for a young earth .
I have faith in the biblical model.
You take away 6 days and turn it into 4 billion, or any other date and the rest of the bible becomes meaningless.
Those geneologies glue it together, that Adam and creation happened 6000 or so years ago.

Just were do you start taking the bible literally?
Moses?
Abraham?; king David? Jesus Christ? where do you personally begin to accept it as literal history?

Can we agree that Jesus is Lord bro?

 

[grimbly]

Have you considered that you might be full of pride-you might be the stubborn one?

These shoes might fit your feet better than mine.
Anyway it makes more sense to me that the earth is young, there is much more evidence for a young earth .
I have faith in the biblical model.
You take away 6 days and turn it into 4 billion, or any other date and the rest of the bible becomes meaningless.
Those geneologies glue it together, that Adam and creation happened 6000 or so years ago.

Just were do you start taking the bible literally?
Moses?
Abraham?; king David? Jesus Christ? where do you personally begin to accept it as literal history?

Can we agree that Jesus is Lord bro?

That underlined statement is false. Go to your local University, find their technical library. Go to the Geology section of the stacks (archives of technical journals) and start reading. You could spend the rest of your life (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) reading technical journals and you would hardly make a small dent in all the information we have found demonstrating the great antiquity of this planet.

In addition, you will find NO data that points to a young earth; NADA, Zip , Zilch. It doesn't exist. Why do you think that is???

 

[KTatis]

Have you considered that you might be full of pride-you might be the stubborn one?

These shoes might fit your feet better than mine.
Anyway it makes more sense to me that the earth is young, there is much more evidence for a young earth .

Just because something seems right dosen't mean that it is. What if you had a little friend who was around his a grown man and believed in the tooth fairy, Unicorns, Leprachauns, and heck even Santa Clause. Would you let your friend know the truth no matter how hard it hurts him? Yes you should because no matter what he should know the truth. And you should NEVER be offended by the truth. And even though you may not like the truth remember this, the truth isn't here to make you happy it's here to give you knowlage. (which is what sciene and YEC is based off of.)

Please show me the evidence. But if it's the Bible then forget it.

I have faith in the biblical model.
You take away 6 days and turn it into 4 billion, or any other date and the rest of the bible becomes meaningless.
Those geneologies glue it together, that Adam and creation happened 6000 or so years ago.

Forget everything about the six day theory for just a sec. two words... open minded.

Just were do you start taking the bible literally?
Moses?
Abraham?; king David? Jesus Christ? where do you personally begin to accept it as literal history?

Can we agree that Jesus is Lord bro?

I don't take the entire Bible literally. And sure Jesus could have been lord.

 

[jeffweeder]

In addition, you will find NO data that points to a young earth; NADA, Zip , Zilch. It doesn't exist. Why do you think that is???

I'm sure youve heard some of the reasons as to why.

http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3040/
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/04/13/t-rex-big-chicken

Lets take this t-rex with the red blood vessels and that soft stretchy tissue.-
Instead of acknowledging that it cant be 65 million years old they turn it into a big chicken. Its not 65 million years old is it? How old can it be , with all that fresh tissue for them to say that it is similar to a chicken.
Strong evidence for a young t-rex.

I don't take the entire Bible literally. And sure Jesus could have been lord.

Could have?
Which parts do you take literally? can you answer ?
Its all or nothing-----------in my opinion.

havent read this yet article yet, but
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/04/18/farewell-lucy

 

[Assyrian]

ok then it was night then it was afternoon 1day- i dont see it being any different....

And there was evening and there was morning, a second day
describes the passage of time which could be literal or metaphorical,
Evening and morning=1day
is an attempt to turn this into a mathematical formula to define a literal day.

Again it is no different

Yes it is, otherwise languages wouldn't bother with cardinal and ordinal numbers.

would it be any other day but the second?

Easily.

Im sure that you would have rested at the end of the week. If your objective was to go see the palace on a weeks holiday, why do nothing on the first day- surely you went on your first day there.

I went to the Tate Modern gallery the first day I was in London. I wanted to see Salvador Dali's lobster phone.


The second day I was in London I took it easy and didn't go to Buckingham palace until the following week, after I had been to the Imperial War Museum (they have a spitfire and a V2 rocket!) and the British Museum. They have an exquisite gold and lapis lazuli 'Ram in a Thicket' from Ur.

I can still say that I went to Buckingham Palace one day. I didn't bother going back again for a whole week. It was still 'a second day' that I went there, but it wasn't the second day of my holidays. I tried getting into Buckingham Palace on four other days but it wasn't until the sixth day that I finally got in.


The Corgis send their regards.

 

[gluadys]

Which parts do you take literally? can you answer ?
Its all or nothing-----------in my opinion.

So you believe the earth is flat and supported on pillars/foundations above a great sea. You believe the sky is a solid dome or tent-like structure with waters above it and windows that can be opened to let in the rain. You believe the sun, moon and all the stars are inside this dome/tent.

These are all necessary consequences of taking all the scripture literally.

If you hold to a different cosmology than the one presented in the Bible, you are not really taking it all literally.

Why on earth should it be an all or nothing proposition? The bible is filled with parables, metaphors, poetic language, types, images, all sorts of things not intended to be taken literally.

 

[KTatis]

I have a question for you YEC. There is a galaxy about 400 million light years away. If a super Nova were to happen there how long would it take the light to reach us?


Do you believe that all the animals on earth existed all at the same time just 6,000 years ago? And if so please EXPLAIN how in great detail.

 

[jeffweeder]

And there was evening and there was morning, a second day
describes the passage of time which could be literal or metaphorical,
Evening and morning=1day
is an attempt to turn this into a mathematical formula to define a literal day.

What i'm about to post now adds a liittle more glue to the literal interpretation- behold;

ex 31
14 'Therefore you are to observe the sabbath, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death; for whoever does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from among his people.
15 'For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, holy to the LORD; whoever does any work on the sabbath day shall surely be put to death.
16 'So the sons of Israel shall observe the sabbath, to celebrate the sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant.'
17 "It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed."
18 When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.

ex 20-the finger of God;
11 "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Six is always six, the same word used throughout scripture.

17 Then he made the lampstand of pure gold. He made the lampstand of hammered work, its base and its shaft; its cups, its bulbs[18][Or calyxes ] and its flowers were of one piece with it.
18 There were six branches going out of its sides; three branches of the lampstand from the one side of it and three branches of the lampstand from the other[19][Lit second ] side of it;

same word used again,as throughout the OT--Shishshah

There was war at Gath again, where there was a man of great stature who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also had been born to the giant[16][Heb Raphah ].

http://www.leaptoad.com/muchmore/barefoot.html
http://s8int.com/six.html

Why on earth should it be an all or nothing proposition? The bible is filled with parables, metaphors, poetic language, types, images, all sorts of things not intended to be taken literally

yes i am aware of that, but we are just talking about these 6 days. It goes to great lengths to suggest that it was 6 days by the addition to the text of the geneologies-and those texts above.

 

[grimbly]

.
​

 

[Mick116]

I tend to lean towards the view that scripture was written reflecting the (limited) scientific knowledge and worldview of its human authors. Inspired by God in its religious and moral teachings, but not necessarily a scientific or historical textbook.

 

[Assyrian]

What i'm about to post now adds a liittle more glue to the literal interpretation- behold;

Quote:
ex 31
14 'Therefore you are to observe the sabbath, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death; for whoever does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from among his people.
15 'For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day there is a sabbath of complete rest, holy to the LORD; whoever does any work on the sabbath day shall surely be put to death.
16 'So the sons of Israel shall observe the sabbath, to celebrate the sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant.'
17 "It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed."
18 When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.

Quote:
ex 20-the finger of God;
11 "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.
Six is always six, the same word used throughout scripture.
same word used again,as throughout the OT--Shishshah

Actually we were looking at the word 'sixth' in Genesis and that is Shishshiy not Shishshah.

Using numbers does not make things literal. Jesus tells us there were ten virgins waiting for the bridegroom, five foolish and five were wise. Was Jesus talking about real people here?

The beast in Revelation had seven heads and ten horns. Were they literal?

You quoted Exodus 31 in verse 17 we read: It is a sign forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed. Was God literally refreshed after having a rest? Was he weary after six days labour? Or is the passage an anthropomorphism, a metaphor where God identifies with weary labourers who do need to rest and be refrershed?

cf: Exodus 23:12 "Six days you shall do your work, but on the seventh day you shall rest; that your ox and your donkey may have rest, and the son of your servant woman, and the alien, may be refreshed.

Quote:
There was war at Gath again, where there was a man of great stature who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also had been born to the giant[16][Heb Raphah ].

http://www.leaptoad.com/muchmore/barefoot.html
http://s8int.com/six.html

Six toes good, four wings bad.

yes i am aware of that, but we are just talking about these 6 days. It goes to great lengths to suggest that it was 6 days by the addition to the text of the geneologies-and those texts above.

There are no genealogies in Genesis 1, Exodus 20 or Exodus 31.

 

[KTatis]

What i'm about to post now adds a liittle more glue to the literal interpretation- behold;






Six is always six, the same word used throughout scripture.



same word used again,as throughout the OT--Shishshah



http://www.leaptoad.com/muchmore/barefoot.html
http://s8int.com/six.html




yes i am aware of that, but we are just talking about these 6 days. It goes to great lengths to suggest that it was 6 days by the addition to the text of the geneologies-and those texts above.

Do you believe that all the animals on earth existed all at the same time just 6,000 years ago? And if so please EXPLAIN how in great detail.