Old Earth Creationism

[Job 33:6]

He also mentions ships traveling the seas and sinners and wicked people. How many sinners and wicked people were there before Adam committed THE FIRST SIN?!! I brought this to your attention yesterday in the very post you’re replying to and you’re completely ignoring these verses.

How many wicked winners were there when God stretched out the heavens? The poem has a progression that describes the beauty of creation, then simply concludes by describing sinners.

Just read Psalm 104.

‭‭Psalms‬ ‭104:1‭-‬24‬ ‭NRSVUE‬‬
[1] Bless the Lord, O my soul. O Lord my God, you are very great. You are clothed with honor and majesty, [2] wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent; [3] you set the beams of your chambers on the waters; you make the clouds your chariot; you ride on the wings of the wind; [4] you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. [5] You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. [6] You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. [7] At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. [8] They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys, to the place that you appointed for them. [9] You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. [10] You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, [11] giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. [12] By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. [13] From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. [14] You cause the grass to grow for the cattle and plants for people to cultivate, to bring forth food from the earth [15] and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine and bread to strengthen the human heart. [16] The trees of the field are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. [17] In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. [18] The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. [19] You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting. [20] You make darkness, and it is night, when all the animals of the forest come creeping out. [21] The young lions roar for their prey, seeking their food from God. [22] When the sun rises, they withdraw and lie down in their dens. [23] People go out to their work and to their labor until the evening. [24] O Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all; the earth is full of your creatures.


Verse 35 is just part of the poems conclusion.

‭‭Psalms‬ ‭104:33‭-‬35‬ ‭NRSVUE‬‬
[33] I will sing to the Lord as long as I live; I will sing praise to my God while I have being. [34] May my meditation be pleasing to him, for I rejoice in the Lord. [35] Let sinners be consumed from the earth, and let the wicked be no more. Bless the Lord, O my soul. Praise the Lord!

He's saying, given the beauty of creation, I will sing to the Lord, let the sinners be consumed, bless and praise the Lord.

That's just a conclusion.

If no death before the fall were true, It's really quite absurd that you would think a poem related to the beauties of creation, with much language taken directly from Genesis, would involve the psalmist appreciating the beauty of God providing prey for lions and somehow forgetting that predation is a product of a sinful fall.

It's not like the psalmist talks about animals being immortal and then mysteriously starting to die at the fall.

 

[BNR32FAN]

How many wicked winners were there when God stretched out the heavens? The poem has a progression that describes the beauty of creation, then simply concludes by describing sinners.

Just read Psalm 104.

‭‭Psalms‬ ‭104:1‭-‬24‬ ‭NRSVUE‬‬
[1] Bless the Lord, O my soul. O Lord my God, you are very great. You are clothed with honor and majesty, [2] wrapped in light as with a garment. You stretch out the heavens like a tent; [3] you set the beams of your chambers on the waters; you make the clouds your chariot; you ride on the wings of the wind; [4] you make the winds your messengers, fire and flame your ministers. [5] You set the earth on its foundations, so that it shall never be shaken. [6] You cover it with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. [7] At your rebuke they flee; at the sound of your thunder they take to flight. [8] They rose up to the mountains, ran down to the valleys, to the place that you appointed for them. [9] You set a boundary that they may not pass, so that they might not again cover the earth. [10] You make springs gush forth in the valleys; they flow between the hills, [11] giving drink to every wild animal; the wild asses quench their thirst. [12] By the streams the birds of the air have their habitation; they sing among the branches. [13] From your lofty abode you water the mountains; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of your work. [14] You cause the grass to grow for the cattle and plants for people to cultivate, to bring forth food from the earth [15] and wine to gladden the human heart, oil to make the face shine and bread to strengthen the human heart. [16] The trees of the field are watered abundantly, the cedars of Lebanon that he planted. [17] In them the birds build their nests; the stork has its home in the fir trees. [18] The high mountains are for the wild goats; the rocks are a refuge for the coneys. [19] You have made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting. [20] You make darkness, and it is night, when all the animals of the forest come creeping out. [21] The young lions roar for their prey, seeking their food from God. [22] When the sun rises, they withdraw and lie down in their dens. [23] People go out to their work and to their labor until the evening. [24] O Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom you have made them all; the earth is full of your creatures.


Verse 35 is just part of the poems conclusion.

‭‭Psalms‬ ‭104:33‭-‬35‬ ‭NRSVUE‬‬
[33] I will sing to the Lord as long as I live; I will sing praise to my God while I have being. [34] May my meditation be pleasing to him, for I rejoice in the Lord. [35] Let sinners be consumed from the earth, and let the wicked be no more. Bless the Lord, O my soul. Praise the Lord!

He's saying, given the beauty of creation, I will sing to the Lord, let the sinners be consumed, bless and praise the Lord.

That's just a conclusion.

It's really quite absurd that you would think a poem related to the beauties of creation, with much language taken directly from Genesis, would involve the psalmist appreciating the beauty of God providing prey for lions.

It's not like the psalmist talks about animals being immortal and then mysteriously starting to die at the fall.

Yeah just ignore the ships sailing the seas in the middle of the psalm.

 

[Job 33:6]

Yeah just ignore the ships sailing the seas in the middle of the psalm.

You're not addressing the fact that the psalmist sees nothing wrong with predation in a poem on creation. And not only does he not see anything wrong with it, God is glorified as the provider of prey to lions. The exact opposite of what one would expect if there was no death before the fall. Maybe you think the psalmist, right after talking about the beauty of God stretching out the heavens, mysteriously forgot to mention that predation wasn't actually a beautiful thing.

YEC is just absurd. It is what it is. It's completely unbiblical.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You're not addressing the fact that the psalmist sees nothing wrong with predation in a poem on creation. And not only does he not see anything wrong with it, God is glorified as the provider of prey to lions. The exact opposite of what one would expect if there was no death before the fall. Maybe you think the psalmist, right after talking about the beauty of God stretching out the heavens, mysteriously forgot to mention that predation wasn't actually a beautiful thing.

YEC is just absurd. It is what it is. It's completely unbiblical.

Whether predation was “beautiful” or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not it actually took place before the fall and this passage does not indicate that it did take place before the fall.

YEC is not unbiblical and is only “absurd” to those who refuse to acknowledge God’s miracles.

 

[FredVB]

”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.“
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭20‬:‭11‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

I do not disagree. All of it was made in six days. We have sabbaths to remember that seventh day after everything being created, among other things. What would you say was the chaos previously? It was what had not yet been formed to be what it would be.

The Bible does not say "made". The Bible says "God said".

Isaiah 46:10 I declare the end from the beginning​

Isaiah 46:10 - Babylon's Idols
Why would you replace one word with another?

Same thing, no difference. God is the Creator, and made things with speaking them. Plenty of verses show God made these things.

If you ask me, the theory that all life evolved from a common ancestor is a bedtime story invented by atheists. For starters, the fossil record contradicts that theory (Exhibit A: the Cambrian explosion).

That atheist bedtime story says human and potatoes, for example, evolved from the same ancestral organism. That begs the question: What sort of mind can believe such an absurdity and keep a straight face?

I do not come to believe things because there are atheists believing them. They already excluded God, which I see should not be done.

 

[FredVB]

That all things were created on the earth that happened thousands of years ago but not millions of years ago is biblical, and it is not absurd to believe what the Bible shows, or to believe that God made everything perfectly, and death that came with the fall because of sin, which is in rebellion to God's will, was not a part of that design of God's perfect creation. There is deliverance just with repentance, with what is made possible from Christ coming and bearing things for us, along with showing us the way, that we should live differently than we do. Originally all ate their food only from what was produced by plants or certain photosynthesizing organisms, such as what could be in the seas, and no animal creatures were being killed, it was not in God's will. The curse spreading in the world with sins changed this, and the design was more and more corrupted, while creatures of creation all groan for the deliverance. There will be restoration in the new earth for deliverance, that out of humanity it will be the redeemed who are with repentant faith who will come to that, through Christ making that possible.

Still there was what was unformed then before all this, for unknown amount of time.

 

[FredVB]

It works to say there was an unformed rocky mass. There would be others scattered far apart, it would not have been distinct, for however long a time it had been there. God would have water introduced that would be covering it. God made the light which shone on it which happened the first day. God then made everything else there over that six day period, with everything living made then. It was then the perfect creation from God's design, the only thing God is shown to speak of being very good in any passages, and there was no killing, there was no death of any until sin was done, by choice, with more sins since then, and the fall came with curse that would grow and spread through the world, things becoming corrupted with that and systems in it running down. Creatures changed somewhat over all the time after that, but were with the same general makeup that is inherited, from the original gene pools. All creation is groaning with this corruption in which there is suffering, only with hope for restoration, which God is promising, but we and all people need to be with repentant faith for being restored to God through Christ making it possible.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I'm not quite sure what I believe about the days of Genesis. I have seen many arguments for the old earth perspective that the six days of the creation week are not meant to be literal 24 hour days, but rather long periods of time.

I do find old earth creationism compelling on the surface, but I find some difficulties in reconciling it with Scripture.

For example, Exodus 20:11 seems to reinforce the young earth view that it actually was six literal days.

I feel like if we were not meant to take the Creation Week as six 24 hour days, then I don't think it would have been reiterated in the 10 Commandments.

What are your thoughts?

God said that He created the world in six 24 hour days. He was there, so He should know. Do we know more than what He knows? What do we accept - man's words or God's Word? Jesus referred to Adam and Eve as real people. Because Jesus as the pre-incarnate Son of God was there, I think He knows. Actually it was He who spoke to Adam in the Garden during the cool of the day. When it is all boiled down, people are either with Christ or against Him.

 

[Jipsah]

God said that He created the world in six 24 hour days.

I missed the part whre He said they were 24 hour days.

He was there, so He should know. Do we know more than what He knows? What do we accept - man's words or God's Word?

I'll leave off the easily misunderstood words and look at God's creation itself. Radical idea, innit?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I missed the part whre He said they were 24 hour days.

I'll leave off the easily misunderstood words and look at God's creation itself. Radical idea, innit?

Read the bit in Genesis 1 where it says:
"Evening and morning - the first day
Evening and morning - the second day
Evening and morning - the third day
Evening and morning - the fourth day
evening and morning - the fifth day
Evening and morning - the sixth day"

It seemed that God looked forward to 21st century folks and saw that they would be so thick that He needed to repeat the same description of "day" six times to show that they were 24 hour days.

 

[Jipsah]

It seemed that God looked forward to 21st century folks and saw that they would be so thick that He needed to repeat the same description of "day" six times to show that they were 24 hour days.

Or maybe it's just that some of us have to assue that a an evening and a morning are 24 hours even where it doiesn't say so. I've been in a place before when evening and morning were weeks apart,
But apparently in your thinking God had never heard of that; He just looked at His watch, which I reckon He also had to do when He hadn't created the sun yet so as to tell time by it. No sun, no evening, no morning, right?

It's amazing how y'all feel free to just make up stuff and attribute it to the Bible. But when you're having to make stuff as you go, that becomes a necessity, doesn't it?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Or maybe it's just that some of us have to assue that a an evening and a morning are 24 hours even where it doiesn't say so. I've been in a place before when evening and morning were weeks apart,
But apparently in your thinking God had never heard of that; He just looked at His watch, which I reckon He also had to do when He hadn't created the sun yet so as to tell time by it. No sun, no evening, no morning, right?

It's amazing how y'all feel free to just make up stuff and attribute it to the Bible. But when you're having to make stuff as you go, that becomes a necessity, doesn't it?

It's very interesting that everywhere else where the Hebrew word "yom" is used, everyone knows exactly what it means, and yet in Genesis 1:1 where it is plainly obvious that "evening and morning" means a 24 hour day, they dispute that meaning. I think that they don't want to believe that God created the world in six 24 hour days. They are accepting the doubt that Satan said Eve: "Did God really say that?"

Also, on the first day God said, "Let there be light". It wasn't until the 4th day that He created the sun and the moon, but the earth was there and was rotating. We are not told where the original light came from, but obvious there was an evening and morning which made up a 24 hour day caused by the rotation of the earth. God is quite capable of creating a source of light and He doesn't have to say where it came from, until He came around to lighting up the sun on the 4th day.

So, the word of man says that Genesis 1:1 does not consist in 24 hour days, yet the word of God says it does. I'd rather go with the word of God in favour of the word of man.

Some try to use the verse: "A day to the Lord is as a thousand years" (and leave out the rest of the verse which says "A thousand years as a day"). But that verse in 2 Peter 3:8 has nothing to do with creation. The context is to answer people who are doubting the second coming of Christ because it is taking a long time to happen. Peter is saying that God, not being limited by our time, even a thousand years to God is just one day to Him, and this shows that He is in no hurry to end the Church Age. So to apply it to creation to try and say that the day in Genesis 1:1 could be thousands of years, is to twist the Scripture right out of its context and make it mean something that Peter never meant it to mean.

Your reasoning that an evening and morning could be weeks apart is just stupid. The Scripture clearly says, "Evening and morning, the first day" then "evening and morning the second day", etc.

Furthermore, seeing that we have a seven day week, where there is six days of work and one day of rest. Therefore our working week was set by God by the seven days of creation. But if you don't believe that, then your working week must be pretty arduous having days of thousands of years in between! But shows the illogical reasoning those who prefer the word of man to the clear word of God.

 

[Jipsah]

It's very interesting that everywhere else where the Hebrew word "yom" is used, everyone knows exactly what it means, and yet in Genesis 1:1 where it is plainly obvious that "evening and morning" means a 24 hour day, they dispute that meaning.

I.E., your specious doctrine requires it to mean 24 hours even if it doesn't. But we both knew that from the outset, didn't we?

I think that they don't want to believe that God created the world in six 24 hour days

The Scripture doesn't say that He did. That's simply your doctrinal overlay, which I happen to believe is self-serving rubbish. It's the old reliable "what that means is..." dodge so beloved of everyone who has a sketchy doctrine to defend.

. They are accepting the doubt that Satan said Eve: "Did God really say that?"

No, they're just pointing out that you're claiming the Bible says something that in fact it does not. You evade the charge of simply lying about it by insisting that even though Scripture doesn't really say what you claim, that's what it "really means".

Also, on the first day God said, "Let there be light". It wasn't until the 4th day that He created the sun

So no evenings or mornings at all until day 4, for any number of hours. Thanks for that uncharacteristic bit of candor.

and the moon, but the earth was there and was rotating.

That's nice to know, but nothing to the purpose.

We are not told where the original light came from

Not the sun, obviously.

but obvious there was an evening and morning

How did that work without a sun, precisely? And how do you know the cycle took 24 hours? (Hint - you don't. You need it to be 24 hours, so that's what you declare it to be.)

which made up a 24 hour day caused by the rotation of the earth.

Unfortunately, the Bible says nothing at all to support that reasoning; you just make it up from whole cloth and then have the temerity to declare it to be what the Bible says. Doubleplus ungood.

God is quite capable of creating a source of light

Sure He is. and y'all are quite capable of making up stuff and palming it off by saying "God could have..." God could have created flying blue whales, but that's no basis for claiming that He did.

and He doesn't have to say where it came from, until He came around to lighting up the sun on the 4th day.

When the first evening and morning happened.

So, the word of man says that Genesis 1:1 does not consist in 24 hour days,

In your case, the word of man (yours) says it did. The Bible is silent on the matter of hours in a Creation Day.

yet the word of God says it does.

That is a simple falsehood; the Bible does not say that a "day" in that context was 24 hours, you do.

I'd rather go with the word of God in favour of the word of man.

You have just proven the precise opposite to be the case, by claiming that the Bible says something that in fact it does not.

Some try to use the verse: "A day to the Lord is as a thousand years" (and leave out the rest of the verse which says "A thousand years as a day").

Perfectly applicable in this case, as it shows that God doesn't reckon time as we do.

But that verse in 2 Peter 3:8 has nothing to do with creation.

Of course not! You have to try and force God to behave according to your doctrine.

The context is to answer people who are doubting the second coming of Christ because it is taking a long time to happen. Peter is saying that God, not being limited by our time, even a thousand years to God is just one day to Him

Or even one day is as a thousand years. And it certainly pertains to the Creation as it does any other work of God. God isn't bound by time any more than He is to your doctrines.

So to apply it to creation to try and say that the day in Genesis 1:1 could be thousands of years, is to twist the Scripture right out of its context and make it mean something that Peter never meant it to mean.

I.E., it says something that you're trying desperately to escape.

Your reasoning that an evening and morning could be weeks apart is just stupid.

Never been to, or apparenrtly never heard of, Greenland, have you? It's a looong between sundown and sunup there, matey. That's by God's design, BTW, so careful what you call stupid. Just sayin'

The Scripture clearly says, "Evening and morning, the first day" then "evening and morning the second day", etc.

And you say 24 hours, which the Bible does not say. Which is, I believe where we came in, with you making a false claim, and me calling you out for it.

Furthermore, seeing that we have a seven day week, where there is six days of work and one day of rest.

Which is nice, but has nothing whatsoever to do with the length of those "days" of Crteation. You just made it up.

But if you don't believe that, then your working week must be pretty arduous

My work days are set by my employer with very little regard for the calendar.

But shows the illogical reasoning those who prefer the word of man to the clear word of God.

But it better illustrates how little intellectual honesty means to those with a dearly held dcotrine to defend.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I.E., your specious doctrine requires it to mean 24 hours even if it doesn't. But we both knew that from the outset, didn't we?

If it is correct that "yom" doesn't have to mean a 24 hour day, it is also just as correct to say that it does. The problem is that your foundation is based on the word of man and not the word of God.

The Scripture doesn't say that He did. That's simply your doctrinal overlay, which I happen to believe is self-serving rubbish. It's the old reliable "what that means is..." dodge so beloved of everyone who has a sketchy doctrine to defend.

No, they're just pointing out that you're claiming the Bible says something that in fact it does not. You evade the charge of simply lying about it by insisting that even though Scripture doesn't really say what you claim, that's what it "really means".

Again, you are talking from your foundation that the word of man is more important than the word of God.

So no evenings or mornings at all until day 4, for any number of hours. Thanks for that uncharacteristic bit of candor.

The planet, even though totally covered with water, was revolving even though the sun and moon were not yet created. The fact that God created light on the first day, means that the light was not coming from the sun until it was lit up on the fourth day.

How did that work without a sun, precisely? And how do you know the cycle took 24 hours? (Hint - you don't. You need it to be 24 hours, so that's what you declare it to be.)

God created a source of light that did not come from the non existent sun.

Unfortunately, the Bible says nothing at all to support that reasoning; you just make it up from whole cloth and then have the temerity to declare it to be what the Bible says. Doubleplus ungood.

I am just going on what the Bible is actually saying. Your theories are adding to the Genesis record that is not there. You are adding the word of man to God's Word.

Sure He is. and y'all are quite capable of making up stuff and palming it off by saying "God could have..." God could have created flying blue whales, but that's no basis for claiming that He did.

You are the one who is making up stuff by adding the word of man to what is literally written in Genesis 1.

When the first evening and morning happened.

In your case, the word of man (yours) says it did. The Bible is silent on the matter of hours in a Creation Day.

Evening and morning on a particular day means a 24 hour day. There is no other explanation for the actual description. 24 hour days have evening and morning, followed by other evenings and mornings. One would have to be a total idiot to believe otherwise.

That is a simple falsehood; the Bible does not say that a "day" in that context was 24 hours, you do.

Rubbish. God does. It is just that you think you know better than God and that that God to have your help explaining what really happened in Genesis 1.

You have just proven the precise opposite to be the case, by claiming that the Bible says something that in fact it does not.

Perfectly applicable in this case, as it shows that God doesn't reckon time as we do.

Of course not! You have to try and force God to behave according to your doctrine.

Or even one day is as a thousand years. And it certainly pertains to the Creation as it does any other work of God. God isn't bound by time any more than He is to your doctrines.

You are putting words into Peter's mouth that aren't there. Twisting Scripture out of context doesn't prove your case.

I.E., it says something that you're trying desperately to escape.

Never been to, or apparenrtly never heard of, Greenland, have you? It's a looong between sundown and sunup there, matey. That's by God's design, BTW, so careful what you call stupid. Just sayin'

The context was the Middle East, not Greenland. Weak.

And you say 24 hours, which the Bible does not say. Which is, I believe where we came in, with you making a false claim, and me calling you out for it.

Which is nice, but has nothing whatsoever to do with the length of those "days" of Creation. You just made it up.

I have just gone with the literal wording of Genesis 1. You are the one adding to God's Word and making stuff up that is not there.

My work days are set by my employer with very little regard for the calendar.

But it better illustrates how little intellectual honesty means to those with a dearly held doctrine to defend.

Weak. You know jolly well that the six day working week with one day of rest is standard. Regardless of the way you work, I find it difficult to believe that you work a seven day week. Come on, you have to do better than all this accusative nonsense and weak arguments. What you are doing is reading into the Genesis record nonsense that was dredged up by a group of 18th and 19th Century German theologians.

 

[Jipsah]

The problem is that your foundation is based on the word of man and not the word of God.

Quoth he who has to insert extra verbiage to make the Bible say what he wants. Physician, heal thine own self.

Again, you are talking from your foundation that the word of man is more important than the word of God.

And you add to the Word of God to make it say what you want. Dishonest at best.

The planet, even though totally covered with water, was revolving even though the sun and moon were not yet created.

What do the words "morning" and "evening" mean in Kiwiegian? That the world is turning, or that the sun rose or set?

Here's what they mean in English:

morning /môr′nĭng/

noun​

1. The first or early part of the day, lasting from midnight to noon or from sunrise to noon.
2. The dawn.

evening​

---

noun

1. the latter part of the day and early part of the night.
2. the period from sunset to bedtime:
   
   Hard to have those things without a sun, innit?
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

The fact that God created light on the first day, means that the light was not coming from the sun until it was lit up on the fourth day.

Correct! So those things that are dependent on there being sun, like, let's say, mornings and evenings, weren't happening. If I turn on the porch light, there's light, but that doesn't mean it's morning, does it?

God created a source of light that did not come from the non existent sun.

Irrelevant. I have a torch that allows me to see at night, too, but it's still night. No sun, you see.

I am just going on what the Bible is actually saying.

Nah, you're going on your "24 hour" made up rubbish.

Your theories are adding to the Genesis record

Gaslighting much? I object to your addition of "24 hours" to Genesis, and you accuse me of adding to God's Word. You've got more nerve than a bad tooth!

You are the one who is making up stuff by adding the word of man to what is literally written in Genesis 1.

Still no 24 hours in the real Genesis, as opposed to your modified version, is there?

Evening and morning on a particular day means a 24 hour day.

Says you, not the Bible.

There is no other explanation

I'm sure that given the opportunity you could make another one up.

for the actual description. 24 hour days have evening and morning, followed by other evenings and mornings. One would have to be a total idiot to believe otherwise.

Actually I'd say that one has to be a gullible idiot to believe your made-up notions that you try and palm off as what the Bible actually says. I

you think you know better than God

Help me out here, which of us is the one who insists on adding "24 hours" to Genesis, and which of us is calling him out on it? Seems you've become confused about which of us is doing what.

and that that God to have your help explaining what really happened in Genesis 1.

While you're trying to explain to Him what He really meant.

You are putting words into Peter's mouth that aren't there.

Nope, he said what he said. Here it is:

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Ties back to Psalms 90:4 4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

The idea is that God isn't bound by time as we are. You would like to make that applicable only to our Lord's return so it doesn't interfere with your man-made doctrine. But it isn't, it refers to God's not reckoning time as we do, and it app[ies in all circumstances.

Here's Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on 2 Peter 3:8:
Though, in the account of men, there is a vast difference between one day and a thousand years, yet, in the account of God, there is no difference. All things past, present, and future, are ever before him: the delay of a thousand years cannot be so much to him, as putting off any thing for a day or for an hour is to us.

Here's Meyer's New Testament Commentary:
"One day is with the Lord as a thousand years.—This half of the saying is quite original, and has no equivalent in Psalm 90:4. The second half is only partially parallel to “a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday, when it is past.” Consequently, we cannot be sure that the Apostle had this passage from the Psalms in his mind, though it is probable enough that he had. That God Can punish in one day the sins of a thousand years is a thought which is neither in the text nor in the context. What is insisted on is simply this—that distinctions of long and short time are nothing in the sight of God; delay is a purely human conception.

There are many more saying substantially the same thing. God isn't bound by time as we are, and does not reckon time as we do. You'd have Him bound by time as we are, second for second. The very idea is ludicrous.

Again, you're trying to doctor Scripture to suit what you believe, and then when I object to it, you accuse me of doing the very thing you're trying to defend! Crude, but ineffective.

Let's recap, shall we? You declared that the Bible says God created everything in six 24 hour days. In fact it says no such thing, as you well know. You simply added the hours bit because you think that's what it ought to say, because your made-up, unscriptural, eisegetic, baseless, rubbish man-made doctrine demands it.

Twisting Scripture out of context doesn't prove your case.

And once again, I'll remind you who stuck the non-existent man-made "the Bible sez 24 hours" rubbish in there.

The context was the Middle East, not Greenland. Weak.

Well turn to and see if you can insert a "except in Greenland" into Genesis to secure your doctrine even further.

I have just gone with the literal wording of Genesis 1.

With "24 hours" added for lagniappe, because surely God really meant to say that.

You are the one adding to God's Word and making stuff up that is not there.

No "24 hours" in my Bible, matey.

Weak. You know jolly well that the six day working week with one day of rest is standard.

That hasn't been true in the States for quite a long time, is not nor ever has been in most of Asia. Good grief, man, if you're going to make stuff up at least make sure it's remote plausible.

Regardless of the way you work, I find it difficult to believe that you work a seven day week.

Didn't say I did. As an engineer, a month straight through wasn't unheard of if a big project was due. As I said, don't make up stuff unless it has at least a nodding acquaintance with the truth.

Come on, you have to do better than all this accusative nonsense and weak arguments.

Speaking of doing better, if your doctrines require you to add stuff to Scripture that isn't there, you probably need to change your doctrine.

What you are doing is reading into the Genesis record nonsense

No, just removing the rubbish yuou've tried to insert so as to make your false doctrine "work". You always run the risk of getting caught at that sort of thing, so why persist in it?

that was dredged up by a group of 18th and 19th Century German theologians.

Sorry, the KJV existed well before the 18th century, and your "24 hours" wasn't in there either.

Give it a rest, OM. Your doctrine is rubbish.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Quoth he who has to insert extra verbiage to make the Bible say what he wants. Physician, heal thine own self.

And you add to the Word of God to make it say what you want. Dishonest at best.

What do the words "morning" and "evening" mean in Kiwiegian? That the world is turning, or that the sun rose or set?

Here's what they mean in English:

morning /môr′nĭng/

noun​

1. The first or early part of the day, lasting from midnight to noon or from sunrise to noon.
2. The dawn.

evening​

---

noun

1. the latter part of the day and early part of the night.
2. the period from sunset to bedtime:
   
   Hard to have those things without a sun, innit?
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

Correct! So those things that are dependent on there being sun, like, let's say, mornings and evenings, weren't happening. If I turn on the porch light, there's light, but that doesn't mean it's morning, does it?

Irrelevant. I have a torch that allows me to see at night, too, but it's still night. No sun, you see.

Nah, you're going on your "24 hour" made up rubbish.

Gaslighting much? I object to your addition of "24 hours" to Genesis, and you accuse me of adding to God's Word. You've got more nerve than a bad tooth!

Still no 24 hours in the real Genesis, as opposed to your modified version, is there?

Says you, not the Bible.

I'm sure that given the opportunity you could make another one up.

Actually I'd say that one has to be a gullible idiot to believe your made-up notions that you try and palm off as what the Bible actually says. I

Help me out here, which of us is the one who insists on adding "24 hours" to Genesis, and which of us is calling him out on it? Seems you've become confused about which of us is doing what.

While you're trying to explain to Him what He really meant.

Nope, he said what he said. Here it is:

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Ties back to Psalms 90:4 4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

The idea is that God isn't bound by time as we are. You would like to make that applicable only to our Lord's return so it doesn't interfere with your man-made doctrine. But it isn't, it refers to God's not reckoning time as we do, and it app[ies in all circumstances.

Here's Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on 2 Peter 3:8:
Though, in the account of men, there is a vast difference between one day and a thousand years, yet, in the account of God, there is no difference. All things past, present, and future, are ever before him: the delay of a thousand years cannot be so much to him, as putting off any thing for a day or for an hour is to us.

Here's Meyer's New Testament Commentary:
"One day is with the Lord as a thousand years.—This half of the saying is quite original, and has no equivalent in Psalm 90:4. The second half is only partially parallel to “a thousand years in Thy sight are but as yesterday, when it is past.” Consequently, we cannot be sure that the Apostle had this passage from the Psalms in his mind, though it is probable enough that he had. That God Can punish in one day the sins of a thousand years is a thought which is neither in the text nor in the context. What is insisted on is simply this—that distinctions of long and short time are nothing in the sight of God; delay is a purely human conception.

There are many more saying substantially the same thing. God isn't bound by time as we are, and does not reckon time as we do. You'd have Him bound by time as we are, second for second. The very idea is ludicrous.

Again, you're trying to doctor Scripture to suit what you believe, and then when I object to it, you accuse me of doing the very thing you're trying to defend! Crude, but ineffective.

Let's recap, shall we? You declared that the Bible says God created everything in six 24 hour days. In fact it says no such thing, as you well know. You simply added the hours bit because you think that's what it ought to say, because your made-up, unscriptural, eisegetic, baseless, rubbish man-made doctrine demands it.

And once again, I'll remind you who stuck the non-existent man-made "the Bible sez 24 hours" rubbish in there.

Well turn to and see if you can insert a "except in Greenland" into Genesis to secure your doctrine even further.


With "24 hours" added for lagniappe, because surely God really meant to say that.

No "24 hours" in my Bible, matey.

That hasn't been true in the States for quite a long time, is not nor ever has been in most of Asia. Good grief, man, if you're going to make stuff up at least make sure it's remote plausible.

Didn't say I did. As an engineer, a month straight through wasn't unheard of if a big project was due. As I said, don't make up stuff unless it has at least a nodding acquaintance with the truth.

Speaking of doing better, if your doctrines require you to add stuff to Scripture that isn't there, you probably need to change your doctrine.

No, just removing the rubbish yuou've tried to insert so as to make your false doctrine "work". You always run the risk of getting caught at that sort of thing, so why persist in it?

Sorry, the KJV existed well before the 18th century, and your "24 hours" wasn't in there either.

Give it a rest, OM. Your doctrine is rubbish.

Quite frankly I don't care. Any intelligent person can see quite clearly that Genesis 1:1 shows 24 hour days. Those who oppose show that their "god" is small and is incapable of creating a whole universe and habitable planet in six 24 hour days. The fact that you are being adversarial and accusative, kicking the player instead of the ball, shows that your arguments are very weak and inconsequential. The great volume of argument that you have produced consists of the word of man instead of the Word of God. So no matter what you say, I subscribe to the literal text of the Bible, in that the way God has said it, is the way it was. None of us were there to observe the Creation, and it has never been studied in any laboratory, so none us know exactly how the world was created. People can only guess, The only Person who was there was God Himself and He is the only one who knows how it all happened.

So you can believe what you like, I don't really care.

 

[Jipsah]

Quite frankly I don't care. Any intelligent person can see quite clearly that Genesis 1:1 shows 24 hour days.

Baloney. But at least you didn't claim that it says 24 hour days, so we've made that much progress. At this rate you may actually give up misrepresenting Scripture some day.

Those who oppose show that their "god" is small and is incapable of creating a whole universe and habitable planet in six 24 hour days.

Is that the best you can do? My God (can't speak for yours, since you have to put words in his mouth) was and is capable of creating the universe in a day and a half or less if He's so inclined. He may have, in fact, since He doesn't reckon time as His creatures do, because He created time as well as everything else. So your "six 24 hour days" may have been, by human reckoning, a million years, or 25 minutes. The fact that it was presented for the edification of preliterate humans thousands of years ago as "days" was simply to give them the understanding that A) God (the real one) created the universe -

universe /yoo͞′nə-vûrs″/

noun​

All space-time, matter, and energy, including the solar system, all stars and galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole.​

- and B) in a series of stages, presented in a form they could understand.

The fact that you are being adversarial and accusative, kicking the player instead of the ball, shows that your arguments are very weak and inconsequential.

In other words, I beat you with your own stick. Next time try to be at least reasonably honest, especially when it comes to saying "the Bible sez...".

The great volume of argument that you have produced consists of the word of man instead of the Word of God.

In other words, you didn't read much of it, which is no surprise. Maybe you thought the Bible actually said "24 hours" because you didn't know any better.

So no matter what you say, I subscribe to the literal text of the Bible,

With strategic additions to make it suit what you want it to say. Still dishonest after all.

in that the way God has said it, is the way it was.

Except for the "24 hours" part, which you made up.

So you can believe what you like, I don't really care.

Really? You cared enough to claim that the Bible says something that in fact it does not say to try and "win" an argument.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Baloney. But at least you didn't claim that it says 24 hour days, so we've made that much progress. At this rate you may actually give up misrepresenting Scripture some day.

Is that the best you can do? My God (can't speak for yours, since you have to put words in his mouth) was and is capable of creating the universe in a day and a half or less if He's so inclined. He may have, in fact, since He doesn't reckon time as His creatures do, because He created time as well as everything else. So your "six 24 hour days" may have been, by human reckoning, a million years, or 25 minutes. The fact that it was presented for the edification of preliterate humans thousands of years ago as "days" was simply to give them the understanding that A) God (the real one) created the universe -

universe /yoo͞′nə-vûrs″/

noun​

All space-time, matter, and energy, including the solar system, all stars and galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole.​

- and B) in a series of stages, presented in a form they could understand.


In other words, I beat you with your own stick. Next time try to be at least reasonably honest, especially when it comes to saying "the Bible sez...".


In other words, you didn't read much of it, which is no surprise. Maybe you thought the Bible actually said "24 hours" because you didn't know any better.

With strategic additions to make it suit what you want it to say. Still dishonest after all.


Except for the "24 hours" part, which you made up.

Really? You cared enough to claim that the Bible says something that in fact it does not say to try and "win" an argument.

Adam (the first man) was created on day 6 of Creation Week in Genesis 1, lived through the rest of day 6 and day 7, then died when he was 930 years old. Those Christians who try to make these days millions of years long are perverting the clear teaching of Scripture.
The 7 day week has no basis in any astronomical observation. The week comes from the Bible and the fact that God created everything in 6 days and rested for one. When atheists use a 7 day week, they are actually attesting to the truth of God's Word in Genesis.

 

[Jipsah]

Those Christians who try to make these days millions of years long are perverting the clear teaching of Scripture.

Real Scripture, or your specially modified scripture? And read 2 Peter 3:8, and look it up in your favorite commentary so you'll know what it actually means. You may even come to understand why blathering about 24 hour days in the Creation is ridiculous.

The 7 day week has no basis in any astronomical observation.

It's entirely based on the Jewish week.

The week comes from the Bible and the fact that God created everything in 6 days and rested for one.

And?

When atheists use a 7 day week, they are actually attesting to the truth of God's Word in Genesis.

No, thery're attesting to the calendar used by everyone in the civilized world. They don't care a fig for the Bible, but at least they don't generally set about to change it to suit their beliefs, as some Christians seem compelled to do.

 

[Jipsah]

Those Christians who try to make these days millions of years long are perverting the clear teaching of Scripture.

2 Peter 3:8. How long is a "day" for God?