Where is a "6000 year old earth" found in scripture?

[-57]

You misunderstand science. The point and purpose of science is for us to test out our beliefs, no matter how sacred they may be. When it comes to the biblical cosmology, science has rendered that obsolete, since the 16th century. As to people rising from the dead, I know of no doctor who says that is impossible. After all, there are plenty of documented cases today where medicine has brought back someone who was clinically dead. If we can do it, then certainly God can.

Clinically dead for 3 days...or flatlined on the table?

 

[yeshuasavedme]

You misunderstand science. The point and purpose of science is for us to test out our beliefs, no matter how sacred they may be. When it comes to the biblical cosmology, science has rendered that obsolete, since the 16th century. As to people rising from the dead, I know of no doctor who says that is impossible. After all, there are plenty of documented cases today where medicine has brought back someone who was clinically dead. If we can do it, then certainly God can.

Man can't do it after three days -or four- to dead bodies not on machines and left outside, buried.
You misunderstand the "science" you believe in, and have more faith without foundational proof, in it. "Science", in this case, meaning any misguided silly man who thinks he can can test God's supernatural creation or the the holding together of it, cannot even begin to discover "how, what, when", nor how it is held together nor even what it "is"!
Your faith is misplaced.

 

[Razare]

I am a proponent of creationism that leans toward 6k year old Earth, but I don't see it in scripture.

Yet, I certainly do not trust science as a whole that strings together a series of superflous logical steps to conclude the Earth is not 6k years old. I'd more likely believe a myth from another religion that believe the story science has invented because I can go through the various holes in their logic in detail and it is just nonsense.

That said, people who want to argue from scripture that the Earth is much older, but there was no death until Adam's fall, and that mankind only goes back that 6k years or something like this... but the Earth is much older, I cannot say they are wrong from scripture. They could be wrong or they could be right but I have not seen scripture to prove it one way or the other.

What is proven is that the time periods in Genesis representing days, are not exactly days by the admission of scripture itself. There is likely deep meaning in why a day is not an actual day, and we can probably find prophetic implications and symbolic implications for that going forward, but I would not know them yet.

I believe the notion that the Earth specifically would be 6k years old, would be based on 6 literal Earth days of creation, but that's not exactly what the text said occurred.

But is it then millions and billions of years old? I doubt that highly too.

Man is something like 6k years old, going back to Adam the first man, made by God, but the Earth itself could be older.

 

[ewq1938]

I am a proponent of creationism that leans toward 6k year old Earth, but I don't see it in scripture.

Yet, I certainly do not trust science as a whole that strings together a series of superflous logical steps to conclude the Earth is not 6k years old. I'd more likely believe a myth from another religion that believe the story science has invented because I can go through the various holes in their logic in detail and it is just nonsense.

That said, people who want to argue from scripture that the Earth is much older, but there was no death until Adam's fall, and that mankind only goes back that 6k years or something like this... but the Earth is much older, I cannot say they are wrong from scripture. They could be wrong or they could be right but I have not seen scripture to prove it one way or the other.

What is proven is that the time periods in Genesis representing days, are not exactly days by the admission of scripture itself. There is likely deep meaning in why a day is not an actual day, and we can probably find prophetic implications and symbolic implications for that going forward, but I would not know them yet.

I believe the notion that the Earth specifically would be 6k years old, would be based on 6 literal Earth days of creation, but that's not exactly what the text said occurred.

But is it then millions and billions of years old? I doubt that highly too.

Man is something like 6k years old, going back to Adam the first man, made by God, but the Earth itself could be older.

If man goes back 6,000 years then the Earth is certainly older. Then if you accept Adam might have been a new type of man then you can accept that man could be much older in different types of man. Adam was the first man, of his own race or lineage not the first human ever

 

[Razare]

If man goes back 6,000 years then the Earth is certainly older. Then if you accept Adam might have been a new type of man then you can accept that man could be much older in different types of man. Adam was the first man, of his own race or lineage not the first human ever

Problem is evolution was disproven in the 60's and 70's by mathematics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_theory_of_molecular_evolution

So I have no valid logical basis to believe there were prior types of man. Fossils don't say much, other than there were strange types of men, but prior versions? No, they don't conclude that, and the math says it is impossible anyway, so even if we saw a perfect series of fossils for a fossil progression, we would still not conclude evolution occurred because of the mathematical proof that it could not occur.

 

[ewq1938]

Problem is evolution was disproven in the 60's and 70's by mathematics.

First of all that is nonsense. Second, I wasn't talking about evolution anyways. It's just a biblical and historical fact Adam was not the first human. People misunderstand a verse or two and have made the mistake for ages.

 

[Papias]

Problem is evolution was disproven in the 60's and 70's by mathematics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_theory_of_molecular_evolution

The neutral theory of molecular evolution is fully compatible with, and part of, evolution by natural selection. It describes the well-known, and undisputed, presence of silent mutations, and thus has no effect on actual traits, which are affected by natural selection. Both it's proponents and detractors know that it does't dispute or "disprove" evolution any more than the fact that water weighs ~7 pounds per gallon somehow disputes or "disproves" the theory of gravity.

Anyone who has "mathematical proof" that evolution is false is sitting on something more valuable than a winning lottery ticket - they only need to make it public to win their Nobel prize.

Fossils don't say much, other than there were strange types of men, but prior versions?

The fossils show a clear transition, as can be seen below. A graph of skull volume of the fossils is clear too.

There is a lot of evidence to look at - far beyond the scope of this thread- and this is the wrong forum to discuss all the reasons as well. If someone actually doubts a piece of the evidence, then starting a thread on it in the main "Evolution and Creationism" forum is the way to discuss it.

However, the main point is that the two statements above: "evolution was disproven by the neutral theory of molecular evolution", and that "there aren't any transitional human fossils" - are both statements that are easily shown to be incorrect, and creationists should not use them. Doing so only makes the creationist position look bad.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[Goatee]

'Man' was made in the image of God........That is good enough for me.

 

[Aman777]

Can anyone tell us of the Image of God Scripturally?

 

[IamNazarene]

Adam unto Christ, are 3974 years, six months, and ten days; and from the birth of Christ, unto this present ...

 

[yeshuasavedme]

If man goes back 6,000 years then the Earth is certainly older. Then if you accept Adam might have been a new type of man then you can accept that man could be much older in different types of man. Adam was the first man, of his own race or lineage not the first human ever

No. The word human is the word from Adam.
Adam is the first human being created son of God.

Adam is made male and female, and the two are named "Adam". Adam means "man" -specifically, "human".
The female is built from the Adam flesh, Adam bone, Adam blood, states Scripture, and by the one Adam spirit/nature/being of the Adam flesh, states the Scripture...They two are "one" bone; flesh, blood, and spirit, but made male and female, states the Scripture.

There were five evenings and mornings, in creation week, states the Word, and then on the sixth of them, the Adam flesh is built from the dust of the earth, and the Creator breathed into him the breath of life. Then the Creator, after Adam had named all the animal kinds that God had made, put him into a coma and took a rib bone and built the female Adam by cancelling the "y" "chromosome and doubling the "x" chromosome.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Can anyone tell us of the Image of God Scripturally?

Yes, it is the Adam.

Genesis 1: let "us"[=the One God in three Persons, a self existing, closed = not reproducing, multiplicity of the One YHWH, the One Living Spirit], "make Adam in our image, after our likeness/צֶלֶם tselem -and let them have dominion"...

God has an image, a tselem, and it is the Adam creation, but WAIT: the image of God that Adam was made in "was to come", and "has come", "and is coming". He was kept secret, hidden in God, with God, and was God, until He was made manifest. God has come in the flesh, and He is the image of God that Adam was made in, states Romans 5:14 -the very "tupos"/ of God, like a news print type, was the Adam flesh formed in.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure/typos of him that was to come.

Adam was made in the "figure/Typos of Him who was to come: typos: the mark of a stroke or blow, print a figure formed by a blow or impression

Jhn 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Eze 1:26 And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of Adam above upon it.

 

[Aman777]

Yes, it is the Adam.

Genesis 1: let "us"[=the One God in three Persons, a self existing, closed = not reproducing, multiplicity of the One YHWH, the One Living Spirit], "make Adam in our image, after our likeness/צֶלֶם tselem -and let them have dominion"...

God has an image, a tselem, and it is the Adam creation, but WAIT: the image of God that Adam was made in "was to come", and "has come", "and is coming". He was kept secret, hidden in God, with God, and was God, until He was made manifest. God has come in the flesh, and He is the image of God that Adam was made in, states Romans 5:14 -the very "tupos"/ of God, like a news print type, was the Adam flesh formed in.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure/typos of him that was to come.

Adam was made in the "figure/Typos of Him who was to come: typos: the mark of a stroke or blow, print a figure formed by a blow or impression

Jhn 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Eze 1:26 And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of Adam above upon it.

↑
Aman:>>Can anyone tell us of the Image of God Scripturally?

***Yes, it is the Adam.

Are you sure? Read this:

12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son: 14 In Whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and by him all things consist.18 And He is the head of the body, the Church: Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the preeminence. 19 For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fulness dwell; 20 And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Sounds like Jesus Christ to me. Adam didn't die on the Cross. Amen?

 

[SkyWriting]

You misunderstand science. The point and purpose of science is for us to test out our beliefs, no matter how sacred they may be. When it comes to the biblical cosmology, science has rendered that obsolete, since the 16th century. As to people rising from the dead, I know of no doctor who says that is impossible. After all, there are plenty of documented cases today where medicine has brought back someone who was clinically dead. If we can do it, then certainly God can.

According to scripture, science is unable to support faith outside of
"Did you see Jesus heal that man?"
"Yes, I saw it too."

Changing water into wine
Healing of the royal official's son
Healing of the Capernaum demoniac
Healing of Peter's mother-in-law
Healing the sick during the evening
Catching a large number of fish
Healing a leper
Miracle of healing a centurion's servant
Healing a paralyzed man
Healing a withered hand
Raising a widow's son
Calming the storm
Healing the Gerasene man possessed by demons
Healing a woman with internal bleeding
Raising Jairus' daughter
Healing two blind men
Healing a mute demon-possessed man
Healing a 38 year invalid
Feeding 5000 men and their families
Walking on water
Miraculous healing of many people in Gennesaret
Healing a girl possessed by a demon
Healing a deaf man with a speech impediment
Feeding the 4,000 men and their families
Healing a blind man
Healing a man born blind
Healing a demon-possessed boy
Catching a fish with a coin in its mouth
Healing a blind and mute man who was demon

 

[ewq1938]

No. The word human is the word from Adam.

Wrong again. Adam's personal name comes from the original word for human. You have it backwards.

Adam is the first human being created son of God.

Not according to Genesis.

Adam is made male and female, and the two are named "Adam".

No, Adam was created male.

Adam means "man" -specifically, "human".

No Adam is a personal name from adam which is a non-personal name.

Strong's 119 means to show blood in the face ie: human being, 121 is Adam's personal name with 120 as it's root word with same meaning.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

↑
Aman:>>Can anyone tell us of the Image of God Scripturally?

***Yes, it is the Adam.

Are you sure? Read this:

12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son: 14 In Whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and by him all things consist.18 And He is the head of the body, the Church: Who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the preeminence. 19 For it pleased the Father that in Him should all fulness dwell; 20 And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

Sounds like Jesus Christ to me. Adam didn't die on the Cross. Amen?

How did you miss the message of the post -big time!
Please read it.
Adam is made male and female, and Adam is made in the image of God -the very "tselem" of Hebrew that the Israelites are forbidden to erect!
Adam is made in the image of God the Word, who was to come and who is come, in the likeness of sinful Adam, but whose flesh was sinless; a new human being creation; a second and last Adam; and the Firstborn Son of God of the human being kind; and who is come in that flesh of human being creation in the likeness of Adam, but without sin, and is the "Kinsman/Redeemr" in that flesh, to all born in Adam...

Romans 5:14 states that Adam was made in the "typos" of Him who was to come -that "typos" is God the Word come in flesh, and Adam was made in His image, which was to come, states Romans 5:14 - and He is come, and is coming again, and He looks like Adam in that flesh, and is glorified in that flesh, just as Adam was created to be, and lost the glory in the fall....irrevocably!

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Wrong again. Adam's personal name comes from the original word for human. You have it backwards.
Not according to Genesis.

No, Adam was created male.

No Adam is a personal name from adam which is a non-personal name.

....

Genesis 5:2 "male and female made He them, and called their name Adam"
Strong's
Adam
man, mankind
man, human being

man, mankind (much more frequently intended sense in OT)

Adam
The KJV translates Strongs H120 in the following manner: man (408x), men (121x), Adam (13x), person(s) (8x), common sort (with H7230) (1x), hypocrite (1x]/B]

We are all "Adam", the old "man", and dead in nature/spirit to the Father of Glory since the fall -which is why we must be born again, into the One Living Spirit/Christ/Messiah of the New Creation human being flesh man, named "Israel" -the Kinsman/Brother/Redeemer to the Adam creation.

In Adam [spirit/nature/flesh] all die; in Christ, all are made alive [whosoever will].

 

[ewq1938]

How did you miss the message of the post -big time!

The only thing that was big was the amount of errors in it. You firstly need to know the difference between adam and Adam or you will continue to make errors about the Hebrew words.

 

[ewq1938]

Genesis 5:2 "male and female made He them, and called their name Adam"

Which is not the Hebrew for Adam's personal name, the specific man created after the 7th day.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

The only thing that was big was the amount of errors in it. You firstly need to know the difference between adam and Adam or you will continue to make errors about the Hebrew words.

The original Hebrew states that "male and female made He them, and called their name Adam...Genesis 5:2

Male and female human beings are named "Adam".
The first, firstborn son of God of the human/Adam being kind gives His name to the entire race of Adam kind human beings.

The persons in Adam are male and female, and they are all from the one male Adam who was formed of dust/clay on day 6 and out of whom the female Adam person [the ishyah formed from the ish], was built from the male Adam person bone, with the flesh of it, and the blood of it, and the remnant of the Adam spirit/nature/kind of it, and they two were the "one Adam kind, made male and female, and Adam, the first, firstborn son of God named Adam [as to his kind], was made in the very likeness/image [Hebrew transliterated to English "tselem"] of God the Word, who was to come and is come, and shall come.

I gave Scriptures a few posts back that you are not reading or else you could never make the totally biblically false statements about our Adam kind and the Adam firstborn of our kind, and therefore what the we, his multiplied seed were created to be, in the beginning of creation.

Romans 5:14: Christ come in flesh is the very likeness of Adam, but without sin, and Adam was made in the very likeness/image of God the Word, in the beginning, and who is now made manifest in the flesh of a second human being creation whose name is "Israel", only created brother to the Adam.

The Bible tells us what the manifest image of God looks like, and He looks like Adam, who was created in His image [Genesis 1:26-28; Romans 5:14], but who was not yet come in that image [who was invisible], until God, in the Person of the Word, dressed Himself in human being creation flesh of the second creation, which was prepared by God the Holy Spirit in the womb of an Adam person female virgin, for His donning, like a garment.

He who has seen Me, said Jesus, has seen the Father.

Abraham even named Mount Moriah "YAH [will be] Seen -in His image/tselem, for our peace; so we have Jerusalem, from Abraham's testimony God will be seen on Mount Moriah....and He has been!

and the the mother of all the seed that was to multiply the Adam kind which were created in the loins of the Adam was taken the firstborn son of God named Adam,