Why Old Earth creationism doesn't work

[BNR32FAN]

I agree that Jews wouldnt know of such things. But in addition, ancient isrealite authors wouldn't know of such things either. That's just not their context.

Oh so the ancient Israelite authors knew what days the earth was created? They just handed that information down from generation to generation when even Adam wasn’t even created yet? Genesis is not based on what the Israelites knew, it’s based on what God knew.

 

[Job 33:6]

Al

Then you don’t understand a thing about revelation. The New Testament doesn’t overwriting the Old Testament texts, it’s revealing more information about them. John 1:1-3 specifically says that everything was created thru Jesus and nothing was created except thru Him. That statement reveals to us information that was not known by the Jews. Jews are monotheists they knew nothing about Christ being a part of the Trinity or His involvement with creation until John 1.

Also, to be fair, John never actually refers to Genesis. He mentions "the beginning". But that's the full extent of potential correlation.

‭‭John‬ ‭1:1‭-‬3‬ ‭ESV‬‬
[1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. [2] He was in the beginning with God. [3] All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

We could just as easily go to Peter and read about creation of earth our of water and through water.

‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:5‬ ‭ESV‬‬
[5] For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God,

So it's just not enough to say "Jesus was in the Beginning, therefore Genesis is talking about Jesus". Nor is it enough to say "all things were made through Him, therefore Genesis is describing the ex nihilo origins of the cosmos".

The two aren't mutually exclusive. Jesus being in the beginning doesn't mean that the 1:26 is referring to the Trinity. Nor does creation being through Him mean that Genesis is describing this same event.

 

[Job 33:6]

Oh so the ancient Israelite authors knew what days the earth was created? They just handed that information down from generation to generation when even Adam wasn’t even created yet? Genesis is not based on what the Israelites knew, it’s based on what God knew.

The isrealites authors of course knew what days earth was created, they are the ones who wrote the text.

Do you think the isrealites authors didn't actually know or understand what they themselves were writing? Of course they understood what they were writing about, otherwise how would they be able to even write about it? And if the authors didn't understand or know what they were writing, much less would their audience. It would defeat the whole purpose of revelation to reveal things that the author or audience wouldnt have understood.

The Bible was not written before ancient Isreal.

Genesis is revelation. But it is not scientific revelation. It's theological.

 

[BNR32FAN]

A billion year is a wisp of vapor in the wind.
In Ezekeil, 28:12 speaking of Satan, We see his choice of self over God.

“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
carnelian, chrysolite and emerald,
topaz, onyx and jasper,
lapis lazuli, turquoise and beryl.
Your settings and mountings were made of gold;
on the day you were created they were prepared.
14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub,
for so I ordained you.
You were on the holy mount of God;
you walked among the fiery stones.
15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.
16 Through your widespread trade
you were filled with violence,
and you sinned.
So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God,
and I expelled you, guardian cherub,
from among the fiery stones.
17 Your heart became proud
on account of your beauty,
and you corrupted your wisdom
because of your splendor.
So I threw you to the earth;
I made a spectacle of you before kings.
18 By your many sins and dishonest trade
you have desecrated your sanctuaries.
So I made a fire come out from you,
and it consumed you,
and I reduced you to ashes on the ground
in the sight of all who were watching.
19 All the nations who knew you
are appalled at you;
you have come to a horrible end
and will be no more.’

Satan may be referred to as that serpent, but appears as an angel of light.
Satan also has access to the throne of God.
Job 1:6
One day the angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came with them. 7 The Lord said to Satan, “Where have you come from?”

Satan answered the Lord, “From roaming throughout the earth, going back and forth on it.”

8 Then the Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.”

Time means nothing in eternity...

When the Bible gives a specific time reference it certainly does mean something. It means exactly what is written.

 

[Job 33:6]

You said yourself that God created the earth Ex nihilo. Now you’re saying it’s not biblical?

I didn't say it's not biblical. It's just not what Genesis is describing.

 

[BNR32FAN]

And not only that, but as noted several times now, the backdrop context involves ancient near east cosmology.

It is abundantly clear, that the text is not to be confused with science. That's not what the Bible is about. That's not what it talks about.

The Bible doesn't say anything about the age of the earth, no more than it talks about cell phones or laptops, or modern LGBTQ politics, or anything modern. It doesn't talk about ex nihilo creation either. These are modern ideas. These ideas are part of a modern culture that we live in.

The old testament authors and audience didn't know of these things. They didn't think about these things. Didn't talk about them. That's not their culture.

Anyone who thinks that Genesis talks about the age of the Earth is guilty of the same hermeneutical crime as people who think that the Bible talks about anything else of modern age.

There are no helicopters or Apache military vehicles in the book of Daniel.

There are no, space aliens in Genesis 6 (the nephelim).

There are no discussions of capitalism in 1 kings.

These are modern cultural ideas. And they should not be read backwards into the Bible where they don't belong.

Ok so I watched this video that you keep posting over and over and it has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of the earth. All it discusses is Genesis 1:6-8 the separation of the waters then it switches to flat earth. The video doesn’t say a single word about the creation of the earth ex nihilo or ex materia it doesn’t have anything to do with this discussion, so why do you keep posting it as if it contains anything relevant to this discussion?

 

[Jimmy It]

When the Bible gives a specific time reference it certainly does mean something. It means exactly what is written.

Yeah, it is as specific as this in Genesis, 1:5
Strong's H3117 in the following manner: day (2,008x), time (64x), chronicles (with H1697) (37x), daily (44x), ever (18x), year (14x), continually (10x), when (10x), as (10x), while (8x), full (8x), always (4x), whole (4x), alway (4x), miscellaneous (44x).
And again:
Day: yôwm, yome; from an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literal (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figurative (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverb):—age, always, chronicals, continually(-ance), daily, ((birth-), each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), elder, × end, evening, (for) ever(-lasting, -more), × full, life, as (so) long as (… live), (even) now, old, outlived, perpetually, presently, remaineth, × required, season, × since, space, then, (process of) time, as at other times, in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), × whole ( age), (full) year(-ly), younger.

This word seems to mean a period of time, an age since 24 hour days did not yet exist.
When we get into the, 'Begats" we can assume they are 'earth days.'
Prior to that there was no sun to, as scripture speaks of the 4th day.

Genesis 1:16
God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

We tend to think the entire universe still revolves around and takes it's clues from the earth. It does not.

This is just in our little section of the woods



Mercury


Day length = 58.67 Earth days (1408 hours)

Year length = 88 Earth days (0.2 Earth years



Venus

Day length = 243 Earth days (5832 hours)

Year length = About 225 Earth days (0.6 Earth years)

Mars​

Day length = 1.04 Earth days (about 25 hours)

Year length = 687 Earth days (1.9 Earth years)

Jupiter​

Day length = 0.42 Earth days (10 hours)

Year length = 4333 Earth days (11.9 Earth years)

Saturn​

Day length = 0.46 Earth days (about 11 hours)

Year length = 10,756 Earth days (29.4 Earth years)

Uranus​

Day length = 0.71 Earth days (about 17 hours)

Year length = 30,687 Earth days (about 84 Earth years)

Neptune​

Day length = 0.67 Earth days (16 hours)

Year length = 60,190 Earth days (165 Earth years)

Pluto​

Day length = about 6 Earth days (153 hours)

Year length = 90,520 Earth days (248 Earth years)
This is just in our little section of the woods

 

[BNR32FAN]

I didn't say it's not biblical. It's just not what Genesis is describing.

So when Genesis 1:26 says “Let Us make man in Our image” that isn’t a reference to Christ? When God reveals more information about the past that information must be included into previous passages especially in this case since John 1:1-3 is absolutely referring to the creation account in Genesis 1 and 2.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”
‭‭John‬ ‭1‬:‭1‬-‭3‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Are you going to try to tell me that this isn’t a reference to the creation account in Genesis 1? John 1 has revealed additional information to Genesis 1 that wasn’t previously revealed and must be taken into consideration in our theology. That’s the whole problem with people who don’t accept YEC, they try to isolate the creation account in Genesis from the rest of scripture. John 1 revealed important information about creation that the Jews didn’t have before Christ’s ministry. Information that now that we do have we must take into account in our theology because it’s this additional information that separates your theology from my theology. Only one of us can be right and I assure you it’s not the one who is ignoring this additional information.

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok so I watched this video that you keep posting over and over and it has absolutely nothing to do with the creation of the earth. All it discusses is Genesis 1:6-8 the separation of the waters then it switches to flat earth. The video doesn’t say a single word about the creation of the earth ex nihilo or ex materia it doesn’t have anything to do with this discussion, so why do you keep posting it as if it contains anything relevant to this discussion?

It demonstrates that the context is obviously ancient near eastern.

And anyone who has looked into any other ancient near east creation text, of the Babylonians, Egyptians, mesopotamians, akkadians etc. knows that they all universally describe creation ex materia. And that none of the texts have anything to do with the age of the earth.

It's simply absurd to argue that the Bible teaches scientifically modern information, when it blatantly describes an ancient near east cosmology.

 

[Job 33:6]

So when Genesis 1:26 says “Let Us make man in Our image” that isn’t a reference to Christ? When God reveals more information about the past that information must be included into previous passages especially in this case since John 1:1-3 is absolutely referring to the creation account in Genesis 1 and 2.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”
‭‭John‬ ‭1‬:‭1‬-‭3‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Are you going to try to tell me that this isn’t a reference to the creation account in Genesis 1? John 1 has revealed additional information to Genesis 1 that wasn’t previously revealed and must be taken into consideration in our theology. That’s the whole problem with people who don’t accept YEC, they try to isolate the creation account in Genesis from the rest of scripture. John 1 revealed important information about creation that the Jews didn’t have before Christ’s ministry. Information that now that we do have we must take into account in our theology because it’s this additional information that separates your theology from my theology. Only one of us can be right and I assure you it’s not the one who is ignoring this additional information.

You can't ignore and overwrite the ancient near east context.

Like Ive just noted, it's really just absurd to argue that the Bible teaches scientifically modern information when the context is ancient near eastern.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yeah, it is as specific as this in Genesis, 1:5
Strong's H3117 in the following manner: day (2,008x), time (64x), chronicles (with H1697) (37x), daily (44x), ever (18x), year (14x), continually (10x), when (10x), as (10x), while (8x), full (8x), always (4x), whole (4x), alway (4x), miscellaneous (44x).
And again:
Day: yôwm, yome; from an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literal (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figurative (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverb):—age, always, chronicals, continually(-ance), daily, ((birth-), each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), elder, × end, evening, (for) ever(-lasting, -more), × full, life, as (so) long as (… live), (even) now, old, outlived, perpetually, presently, remaineth, × required, season, × since, space, then, (process of) time, as at other times, in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), × whole ( age), (full) year(-ly), younger.

This word seems to mean a period of time, an age since 24 hour days did not yet exist.
When we get into the, 'Begats" we can assume they are 'earth days.'
Prior to that there was no sun to, as scripture speaks of the 4th day.

Genesis 1:16
God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

We tend to think the entire universe still revolves around and takes it's clues from the earth. It does not.

This is just in our little section of the woods



Mercury


Day length = 58.67 Earth days (1408 hours)

Year length = 88 Earth days (0.2 Earth years



Venus

Day length = 243 Earth days (5832 hours)

Year length = About 225 Earth days (0.6 Earth years)

Mars​

Day length = 1.04 Earth days (about 25 hours)

Year length = 687 Earth days (1.9 Earth years)

Jupiter​

Day length = 0.42 Earth days (10 hours)

Year length = 4333 Earth days (11.9 Earth years)

Saturn​

Day length = 0.46 Earth days (about 11 hours)

Year length = 10,756 Earth days (29.4 Earth years)

Uranus​

Day length = 0.71 Earth days (about 17 hours)

Year length = 30,687 Earth days (about 84 Earth years)

Neptune​

Day length = 0.67 Earth days (16 hours)

Year length = 60,190 Earth days (165 Earth years)

Pluto​

Day length = about 6 Earth days (153 hours)

Year length = 90,520 Earth days (248 Earth years)
This is just in our little section of the woods

Your source doesn’t explain the difference between the Hebrew word Yom and Beyovm. Both are forms of the word Yom but with different spellings. Beyovm has a prefix connected to it that renders it as “in the day” which is different from the word Yom by itself which is only used as a literal 24 hour period. If you don’t believe me you can easily look up any verse that has the word day on biblehub.com and in every single case that is not preceded by the words “in the” and you will see the Hebrew word Yom is used. Then you can check every single case that includes the words “in the day” and you will see that every single one is translated from Beyovm.

 

[Jimmy It]

Your source doesn’t explain the difference between the Hebrew word Yom and Beyovm. Both are forms of the word Yom but with different spellings. Beyovm has a prefix connected to it that renders it as “in the day” which is different from the word Yom by itself which is only used as a literal 24 hour period. If you don’t believe me you can easily look up any verse that has the word day on biblehub.com and in every single case that is not preceded by the words “in the” and you will see the Hebrew word Yom is used. Then you can check every single case that includes the words “in the day” and you will see that every single one is translated from Beyovm.

The concordance is the Strongs. The source is the 'Blue letter Bible'
Check it out. It's a good resource.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It demonstrates that the context is obviously ancient near eastern.

And anyone who has looked into any other ancient near east creation text, of the Babylonians, Egyptians, mesopotamians, akkadians etc. knows that they all universally describe creation ex materia. And that none of the texts have anything to do with the age of the earth.

It's simply absurd to argue that the Bible teaches scientifically modern information, when it blatantly describes an ancient near east cosmology.

That’s not even discussed in the video. Can you provide a time in that video of where that is discussed?

 

[Job 33:6]

That’s not even discussed in the video. Can you provide a time in that video of where that is discussed?

What wasn't discussed? Ancient near east context of the Bible?

You don't think it's discussed in the video titled; "The Solid sky dome of biblical cosmology and the ancient near east" ?

 

[Job 33:6]

That’s not even discussed in the video. Can you provide a time in that video of where that is discussed?

If you're asking about the concept of ex nihilo creation vs ex materia creatoon, an example is found in the other video that I've also shared:

It's the video that you said was too long so you wouldn't watch it. But if you watch the first hour minutes Dr. Heiser reviews Genesis Grammer. Then he continues in the second hour into a description on Egyptian and mesopotamian texts as an example. There are also texts of ugarit and Babylon that give similar accounts of ex materia creation, of that's what you're talking about.

A good book that I would recommend that's short and easy to read is:

"In the Beginning...We Misunderstood" by two Evangelical Old Testament Scholars of Dallas Seminary, that is Dr. Johnny Miller and Dr. John Soden.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The concordance is the Strongs. The source is the 'Blue letter Bible'
Check it out. It's a good resource.

I’m very familiar with Strong’s concordance but it doesn’t give a separate definition of those two very different usages. Biblehub.com on the other hand does. For example if you do a Google search for any Bible verse followed by the word “lexicon” biblehub will show up and give you a word for word translation. So if you were to type in Genesis2:17 lexicon for example and click on the link that says biblehub.com which is usually the very top choice it will take you here.

Genesis 2:17 Lexicon: but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

Notice that the term “in the day” is translated from Beyovm.

Now do it again with any other verse with the word day that does not have the words “in the” before it and you will see that every single case is translated from the word Yom or Yovm, never Beyovm.

Genesis 1:5 Lexicon: God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

Now you can use this link to search exact phrases and search for the term “in the day” and search for just the word “day” and see every passage with those phrases. Then you can check them on biblehub and see which usage of Yom that is being used.

Advanced Bible Search

King James Bible - Advanced Bible Search

thekingsbible.com

Strong’s concordance just grouped all of these words into one category and included the definitions of both but biblehub will actually show you which spelling is actually being used. In every single case where the word day is being used in reference to an unspecified amount of time you will see the Hebrew word Beyovm.

 

[BNR32FAN]

What wasn't discussed? Ancient near east context of the Bible?

You don't think it's discussed in the video titled; "The Solid sky dome of biblical cosmology and the ancient near east" ?

The dome, separation of the waters, and flat earth have nothing to do with the discussion. He’s only talking about ancient beliefs on those specific topics. The creation of the earth is never discussed nor the topic of ex nihilo or ex materia.

 

[BNR32FAN]

If you're asking about the concept of ex nihilo creation vs ex materia creatoon, an example is found in the other video that I've also shared:

It's the video that you said was too long so you wouldn't watch it. But if you watch the first hour minutes Dr. Heiser reviews Genesis Grammer. Then he continues in the second hour into a description on Egyptian and mesopotamian texts as an example. There are also texts of ugarit and Babylon that give similar accounts of ex materia creation, of that's what you're talking about.

A good book that I would recommend that's short and easy to read is:

"In the Beginning...We Misunderstood" by two Evangelical Old Testament Scholars of Dallas Seminary, that is Dr. Johnny Miller and Dr. John Soden.

You’ve already wasted my time with one 26 minute video I’m not watching a 5 hour video just to waste more time.

 

[Job 33:6]

The dome, separation of the waters, and flat earth have nothing to do with the discussion. He’s only talking about ancient beliefs on those specific topics. The creation of the earth is never discussed nor the topic of ex nihilo or ex materia.

They have very much to do with the topic, because they're described in Genesis. They inform us of what Genesis is about.

You can't just read Genesis 1:1 and then act as if Genesis 1:2 and beyond are unimportant to establishing context.

 

[BNR32FAN]

If you're asking about the concept of ex nihilo creation vs ex materia creatoon, an example is found in the other video that I've also shared:

It's the video that you said was too long so you wouldn't watch it. But if you watch the first hour minutes Dr. Heiser reviews Genesis Grammer. Then he continues in the second hour into a description on Egyptian and mesopotamian texts as an example. There are also texts of ugarit and Babylon that give similar accounts of ex materia creation, of that's what you're talking about.

A good book that I would recommend that's short and easy to read is:

"In the Beginning...We Misunderstood" by two Evangelical Old Testament Scholars of Dallas Seminary, that is Dr. Johnny Miller and Dr. John Soden.

So what? Shall I post commentaries on how Jesus isn’t the Son of God or how He isn’t God or how He is the brother of satan? Because there are tons of commentaries on these subjects, it doesn’t mean there’s a shred of truth to them.