Creation and an Old Earth - One Possibility

[ARGOSY]

16 hours ago, Kan said:

6 days, is six days. that does not leave a lot of time for long indeterminable time periods in the creation does it?

I understand that there is an indeterminable time before creation, but the planet itself does not appear until the third day.

Lol Kan. You obviously did not read my post. Both the meaning of the Hebrew word "erets" and the context of day 3, are clear that the word translated as "earth" means land. It was NOT planet earth that was created on day 3, it was dry land. Just read the bible please:

⁹ And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

¹⁰ And God called the dry land earth  (HEBREW = ERETS   = LAND) ; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

 

The wording of the bible itself defines ERETS as DRY LAND.......... not "plant earth".     We have land and sea. Not planet earth and sea.  The earth was NOT created on day 3, the dry land merely appeared from under the ocean. 

[ARGOSY]

15 hours ago, enoob57 said:

You can replace words in any translation to say whatever... heavens in the plural according to the entire word were 3: atmosphere (your sky), universe (where He hung the stars),
God's throne (outside the universe of stars). I know this by God's Word as I shall show you:
You are failing in the contextual hermeneutic not taking the whole of God's Word into the Genesis 1 account...

2 Co 12:1-2

12 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.

2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.
KJV

We know this 3rd heaven is outside of universe for God says

Isa 45:12

12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
KJV
it is with understanding God's Word in the hermeneutic and the very begin is to the syntax and original languages as best we can but that is far from completing the hermeneutic of God's
Word...

 

The Nt was written in Greek. I am not sure why you are using common Greek usage of words to explain the meaning of Hebrew words.

As for the Old Testament:

Isa 45:12

12 I have made the earth (erets/land) , and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

 

This planet earth was a ball of ocean.  God made the land, and created man upon it.

The KJV is the only accurate translation.  At that time the word "earth" meant soil/land in English.  Since then the English word has changed meaning, yet translators have incorrectly carried on using the word "earth" which now means "planet earth".  God created dry land, and placed man on that land. The actual Hebrew should read like this:

⁹ And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry ground appear: and it was so.¹⁰ And God called the dry ground "land"; and the gathering together of the waters called he seas: and God saw that it was good.

[Kan]

1 hour ago, ARGOSY said:

Lol Kan. You obviously did not read my post. Both the meaning of the Hebrew word "erets" and the context of day 3, are clear that the word translated as "earth" means land. It was NOT planet earth that was created on day 3, it was dry land. Just read the bible please:

⁹ And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

¹⁰ And God called the dry land earth  (HEBREW = ERETS   = LAND) ; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

 

The wording of the bible itself defines ERETS as DRY LAND.......... not "plant earth".     We have land and sea. Not planet earth and sea.  The earth was NOT created on day 3, the dry land merely appeared from under the ocean. 

I think I know what you are saying, but I still said something different than what you propose, because our definitions of "planet," for instance, was once called "the dry."

"The dry" as you already know, simply means land or earth, and is made to appear from out of the waters (the wet). The waters may not be just tap water, but a super element, from which matter - the elements - "the dry"- land -earth - minerals, is fashioned, or appears. Before that, whatever was supposed to be in place could not be physically seen by humans.

The Waters, and the Light (caused by the Word) are invisible powers. A look at these terms in other scripture texts, shows something different.

See how this works with the creation account, -

"The (invisible) Spirit of God moved over the (invisible) waters" God said let there be (invisible) light.

God separated the waters, stretching out the upper, and gathering them together below, in order for the "dry" to appear (visible).

God called it earth. 

 

I would hardly think that God would name something He could see under the water anyway. 

If we look up the word "water" or "waters," we find it used to describe what we commonly know as H20, but in some places it describes something which is something else, even in Genesis, it is called "the deep" which is another associated concept or expression. It's interesting anyhow.

I'm not disagreeing with you, rather wanting to you to be in on something that has been discussed from time to time, in case you discover more on it to share.

[ARGOSY]

1 hour ago, Kan said:

I think I know what you are saying, but I still said something different than what you propose, because our definitions of "planet," for instance, was once called "the dry."

"The dry" as you already know, simply means land or earth, and is made to appear from out of the waters (the wet). The waters may not be just tap water, but a super element, from which matter - the elements - "the dry"- land -earth - minerals, is fashioned, or appears. Before that, whatever was supposed to be in place could not be physically seen by humans.

The Waters, and the Light (caused by the Word) are invisible powers. A look at these terms in other scripture texts, shows something different.

See how this works with the creation account, -

"The (invisible) Spirit of God moved over the (invisible) waters" God said let there be (invisible) light.

God separated the waters, stretching out the upper, and gathering them together below, in order for the "dry" to appear (visible).

God called it earth. 

 

I would hardly think that God would name something He could see under the water anyway. 

If we look up the word "water" or "waters," we find it used to describe what we commonly know as H20, but in some places it describes something which is something else, even in Genesis, it is called "the deep" which is another associated concept or expression. It's interesting anyhow.

I'm not disagreeing with you, rather wanting to you to be in on something that has been discussed from time to time, in case you discover more on it to share.

That's all good and well.  But then you seem to be openly admitting that OLD EARTH creationists like me are the more literal group that takes the bible at face value. For me, water is water. Land is land. The sky is the sky. 

Your view that waters represent invisible powers, and land is a symbol of visibility is just one way of viewing it. You are welcome to that view. But I am a bible literalist and so cannot help seeing water as water, and land as land. Sure the bible is full of symbols, but I find it very easy to differentiate when something is symbolic and when something is literal. Normally the bible tells us, that symbols are used (eg Daniel 8:  the goat is Grecia. Daniel 7: the 4th beast is a fourth kingdom)

[Kan]

32 minutes ago, ARGOSY said:

That's all good and well.  But then you seem to be openly admitting that OLD EARTH creationists like me are the more literal group that takes the bible at face value. For me, water is water. Land is land. The sky is the sky. 

Your view that waters represent invisible powers, and land is a symbol of visibility is just one way of viewing it. You are welcome to that view. But I am a bible literalist and so cannot help seeing water as water, and land as land. Sure the bible is full of symbols, but I find it very easy to differentiate when something is symbolic and when something is literal. Normally the bible tells us, that symbols are used (eg Daniel 8:  the goat is Grecia. Daniel 7: the 4th beast is a fourth kingdom)

I believe the earth is old too, about 6000 years. I don't see any need to stretch its age beyond that.

Why would anybody do that, apart from keeping up with popular claims of an older earth?

[ARGOSY]

2 minutes ago, Kan said:

I believe the earth is old too, about 6000 years. I don't see any need to stretch its age beyond that.

Why would anybody do that, apart from keeping up with popular claims of an older earth?

Because nothing in the bible indicates the earth is only 6000 years old. The dry land is 6000 years old. That is biblical.  Therefore because young earthers are so certain about something not even contained in the bible, its possible that they are taking on popular Christian claims without concern for what the bible actually says. The bible itself claims that dry land was created 6000 years ago. The bible makes no such claims about the planet. I am a bible literalist, not a Christian populist.

[Kan]

1 minute ago, ARGOSY said:

Because nothing in the bible indicates the earth is only 6000 years old. The dry land is 6000 years old. That is biblical.  Therefore because young earthers are so certain about something not even contained in the bible, its possible that they are taking on popular Christian claims without concern for what the bible actually says. The bible itself claims that dry land was created 6000 years ago. The bible makes no such claims about the planet. I am a bible literalist, not a Christian populist.

But you've made the definition of "planet" as opposed to land haven't you? 

If you have that definition, then of course...you would read - "planet before earth" 

Why would God name the earth on the day it was made?

"In the beginning God made heaven and earth" then it goes into more detail how it is done, and so on day three, God forms the earth, and names it. 

But you read that, the earth was raised out of the water... there's nothing wrong with that. But remember that the lights on the fourth day were put in the firmament. So if there was a separation of the waters, you have water above the sun. Which still remains true, only it is the waters invisible. See Romans 1:20.

God made things out of nothing preexisting so far as we are concerned. That's the whole point of creative power, it does not need a preexisting earth. And He also used powers which we cannot fathom or see, to accomplish a material world for us. The Genesis account allows for that thought.

Sure, God may have made the earth before creation week, but no, that can't be true, for in six days God did it all, that is clear throughout the Bible, when speaking of it.

[ARGOSY]

1 hour ago, Kan said:

But you've made the definition of "planet" as opposed to land haven't you? 

If you have that definition, then of course...you would read - "planet before earth" 

Why would God name the earth on the day it was made?

"In the beginning God made heaven and earth" then it goes into more detail how it is done, and so on day three, God forms the earth, and names it. 

But you read that, the earth was raised out of the water... there's nothing wrong with that. But remember that the lights on the fourth day were put in the firmament. So if there was a separation of the waters, you have water above the sun. Which still remains true, only it is the waters invisible. See Romans 1:20.

God made things out of nothing preexisting so far as we are concerned. That's the whole point of creative power, it does not need a preexisting earth. And He also used powers which we cannot fathom or see, to accomplish a material world for us. The Genesis account allows for that thought.

Sure, God may have made the earth before creation week, but no, that can't be true, for in six days God did it all, that is clear throughout the Bible, when speaking of it.

You  say that I have "made the definition of "planet" as opposed to land haven't you?"   

Not at all, the bible says "erets" means the land, not me:  v10, God called the dry ground "ERETS"       God is giving the meaning for ERETS:   dry ground   (not earth)

And everyone nowadays associates the word "earth" with planet earth, I didn't make up that association, it is the common modern meaning of the word earth. When the KJV was translated, it was not the common meaning, the word "erets" and the word "earth" were very interchangeable at that time. ie the KJV was correct in those days, before the meaning of "earth" changed.

Wherever you see the word erets, its better to use the word "land". Sure when the whole continental landmass , ALL land is referred to , this becomes vuirtually synonymous with our modern planetary view , so there is some interchange. But because Genesis 1:10 already definies the word, let us stick to the biblical definition than our own definition. Genesis 1 then becomes In the beginning God made the sky and the land. 

 

Regarding the stars, sun and moon as per creation day 4,  the Hebrew word asah  is used.  This can mean  "created" or "produced" or "observed". The stars and sun were visibly produced , ie a few days after light became visible on the surface of the waters, the stars and sun and moon could be seen as well. God produced them in the sky above the land/seas. They could be observed. 

 

 

 

[Guest Teditis]

According to several online lexicons, the word "Eret" can also mean earth (planet) as well as land.

Earth:

urth ('adhamah, ‘erets, ‘aphar; ge, oikoumene):

In a hilly limestone country like Palestine, the small amount of iron oxide in the rocks tends to be oxidized, and thereby to give a prevailing reddish color to the soil. This is especially the case on relatively barren hills where there is little organic matter present to prevent reddening and give a more blackish tinge.

‘Adhamah (compare ‘adham, "a man," and Adam) is from ‘adham, "to be red," and is used in the senses: "earth" (Ex 20:24), "land" (Ps 105:35), a "land" or country (Isa 14:2), "ground" (Ge 4:11), "the earth" (Ge 7:4).

The word most in use is ‘erets, undoubtedly from a most ancient root occurring in many languages, as English "earth," German Erde, Arabic ‘ard. It is used in most of the senses of ‘adhamah, but less as "soil" and more as "the earth" as a part of the universe; frequently with shamayim, "heavens," as in Ge 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

‘Aphar and its root word and derivatives are closely paralleled in the Arabic, and refer mainly to "dust" or "dry earth" (compare Arabic ‘afir, "to be of the color of dust"; ‘afar "dust"; ya‘fur, "a gazelle"; Hebrew ‘opher, "a gazelle"). Compare Ge 2:7: "Yahweh God formed man of the dust of the ground"; Job 2:12: ".... sprinkled dust upon their heads"; Ps 104:29: ".... they die, and return to their dust"; Ge 18:27: "dust and ashes."

In the Septuagint and New Testament, ge is used in nearly all cases, oikoumene being used a few times for the "habitable earth," as in Lu 21:26 the King James Version.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/search/Dictionary/viewTopic.cfm?topic=IT0002841

[enoob57]

10 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

 

The Nt was written in Greek. I am not sure why you are using common Greek usage of words to explain the meaning of Hebrew words.

As for the Old Testament:

Isa 45:12

12 I have made the earth (erets/land) , and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

 

This planet earth was a ball of ocean.  God made the land, and created man upon it.

The KJV is the only accurate translation.  At that time the word "earth" meant soil/land in English.  Since then the English word has changed meaning, yet translators have incorrectly carried on using the word "earth" which now means "planet earth".  God created dry land, and placed man on that land. The actual Hebrew should read like this:

⁹ And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry ground appear: and it was so.¹⁰ And God called the dry ground "land"; and the gathering together of the waters called he seas: and God saw that it was good.

God created the earth day one... period the other days were for design that pleased Him as He went. To make
it any other sense is to be motivated by an agenda outside the hermeneutic of written intent... Period  All this
hoop thru hoop stuff to support an agenda of evolutionary thought is fraught with man elevating himself above
the Scripture and re-writing to accommodate...