Young Earth/Old Earth

[johnc5055]

3 minutes ago, other one said:

he has posted a quite interesting article that it appears he didn't write himself....   and that is against the rules here for the most part.

The article itself is pretty nice from my perspective.   Occasionally I forget to put some copy/paste origin on posts here and appreciate it when people bring it to my attention.....   I was attempting to pass forward the same to someone else.

Thanks other one. I didn't realize there were any rules regarding cutting and pasting information. I have seen it done here before so I assumed it would be okay as long as I did not misrepresent the authorship. It was not my intent to stray from the rules. I stopped short of posting the bibliography and the website because I did not think it was relevant to the point and the article is quite long by itself.

[kwikphilly]

Ahh,thanks other one,john.,,,,,,now I will read the article                    Love,Kwik   (yes,jkoh,,,,agree,very long winded)

[kwikphilly]

More (not new) theories to theorize about the theory that theories are just theories,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,lol

[kwikphilly]

Perhaps we can start by looking at it for what it is,,,"younger"than what we were taught to believe in grammar school or the popular consensus demanded by our limited knowledge & inaccurate measures & testing ?

  Is several thousands of years really "young",,,yes,in comparison to "millions of years",,,,,but without comparison,no,,,,,,thousands of years is very old indeed & the more technologically advanced we become the more we see that what we find happening to everything on our planet at such a "rapid rate" is pointing to a "younger planet" than we thought it was,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,just my thoughts................                      Love,Kwik
 

[Ezra]

4 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,I still have no clue what is going on here

It looks like some are trying to find a different reason to believe in a young earth, based on physics.  For those who take the biblical account (including Bible chronology) literally, the earth is relatively young.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

46 minutes ago, Ezra said:

It looks like some are trying to find a different reason to believe in a young earth, based on physics.  For those who take the biblical account (including Bible chronology) literally, the earth is relatively young.

That's been the subject of much debate here.  This is your opinion and not fact.  You are not taking the Biblical account of creation literally.  I'll take God's word over yours always.

[Ezra]

28 minutes ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

That's been the subject of much debate here.  This is your opinion and not fact.  You are not taking the Biblical account of creation literally.  I'll take God's word over yours always.

What makes you think I am not taking the biblical account literally? The earth is approximately 6,000 years old according to Bible chronology.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

1 minute ago, Ezra said:

What makes you think I am not taking the biblical account literally? The earth is approximately 6,000 years old according to Bible chronology.

Genesis 1:1-2New American Standard Bible (NASB)

The Creation

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. ² The earth was ^[a]formless and void, and darkness was over the ^[b]surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was ^[c]moving over the ^[d]surface of the waters.

Footnotes:

1. Genesis 1:2 Or a waste and emptiness
2. Genesis 1:2 Lit face of
3. Genesis 1:2 Or hovering
4. Genesis 1:2 Lit face of

Cross references:

1. Genesis 1:1 : Ps 102:25; Is 40:21; John 1:1, 2; Heb 1:10
2. Genesis 1:1 : Ps 89:11; 90:2; Acts 17:24; Rom 1:20; Heb 11:3
3. Genesis 1:1 : Job 38:4; Is 42:5; 45:18; Rev 4:11
4. Genesis 1:2 : Jer 4:23
5. Genesis 1:2 : Job 38:9
6. Genesis 1:2 : Ps 104:30; Is 40:13, 14
7. Genesis 1:2 : Deut 32:11; Is 31:5

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation

Source: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1:1-2&version=NASB

We have this discussion on many other threads but I'll repeat myself here because you are denying the truth of God's word.  In verse one, we have the beginning of creation.  The Biblical cross references above go into more detail about this creation activity.  The second verse picks up after a judgment on the inhabitants of the first creation.  We find out details later in the Bible.  Since God doesn't make junk and He see's His creation as good, verse 2 must refer to a righteous judgment placed on earth.  A word study of the text reveals a different word used for create in verse 1, than used in subsequent verses.  This is because starting with verse 3, we have a reforming of the earth from the original judged state.  Verse 2 is the bridge between the first creation, and our creation.  Q.E.D.

I suggest you read up on the subject using resources like Unger's Bible Commentary, Old Testament (2 volumes), The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Old and New Testaments (2 volumes), Dr. Steven Dill's book In the Beginnings, Theologians like Dr. Gleason Archer, Dr. Charles Hodge, Dr. Benjamin B. Warfield, Dr. John Ankerberg, Dr. Norman Geisler, Dr. Walter Kaiser, Dr. J. I. Packer, Dr. J. P. Moreland, Dr. Wayne Grudem (general editor of the ESV Bible), Dr. William Lane Craig, Lee Strobel and a host of others too numerous to name.  Get back to me when you read their material on the subject.  Until then, shalom.

[kwikphilly]

Blessings SavedOne

    So how old do you think our earth is?                             With love-in Christ,Kwik

[RustyAngeL]

6 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm,I still have no clue what is going on here

It all sounds muddled and pointless to me.