Adam and Eve as Genealogical vs Genetic Ancestors

[Guest shiloh357]

7 minutes ago, SkyWriting said:

Hows about you provide your favorite passages about a young earth?

-Rule of thumb, every truth in scripture is covered by multiple authors.-

 

 

Genesis 49:26 The blessings of your father are mighty beyond the blessings of my parents, up to the bounties of the everlasting hills. May they be on the head of Joseph, and on the brow of him who was set apart from his brothers.

Habakkuk 3:6 He stood and measured the earth; he looked and shook the nations; then the eternal mountains were scattered; the everlasting hills sank low. His were the everlasting ways.

Psalm 76:4 You are radiant with light, more majestic than 

Thou enlightenest wonderfully from the everlasting hills.

 

Deuteronomy 33:15 with the choicest gifts of the ancient mountains

and the fruitfulness of the everlasting hills;

 

None of those verses are an attempt at establishing a cosmology, though.   They use poetic imagery and hyperbole to make a point.

[Guest shiloh357]

1 minute ago, SkyWriting said:

Jesus created wine that seems aged by any standards that people would use. 

Jesus "Healed" people......as if they had had weeks of rehab. 

"Time" is a huge part of almost every miracle in scripture. 

Jesus simply restored people back to health or gave them new health.   Has nothing to do with age.

Jesus created wine instantly.  It was new wine.  And I am going by God's standards and the biblical text, not by man's standards.

[SkyWriting]

1 minute ago, shiloh357 said:

None of those verses are an attempt at establishing a cosmology, though.   They use poetic imagery and hyperbole to make a point.

Every Truth in scripture is explained by multiple authors spread over time. 

A young earth does not qualify. 

[SkyWriting]

3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Jesus simply restored people back to health or gave them new health.   Has nothing to do with age.

Jesus created wine instantly.  It was new wine.  And I am going by God's standards and the biblical text, not by man's standards.

I have no problem with that.  I object to "young earth" becasue it attempts to prove the earth is young
by mans standards.  And by mans standards, the Cosmos is not young. 

 

Besides, there is no scriptural support.  No scholar has ever agreed with any other scholar
on the correct age.  That's hardly a biblical truth when no two people can agree. 

Edited November 6, 2017 by SkyWriting

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, SkyWriting said:

Every Truth in scripture is explained by multiple authors spread over time.

That is an over-generalized statement.    The Bible, is unified in its testimony and there is no testimony of a millions of years-old earth.   You have not provided ONE Scripture that establishes your point.   All you have done is cherry pick certain verses and assign your subjective values to them.  

So far, you are batting zero on biblical evidence.

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, SkyWriting said:

I have no problem with that.  I object to "young earth" becasue it attempts to prove the earth is young
by mans standards.  And by mans standards, the Cosmos is not young. 

That is a self-defeating argument.   How can attempts to prove the earth be according according to man's standards, if by man's standards the earth is NOT young????

Our appeal  to a young earth is based on Scripture, not man's standards.

And I would also note that if you have to appeal to man's standards to prove the earth is not young, then your operating from a secular and not biblical framework.   You making the Bible subservient and inferior to man and making man's standards the standard against which the Bible is judged. 

[SkyWriting]

3 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

All you have done is cherry pick certain verses and assign your subjective values to them. 

So then you never tried to determine the correct age yourself?   That's pretty sketchy for truth.

 

 

[SkyWriting]

6 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

And I would also note that if you have to appeal to man's standards to prove the earth is not young, then your operating from a secular and not biblical framework.   You making the Bible subservient and inferior to man and making man's standards the standard against which the Bible is judged. 

Exactly.   And that's why I object to the young earth creationist position,
which I no longer hold. 

Simple reading says the earth is ancient, the Garden of Eden seems old, Adam seems old, Eve seems aged, every thing mentioned in scripture has the appearance of age, so I expect the cosmos to look ancient as well.  An ancient Cosmos is biblical. So it's no surprise that is what people believe. 

 

Edited November 6, 2017 by SkyWriting

[SkyWriting]

14 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Jesus simply restored people back to health or gave them new health.   Has nothing to do with age.

Jesus created wine instantly.  It was new wine.  And I am going by God's standards and the biblical text, not by man's standards.

Sure, he gave one blind man eyes.  Likely, and exam would show age appropriate eyes on that man. 

We can expect the Cosmos to look old. 

[SkyWriting]

12 minutes ago, Sojourner414 said:

In Mark 10, if you accept the outright meaning, there's no way that you can get billions or even millions of years out of it.  If earth is millions of years old, then Adam and Eve were created at the end of creation (about 6000 years ago), not the beginning. 

 So just in that verse alone, your "theory" falls apart. And with Genesis 5 and Luke 3: Genesis demonstrates that the timeline from time of creation is not "millions of years". And Luke backs up the literal meaning of Genesis, not only that chapter, but the whole. If Luke 3 treats the Genesis 3 timeline as literal factual history, then all of it is literal, factual history.

I don't object to genealogy.  As long as you agree it is not documenting each person who has lived, then we have no quarrel.