I've changed my mind. I now believe the "earth" is 6k years old

[Roymond]

On 4/28/2018 at 6:09 AM, Guest shiloh357 said:

Brakes on your car that only work 9 times out of 10 are not completely worthless, but you would not put any faith in them. 

I once drove a truck with brakes that failed more often than that;  nevertheless I put my faith in them because mostly they worked, and when they didn't I just had to hit them again, and a few times again after that.

On 4/28/2018 at 6:09 AM, Guest shiloh357 said:

... we need stop treating science as the means by which we judge the accuracy of the Bible.

But that's exactly what people do when they insist that Genesis 1 must be talking about science -- it's a position that says, "If the Bible isn't right about science it isn't true at all!"  That means they're taking science as what is reliable and not just trusting God that the Bible communicates what He wants us to understand.

On 4/28/2018 at 6:09 AM, Guest shiloh357 said:

When people reject a literal interpretation of Scripture what they are doing is asserting authority over Scripture. 

 

When people insist on a literal interpretation of Scripture what they are doing is asserting authority over Scripture.

The way to approach scripture is by asking, "How did the writer understand things?  What kind of literature was he writing?  What would his audience have understood the words to mean?"  And that's absolutely essential because what various parts look like to us in English can be quite different from what it was meant to be.  To assume it is what it appears to be in English is arrogant, resting on a conviction that we are so smart we don't have to ask what God was saying, we just know without studying.

Always keep in mind that nothing in the Bible was written to us, we're just privileged to be reading other people's mail -- and to understand other people's mail, we have to make the effort to understand them.

[Roymond]

On 4/29/2018 at 6:18 AM, Still Alive said:

One thing I find interesting about evolution and the geological history of our planet is that if the dinosaurs they imagine actually existed, they could not support their own weight. And once a bird becomes heavier than around 35-40 lbs, it can no longer fly because when you add a pound of bone, muscle and feather you get less than a pound of extra lift once you reach that point. So the evolutionists try to imaging "gliding monsters" that, if that is all they could do, would easily have become prey to other creatures since they were as vulnerable as a dodo bird if they could only fly. 

i.e. something changed in the meantime. Denser air, less gravity. Who really knows, but something changed. 

We're just now learning to figure out atmospheric pressure millions of years ago.  The numbers aren't solid, but the results so far say the atmospheric density was much, much greater at the time of the dinosaurs.  We're also finding that many dinosaur species spent their lives in swamps and shallow seas where water held up a lot of their weight.

[Roymond]

On 4/29/2018 at 6:33 AM, BeyondET said:

Hmm haven't heard of the hyperbolic curve but I have heard of the (large shear velocity provinces) being a cause of weakening mag field, that some say has happened before about every 1000 years or so.

Something that has amazed me over the last twenty years or so is just how much we've had to unlearn about the earth's magnetic field as well as about that of the sun.  When I finished university, it was believed that the magnetic field was pretty constant except for flipping every million or some years, but now it's known that there isn't even just one magnetic field, there are several, which brings weird results because they can strengthen each other, make the whole thing seem to fluctuate, cause the magnetic poles to drift (or even race, as they seem to be doing presently!).

A scary aspect is that apparently there have been times when almost all the fields have just collapsed at once, resulting in all sorts of bad things for the planet's surface, like increased cancer rates and increased numbers of forest fires and being out in the sunshine turning deadly... all very apocalyptic!

Edited February 28, 2023 by Roymond
fixed typo

[coheir]

3 minutes ago, Roymond said:

Something that has amazed me over the last twenty years or so is just how much we've had to unlearn about the earth's magnetic field as well as about that of the sun.  When I finished university, it was believed that the magnetic field was pretty constant except for flipping every million or some years, but now it's known that there isn't even just one magnetic field, there are several, which brings weird results because they can strengthen each other, make the whole thing seem to fluctuate, cause the magnetic poles to rift (or even race, as they seem to be doing presently!).

A scary aspect is that apparently there have been times when almost all the fields have just collapsed at once, resulting in all sorts of bad things for the planet's surface, like increased cancer rates and increased numbers of forest fires and being out in the sunshine turning deadly... all very apocalyptic!

I have not been to college, I have learned not to believe everything scientist say many times they are pushing theory as fact.

[Retrobyter]

On 4/29/2018 at 8:30 AM, BeyondET said:

Yup that is exactly what that is all three of those, and a bible that spans all intelligence, in the beginning God created heaven(hydrogen) and earth(helium) 

1 breath, 6 days, 14.4 billion years, 

Shalom, BeyondET.

That's just insane. "Heaven" is "Shaamayim" and it means the "skies!" (Two of them!) It's the earth's atmosphere which is mostly NITROGEN! The earth, "'erets", at least the crust which is where we live and grow plants, is mostly SILICON!

Are you even talking about the same PLANET?!

[teddyv]

43 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, BeyondET.

That's just insane. "Heaven" is "Shaamayim" and it means the "skies!" (Two of them!) It's the earth's atmosphere which is mostly NITROGEN! The earth, "'erets", at least the crust which is where we live and grow plants, is mostly SILICON!

Are you even talking about the same PLANET?!

The crust is dominantly oxygen. Silicon is number two.

[Retrobyter]

1 hour ago, teddyv said:

The crust is dominantly oxygen. Silicon is number two.

 

Shalom, teddyv.

Okay, that's fine, but oxygen is highly combinatory. So, there is frequently a mineral or metal added to it. Most sand and glass is made of silicon dioxide (or silicates), and silicates are found in most soils around the world.

In either case, the earth is NOT "helium!"

[FreeGrace]

Since this thread started in 2018, and I haven't read the 13 pages that followed, I'll just jump in here with some observations about what the Bible has to say.

Gen 1:1-2

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 

2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Many translations have "And" at the beginning of v.2, to show a continuation from v.1. iow, "in the beginning" the earth was created AND was "formless and empty".

The Septuagint translated the firs word of v.2 as "But", which is a disjunctive in the Hebrew, I'm told.  So rather than a continuation from v.1, we really have a contrast between v.1 and v.2.  So there's that.  Keep in mind the LXX was translated into Koine Greek about 400 BC by Hebrew scholars who spoke both languages fluently.  

Now, can anyone imagine what an earth that is "formless" would look like?  Neither can I.  In fact, every solid object HAS a form, whether irregular or regular.  What no solid object can be is "formless".  That is in fact, impossible.  So right away, it seems the English translators were clueless as to how to translate "tohu", even though there are a number of places in the OT where that word is found, and the translators had no problem translating as "wasteland", "wasteplace", "uninhabitable desert", etc.  

And there is a contradiction with the "regular" translation in v.2 with Isa 45:18.

"For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earthand made it, He established it and did not create it a waste place (tohu), but formed it to be inhabited ), "I am the LORD, and there is none else."

The contradiction:  Gen 1:2 says the earth WAS created tohu.  Isa 45:18 says God did NOT create the earth tohu.

Regardless of how one wants to translate "tohu", one place says the earth WAS created tohu and another place says the earth was NOT created tohu.

Since the LXX translates the first word in v.2 as "but" we know that there is a contrast to consider.

Then, we must look at the word "was", a verb of existence.  In fact, Hebrew lexicons describe this word as "to exist, to become".  The Hebrew word in general is "hayah".  However, the word takes many forms throughout the OT.  In fact, this word occurs some 3,560 times in the different forms.

Thanks to biblehub.com, one can easily search the entire OT regarding a single form of any word in the Hebrew.  That search will reveal about 111 uses of the EXACT SAME FORM as found in Gen 1:2.  In about 70% of the time, that form is translated as either "become" or "became".  In only about 6% of the time, that form is translated as simply "was".

So, when piecing together all these facts, this is how the 2 verses in Gen should be translated:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and earth, BUT the earth BECAME an UNINHABITABLE WASTELAND.

So, what does all this mean?  The earth is far older than Adam.  It doesn't say how much older, but that is irrelevant.

For the YEC crowd, this is NO defense of evolution.  Rather, it shows that Genesis 1 is about a RESTORATION, rather than original creation, with the exception of v.1.

I categoritically reject any suggestion of evolution, so please don't accuse me of that heresy.

One final fact.  Even the NT supports this, from Heb 11:3.  "By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible."

The word "formed" here is not accurate at all. 

This is a fascinating verse.  The major translations render ‘katartizo’ as “prepared, formed, or framed”.  That is unfortunate, because the word has a significantly different meaning.  It is found 13 times in the NT.

Matt 4:21 and Mark 1:19 used for “mending their nets”

Matt 21:16 used for “perfecting praise out of the mouths of babes”

Luke 6:40 used for “every disciple is not above his master, but one that is perfect shall be like his master”

Rom 9:22 used for “vessels of wrath fitted to destruction”

1 Cor 1:10  used for “perfectly joined”

2 Cor 13:11 used for “be perfect”

Gal 6:1 used for “restore such a one with gentleness”

1 Thess 3:10 used for “might perfect that which is lacking in your faith”

Heb 10:5 used for “a body you have prepared Me”

Heb 11:3  used for “worlds were prepared”

Heb 13:21  used for “make you perfect”

1 Pet 5:10  used for “make you perfect”

To "make perfect" is used in an ethical sense.  But Heb 11:3 isn't an ethical use at all.

 

 

[Neighbor]

17 hours ago, Roymond said:

Always keep in mind that nothing in the Bible was written to us,

God wasn't aware that I would come to exist, and be led of the Holy Spirit to read and be enlightened by His message? And therefore He did not provide for me directly in His word, I am just peaking over someone in the past's shoulder?

Don't think so.

 The Bible from Genesis through to Revelation is the reveal of Yeshua and is understandable to and applicable today, made so by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit  because of God's mercy from everlasting to everlasting. 

[farouk]

3 minutes ago, Neighbor said:

God wasn't aware that I would come to exist, and be led of the Holy Spirit to read and be enlightened by His message? And therefore He did not provide for me directly in His word, I am just peaking over someone in the past's shoulder?

Don't think so.

 The Bible from Genesis through to Revelation is the reveal of Yeshua and is understandable to and applicable today, made so by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit  because of God's mercy from everlasting to everlasting. 

Hi @Neighbor I do love what Paul says in Philippians 1.6: "He that hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ".