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

[BeyondET]

11 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

This is a restoration, not a creation.

Actually, we don't know HOW or WHY the earth BECAME an uninhabited wasteland.  We just know it did.

You can't have an earth that is formless.

?

We do know from the waters (hydrogen and oxygen) as stated in scripture. The waters below God called seas and the dryland is called earth.

Earth broken down to single atoms, the whole collect of those atoms is still earth but can't be inhabitable wasteland of floating atoms.

Edited May 11, 2023 by BeyondET

[BeyondET]

12 hours ago, teddyv said:

I would argue that the contemporary creation myths of the time are far more compelling for the imagery being stated in the opening verses of Genesis. The allusion to the waters of chaos is a common trope of the time. I believe this is more honouring to the literature and worldviews of the time, rather than reading through a lens bathed in Modernity. Interestingly, instead of these waters being the results of a cosmic battle (i.e. Marduk and Tiamat), Genesis just starts off with the waters and God hovering over the waters, then bringing forth the earth and universe.

I was trying to be a bit generous with Ken Ham. But his organization is becoming more and more cult-like. Of course, they are more about culture war at this point.

I like that teddyv, the chaos of the waters.

Earth came from the waters, more directly waters below after separation where seas and dryland called earth resides.

Interesting the waters above are only mentioned twice. When God was hovering over all the waters and when the lower waters was separated from the waters above.

Edited May 11, 2023 by BeyondET

[FreeGrace]

5 hours ago, BeyondET said:

FreeGrace said: 

This is a restoration, not a creation.

Actually, we don't know HOW or WHY the earth BECAME an uninhabited wasteland.  We just know it did.

You can't have an earth that is formless.

We do know from the waters (hydrogen and oxygen) as stated in scripture. The waters below God called seas and the dryland is called earth.

Earth broken down to single atoms, the whole collect of those atoms is still earth but can't be inhabitable wasteland of floating atoms.

Your response fails to address my point.  No object can be "formless".  That is physically impossible.  Forget your atoms and molecules.  Even water has form.  It fills whatever contains it.  

In space, without gravity, water FORMS a perfect sphere.  Ask any astronaut.

All of which proves that 'formless' is a very poor translation of "tohu" in Gen 1:2.  The earth was NEVER "formless" and God never had to form it.  It was formed WHEN He created the earth.  He created a planet called earth.  Planets are spherical.  Can you prove that there are planets or moons that are formless?

If you can see something, it HAS FORM.

I don't understand why anyone would argue against this.  Maybe it's just too obvious.

[FreeGrace]

5 hours ago, BeyondET said:

I like that teddyv, the chaos of the waters.

Earth came from the waters, more directly waters below after separation where seas and dryland called earth resides.

Interesting the waters above are only mentioned twice. When God was hovering over all the waters and when the lower waters was separated from the waters above.

Gen 1:2 -  Now (But) the earth was (became) formless and empty (an uninhabited wasteland), darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

I heard from a pastor many years ago who had 5 years of seminary Hebrew say that "the waters" in the plural carried the connotation of melting water.  This is indicated by the Hebrew word "hovering", which is also used of a bird brooding over her eggs, so they will hatch.

Deut 32:11 - "Like an eagle that stirs up its nest, That hovers over its young, He spread His wings and caught them, He carried them on His pinions.

Jer 17:11 - “As a partridge that broods but does not hatch, So is he who gets riches, but not by right;  It will leave him in the midst of his days, And at his end he will be a fool.”

 

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance

gather, sit 

A primitive root, to brood over eggs or young -- gather, sit.

So, v.2 shows that the Holy Spirit hovered/brooded over the earth, melting the waters.  This supports an ancient ice age.  That's why there was "darkness over the face of the deep" in v.2.  If the earth was packed in very thick ice, of course there would be darkness on its surface.

[ChristB4us]

On 5/9/2023 at 5:51 PM, FreeGrace said:

The actual Hebrew says "but the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland" in v.2.  The earth became chaos.  It wasn't created that way.  And Isa 45:18 makes that point.

@BeyondET & @teddyv

I see no reasoning for you to interpret that as "but the earth became an unhabitable wasteland" in verse 2 when you went on to say that the land was underwater until day 3.  So how can it be written as "but the earth became an unhabitable wasteland?"

I'd still say the earth did not exist on day one as nothing was there but water in the whole universe of that existence.

Day 2 was the beginning of the creation of earth as a wtaer planet with an upper atmosphere.

Day three God spoke land into existence as the earth was finally created that third day, teeming with plant life.

As for Isaiah 45:18, I had boldened the portion of that verse where God brought that earth out of nothing in establishing the earth, meaning it had not existed at all.

Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.

Quote

I think the major difficulty with YECs is that it seems they can't dissociate evolution from the idea of an old earth.  Even in this thread, they have brought up evolution.  One even went so far as to claim (total speculation) that the geologist Lyell was somehow in cahoots with Darwin, who hadn't been born yet when Lyell came up with his "geologic columns" to determine earth age.

The problem is how corrupted our education system is that the influence of evolutionary thinking can permeate through our perception of our reality without referring to its origin as evolutionary thinking.

I do not know about Lyell, but as far as the geologic column goes, the order of that geologic column does not exists any where in the world except in their imaginations.  So to determine the earth age from that is a fairy tale result and mayhap had influence on Darwin in his perception of the origin of life as he tried to fit his imaginings of the phenomenon of macroevolution into that imaginary time frame.  And so the fairy tale of how old the earth is continues in opposing the Bible.

Edited May 11, 2023 by ChristB4us

[BeyondET]

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Your response fails to address my point.  No object can be "formless".  That is physically impossible.  Forget your atoms and molecules.  Even water has form.  It fills whatever contains it.  

In space, without gravity, water FORMS a perfect sphere.  Ask any astronaut.

All of which proves that 'formless' is a very poor translation of "tohu" in Gen 1:2.  The earth was NEVER "formless" and God never had to form it.  It was formed WHEN He created the earth.  He created a planet called earth.  Planets are spherical.  Can you prove that there are planets or moons that are formless?

If you can see something, it HAS FORM.

I don't understand why anyone would argue against this.  Maybe it's just too obvious.

My atoms hmm, water is atoms of hydrogen and oxygen.

A jar is formless until the clay is molded into a jar.

God had a plan for earth even before it was formed.

Edited May 11, 2023 by BeyondET

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, BeyondET said:

FreeGrace said: 

Your response fails to address my point.  No object can be "formless".  That is physically impossible.  Forget your atoms and molecules.  Even water has form.  It fills whatever contains it.  

In space, without gravity, water FORMS a perfect sphere.  Ask any astronaut.

My atoms hmm, water is atoms of hydrogen and oxygen.

Yes, your atoms.  But rather than get all distracted with your atoms, can you focus on the FACT that all objects HAVE a form?

1 hour ago, BeyondET said:

A jar is formless until the clay is molded into a jar.

Nope.  A jar, being an object, HAS FORM.  When clay or water is put into the jar, the clay or water takes on the FORM of the jar.  It seems you're still not real clear on the FACT that all objects have a FORM.  Which easily proves that the translation of Gen 1:2 is in error.  There is no way the earth was EVER formless.  Not even possible.

1 hour ago, BeyondET said:

God had a plan for earth even before it was formed.

Well, that's obvious.  God never does anything without a plan.  How does your statement relate to this discussion?

And why haven't you addressed the FACT that ALL objects have a FORM?

[FreeGrace]

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

@FreeGrace

The earth was without form and void would mean it was non-existing.

Exactly!!!  Which has been my point all along.  ALL objects HAVE a FORM.  Therefore, the traditional translation of Gen 1:2 is in ERROR.  The earth wasn't formless ever.

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Water was all that was there the first day.  Water was not created that day, but light appeared for us to designate that 24 hour day as we know it each day with evening and morning that day and every day after that.

Even water has a form.  Since it is a liquid, it always takes the form of whatever container it is in.  However, in space, without gravity, it always becomes a perfect sphere.

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Then God used the water to start creating the earth by having a water planet with an upper atmosphere the second day.

Except there is NO evidence for this imagination.  God STARTED with a planet in v.1.  And then, BECAUSE the earth BECAME an uninhabitable wasteland, He restored it in 6 days BEFORE He created man to live on the planet.

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

The third day when God spoke, land appeared out of nowhere because God spoke it into existence along with teeming fruitful seed bearing plant life.

No.  Rather, during the restoration, God moved the water and land around.  It never "appeared out of nowhere".  

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Now one could contend that the land had to existed underneath the water, but then where did the mature plant life comes from bearing fruits and seeds that day?  Was it under the water too?  No.  So if they were spoken into existence, then the land was too.

God CREATED the plant life.  Just as He created the animals.  You know, all the flora and fauna.  Created during the restoration of the planet.  God did NOTHING about the FORM of the planet.  It was always a sphere.

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

The fourth day God spoke the universe into existence and filled in the gaps with her light to shine on the earth that day to give for signs, seasons, days and years.

No.  v.1 speaks of original creation of the heavens and earth.

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

There was no wasteland under the water planet that second day.

No one was there to confirm that claim.  v.2 SAYS the earth BECAME a wasteland.  You have a choice.  Believe that or not.

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

It was a new land being spoken into existence that third day and hardly never a wasteland at all when teeming with plant life that very same day.

Rather, the planet had been  created in v.1 and BECAME a wasteland that was uninhabitable.  God restored the planet so man could live on it.

20 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

Just sharing what I read in the scriptures as no pre Adamic age had ever existed before that first day of the creation of that first day by that light that had appeared.

Again, there is a choice about what v.2 actually said.  One can believe the unbelievable idea that a planet can have no form, or one can believe that the originally created spherical planet BECAME a wasteland and God restored it for man to live on.

v.2 describes the earth in a very deep ice pack, which is supported by science that has noted an ice age.  And the Holy Spirit melted the ice before the planet could be restored.

Fact or fable.  Your choice.

[FreeGrace]

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

@BeyondET & @teddyv

The problem is how corrupted our education system is that the influence of evolutionary thinking can permeate through our perception of our reality without referring to its origin as evolutionary thinking.

We don't need no stinkin' evolution to understand that the age of the earth is WAY OLDER than Adam.  The very concept wasn't even introduced into culture until WAY AFTER Lyell determined the age of the earth and Chalmers gave an explanation of how that could be.

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

I do not know about Lyell, but as far as the geologic column goes, the order of that geologic column does not exists any where in the world except in their imaginations.

OK, so you're smarter, more trained than geologists?

4 hours ago, ChristB4us said:

  So to determine the earth age from that is a fairy tale result and mayhap had influence on Darwin in his perception of the origin of life as he tried to fit his imaginings of the phenomenon of macroevolution into that imaginary time frame.  And so the fairy tale of how old the earth is continues in opposing the Bible.

Interesting opinion.  But just another opinion.

btw, carbon 14 dating is claimed to be accurate out to 10-15,000 years.  Since scholars have tracked human history backward and believe that Adam was on earth about 6,000 years ago, then all measurements by carbon 14 SHOULD back that up.  But they don't.  

Even if you reject the geologic columns (bet you didn't even research it), you can't reject the FACTS about carbon 14 dating.  

Why is it so HARD to accept that the earth is way older than Adam, since it changes NO doctrines?  Why the resistance?  And it has nothing to do with evolution in any way.

Edited May 11, 2023 by FreeGrace

[ChristB4us]

5 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

Exactly!!!  Which has been my point all along.  ALL objects HAVE a FORM.  Therefore, the traditional translation of Gen 1:2 is in ERROR.  The earth wasn't formless ever.

Even water has a form.  Since it is a liquid, it always takes the form of whatever container it is in.  However, in space, without gravity, it always becomes a perfect sphere.

Like two ships passing in the night.  

All that was there was water.... no form of earth and thus no planet earth.

You keep citing error without ever entertaining the notion that you may be in error.

As for space without gravity as it always become a perfect sphere; that is only assuming the reality of the laws of physics existing back then before creation began.

Day 2 was Him creating gravity when separating the upper atmosphere from the water planet He had created below.

Quote

 

Except there is NO evidence for this imagination.  God STARTED with a planet in v.1.  And then, BECAUSE the earth BECAME an uninhabitable wasteland, He restored it in 6 days BEFORE He created man to live on the planet.

 

Since the universe got created the fourth day, then the creation of earth did not begin until the second day and was completed the third day.

Again, you will not find that order of the geologic column any where on earth for why it exists only in the imaginations.

The Lord has to help you to see verse 1 as the topic and the following verses on how God did it to the end conclusion in how He created the heaven and the earth in Genesis 2:3.

Then He began another topic about the generations of mankind in Genesis 2:4 and what happened specifically that 6th day of creation when no man was formed yet to till the ground for why God watered the earth with a mist; hence a greenhouse earth.

So far, we agree to disagree.