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

[FreeGrace]

5 hours ago, BeyondET said:

FreeGrace said: 

How did they translate "hayah"?

Why would you choose such a word?  🤔 

What a strange question.  That's the word, though not in that form, that was translated as "was" in v.2.  I asked my question because you were telling me how the translators of the Septuagint translated some words.

So, are you just punting because you don't know the answer?

The verb "hayah" is the verb of existence;  to be or BECOME.  That's how my lexicon describes it.  The word is found in a number of different forms, BUT, when looking at the EXACT SAME FORM of that word in v.2, we find that in 70% of the 111 verses it is translated as "become/became".  And in only 6% of the verses it was translated as "was".  

AND, using the correct verb translation REMOVES the GLARING CONTRADICTION even if such a big contradiction is no big deal to you.  It is to me.

The TT has God creating the earth tohu.  But Isa 45:18 SAYS that He didn't create the earth tohu.  

If you are comfortable with contradictions in the Bible, that's your business.  I take a very different view.

[FreeGrace]

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Hi all, I was just browsing through this forum (so am not across everyone's arguments) when I saw this comment and decided to but-in.

There is no contradiction between Isa 45:18 and Gen 1:2 - regardless of the translation.

According to the straight-forward context, Isa 45:18 speaks to intention and purpose - i.e. the earth was not created "to be" uninhabited (or "empty"). That does not mean (or even imply) that there was no part of the creation process when the earth was uninhabited.

The end of v.2 actually says there was "darkness over the face of the deep" and the Holy Spirit "hovered over the waters", which indicates the process of melting water.  So we have the Holy Spirit hovering, which in biblical usage overlaps with brooding, so it shows the Holy Spirit hovering to melt the ice pack.  And v.2 actually says the at the time of the 6 day process WAS uninhabited.  Even in the traditional translation (TT).

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Gen 1:2 simply states that immediately after the earth was brought into being, it was unformed and empty. The narrative then goes on to describe how God both formed and filled the earth.

There is no object that has no form.  Every object has a form.  And the various translations say "without form" or "formless", so that eliminates the idea that the earth simply needed some "forming" to be dome.  

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Therefore, there is no logical contradiction between these two verses. When God created the earth, it was initially formless and empty, but He did not create it to remain that way.

v.11-2  God created the earth v.2 and the earth WAS tohu

Isa 45:18  He didn't create the earth tohu

Without a doubt, the TT creates a contradiction with Isa 45:18.

New American Standard Bible
For this is what the LORD says, He who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it and did not create it as a waste place, but formed it to be inhabited): “I am the LORD, and there is no one else.

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Given the actual Hebrew text, "the earth BECAME an uninhabited WASTELAND" is a highly presumptuous translation.

The exact form of the verb "hayah" in v.2 is translated as "become or became" in 70% of all the other verses with that same form.  111 of them.  That is not presumption.  That shows the most common translation of that form of the verb.

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Firstly, there is no internal evidence from the text that 'heyatha' (Hb) should deviate from its common meaning 'existed' (i.e. "was"), and rather be translated as the much rarer "BECAME".

Nope.  That form of the verb IS translated as "become" or "became" in 70% of all of its uses in the OT.  Hardly "much rarer".  In fact, the MOST COMMON translation of the same form found in v.2.

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

It's not impossible, but "BECAME" is not the natural reading of the text. And there is certainly not enough evidence for anyone to insist that "BECAME" is the "corrected translation".

Apparently what throws people off is that God gave NO details about what caused the earth to become tohu, or any details of what happened.  

btw, the LXX begins v.2 with "but", a conjunction of contrast, showing or supporting the fact that the earth became something else from how it was created.

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Secondly, even if one does insist on "BECAME" as the correct translation, it could still just mean that this is how the earth came into being after God commanded it. In Genesis 1:3, "God said, let there be light, and there was (heyatha) light". This could be translated, 'God said, let there be light, and light "BECAME" (or arrived, or came to be)'.

No it can't.  "BUT the earth BECAME an UNINHABITABLE WASTELAND".  This is how the key words are translated elsewhere in the OT.  Again, "became" is FAR more common a translation than "was" given that exact same form as found in v.2.

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Finally, the negative connotation for 'tohu va bohu' (Hb) is cultural, not textual. With supporting context, it could very well mean "an uninhabited WASTELAND". But in the absence of such a context, it just means unformed and empty.

Why do we need "supporting context"?  God gave us what He gave us.  He isn't obligated to explain everything.  And simply looking at how the key words in v.2 were translated elsewhere we see that something happened that God didn't explain or detail.

38 minutes ago, Tristen said:

Therefore, the translation you are claiming to be the "corrected translation" is highly presumptuous, and highly influenced by external biases.

Can you point out any "external biases" in my posts?

All I've done is look at how the key words in v.2 were translated elsewhere in the OT.  That sure isn't anything close to an "external bias".

And the MOST COMMON translation of the same form of the verb "hayah" in v.2 is translated as "become" or "became" in 70% of all occurrences.

Again, no external biases.  

[NConly]

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

The end of v.2 actually says there was "darkness over the face of the deep" and the Holy Spirit "hovered over the waters", which indicates the process of melting water.  So we have the Holy Spirit hovering, which in biblical usage overlaps with brooding, so it shows the Holy Spirit hovering to melt the ice pack.  And v.2 actually says the at the time of the 6 day process WAS uninhabited.  Even in the traditional translation (TT).

There is no object that has no form.  Every object has a form.  And the various translations say "without form" or "formless", so that eliminates the idea that the earth simply needed some "forming" to be dome.  

v.11-2  God created the earth v.2 and the earth WAS tohu

Isa 45:18  He didn't create the earth tohu

Without a doubt, the TT creates a contradiction with Isa 45:18.

New American Standard Bible
For this is what the LORD says, He who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it and did not create it as a waste place, but formed it to be inhabited): “I am the LORD, and there is no one else.

The exact form of the verb "hayah" in v.2 is translated as "become or became" in 70% of all the other verses with that same form.  111 of them.  That is not presumption.  That shows the most common translation of that form of the verb.

Nope.  That form of the verb IS translated as "become" or "became" in 70% of all of its uses in the OT.  Hardly "much rarer".  In fact, the MOST COMMON translation of the same form found in v.2.

Apparently what throws people off is that God gave NO details about what caused the earth to become tohu, or any details of what happened.  

btw, the LXX begins v.2 with "but", a conjunction of contrast, showing or supporting the fact that the earth became something else from how it was created.

No it can't.  "BUT the earth BECAME an UNINHABITABLE WASTELAND".  This is how the key words are translated elsewhere in the OT.  Again, "became" is FAR more common a translation than "was" given that exact same form as found in v.2.

Why do we need "supporting context"?  God gave us what He gave us.  He isn't obligated to explain everything.  And simply looking at how the key words in v.2 were translated elsewhere we see that something happened that God didn't explain or detail.

Can you point out any "external biases" in my posts?

All I've done is look at how the key words in v.2 were translated elsewhere in the OT.  That sure isn't anything close to an "external bias".

And the MOST COMMON translation of the same form of the verb "hayah" in v.2 is translated as "become" or "became" in 70% of all occurrences.

Again, no external biases.  

Ice has form in or out of a container . But I don't see Ice in any verse in Gensis. Help

[BeyondET]

6 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

What fire?

Show me what I've "sliced or diced".  If you are comfortable with verses that CONDTRADICT each other, that's your choice.  I KNOW the Bible is NEVER contradicted, and it is easily proved that the key words in v.2 are translated differently in the other verses they are found in the OT.  

Also, EVERY object HAS form.  So the translation of "formless" or "without form" is ridiculous and impossible.

v.2  BUT the earth BECAME an UNINHABITABLE WASTELAND.

How 'bout that!  I never said I could.

So you believe that God created an invisible earth in v.1?  Seriously?

However, I'll play along.  Even if He did, where in the narrative in ch 1 do we read about God packing atoms and molecules together so the angels could see what He was creating?

Seems to me all the "slicing and dicing" is on your side.

Spoke from the fire, which you played dodge ball with.

I think your claims are melting like ice.

[DeighAnn]

7 hours ago, Tristen said:

Gen 1:2 simply states that immediately after the earth was brought into being, it was unformed and empty. The narrative then goes on to describe how God both formed and filled the earth.

Therefore, there is no logical contradiction between these two verses. When God created the earth, it was initially formless and empty, but He did not create it to remain that way.

When was or will be this?

19My bowels, my bowels! I am pained at my very heart; my heart maketh a noise in me; I cannot hold my peace, because thou hast heard, O my soul, the sound of the trumpet, the alarm of war.

20Destruction upon destruction is cried; for the whole land is spoiled: suddenly are my tents spoiled, and my curtains in a moment.

21How long shall I see the standard, and hear the sound of the trumpet?

22For my people is foolish, they have not known me; they are sottish children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.

23I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

24I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.

25I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.

26I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.

27For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.

28For this shall the earth mourn, and the heavens above be black: because I have spoken it, I have purposed it, and will not repent, neither will I turn back from it.

[FreeGrace]

9 hours ago, NConly said:

Ice has form in or out of a container . But I don't see Ice in any verse in Gensis. Help

I heard a pastor with 5 years of seminary Hebrew say that the word "waters" in the plural meant melting water.  

Gen 1:2 - 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.

The bolded words precede the "waters".  If the earth was packed in ice, there would be "darkness over the surface of the deep".  Then, the word "hovering" has overlap with "brooding over", which is what birds do to hatch their young, by their warm bodies.

When put all together, it shows that the earth was packed in ice, making it uninhabitable.  And the restoration began by melting the ice.  

Not only that, but the NT even refers to Genesis 1 as a restoration.

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 Greek word translated 'formed' is 'katartizo', and means "to repair, mend, restore, complete, etc.  The word is used in the gospels of disciples "mending their nets" in Matt 4:21 and Mark 1:19.

[FreeGrace]

5 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Spoke from the fire, which you played dodge ball with.

Could you refresh my memory, please?  Where do you get "spoke with fire"?

5 hours ago, BeyondET said:

I think your claims are melting like ice.

You are free to think whatever you want.  

[FreeGrace]

4 hours ago, DeighAnn said:

23I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

Jer 4:23

American Standard Version
I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
I looked in the earth, and behold, chaos and emptiness, and to the Heavens, and their light is not there

English Revised Version
I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

Good News Translation
I looked at the earth--it was a barren waste; at the sky--there was no light. 

JPS Tanakh 1917
I beheld the earth, And, lo, it was waste and void; And the heavens, and they had no light.

New American Bible
I looked at the earth—it was waste and void; at the heavens—their light had gone out! 
NET Bible
"I looked at the land and saw that it was an empty wasteland. I looked up at the sky, and its light had vanished. 
New Revised Standard Version
I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heavens, and they had no light.New Heart English Bible
I saw the earth, and, look, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.
World English Bible
I saw the earth and, behold, it was waste and void, and the heavens, and they had no light. 
Young's Literal Translation
I looked to the land, and lo, waste and void, And unto the heavens, and their light is not.

This verse is the only other verse in the Bible that contains "tohu wabohu".  And 16 translations render it "waste", "wasteland", "chaos".  More than half of available English translations on biblehub.com.

[FreeGrace]

Let's talk about "earth age".

For the posters who have resisted what I've posted that shows a time gap between Gen 1:1 and 2, and all the "readers" who don't post, I'd like to know WHY it is so necessary to defend the idea of a young earth.  The Young Earth Creationists (YEC).

How does a very old earth threaten anything in the Bible?  What doctrine or doctrines are contradicted?  

I have presented how certain words in Gen 1:2 are translated elsewhere in the Bible, which when placed in v.2 DO show the fact of a time gap.  An unknown time gap.  

I have showed that "tohu" cannot mean "formless/without form" since ALL objects HAVE form, regardless of shape.  Even clouds, liquids, etc have form.  In space, without the effect of gravity, liquids take the form of a perfect sphere.

So God could NOT have "created the earth tohu", since that is impossible.  However, it is not only possible, but TRUE, that God DID NOT create the earth tohu, per Isa 45:18.

So, all you YECs, please explain why the necessity to so strongly try to defend a young earth?  What is the point, given all the facts and words that don't support a young earth?

Further, scienific measurement shows a very old earth.  I'm not talking about the stupid theory of evolution, but actual measurements.  I very strongly reject any and every form of evolution, so please don't use that stupid theory to defend a young earth.

Evolutionary theory DEMANDS an old earth.

But, a very old earth in NO WAY needs or demands evolution.

Finally, Heb 11:3 refers to Genesis 1 as a restoration.  The word "formed" is 'katartizo' in the Greek.  Means to mend, fix, repair, restore, complete.

Thanks.

[DeighAnn]

2 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Jer 4:23

American Standard Version
I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
I looked in the earth, and behold, chaos and emptiness, and to the Heavens, and their light is not there

English Revised Version
I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

Good News Translation
I looked at the earth--it was a barren waste; at the sky--there was no light. 

JPS Tanakh 1917
I beheld the earth, And, lo, it was waste and void; And the heavens, and they had no light.

New American Bible
I looked at the earth—it was waste and void; at the heavens—their light had gone out! 
NET Bible
"I looked at the land and saw that it was an empty wasteland. I looked up at the sky, and its light had vanished. 
New Revised Standard Version
I looked on the earth, and lo, it was waste and void; and to the heavens, and they had no light.New Heart English Bible
I saw the earth, and, look, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.
World English Bible
I saw the earth and, behold, it was waste and void, and the heavens, and they had no light. 
Young's Literal Translation
I looked to the land, and lo, waste and void, And unto the heavens, and their light is not.

This verse is the only other verse in the Bible that contains "tohu wabohu".  And 16 translations render it "waste", "wasteland", "chaos".  More than half of available English translations on biblehub.com.

Yes, and now if we could just get everyone to READ what that WASTELAND verse followed...






when looking to follow OUR own religion, no matter what questions 'the words of God' ACTUALLY ANSWER, it can't/won't to be seen.  

How when why?   Here they are...


WHY?
19My bowels, my bowels! I am pained at my very heart; my heart maketh a noise in me; I cannot hold my peace, because thou hast heard, O my soul, the sound of the trumpet, the alarm of war.

HOW?
20Destruction upon destruction is cried; for the whole land is spoiled: suddenly are my tents spoiled, and my curtains in a moment.

21How long shall I see the standard, and hear the sound of the trumpet?

22For my people is foolish, they have not known me; they are sottish children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.


WHEN? 
Satan was PERFECT in all his ways TILL his INIQUITY was found and brought it about BETRAYL on a scale of 1/3 of GODS stars.  


BUT, I can understand how people today can't let their carnal minds to go and rest in the eternal Spiritual world of God.  BUT, IF we just LOOK at what WE MIGHT do,  (if we were creating an ETERNAL world that followed after peace and grace and love),

WOULD WE choose SOULS we were giving ETERNAL LIFE to, JUST ONE RANDOM MOMENT TO get it right or wrong, especially knowing how stubborn and dumb they were  (no matter the body)

or would we make them go through a series of 'lives' to find out who everyone really was?   

ME, I am all about the 'series' of tests to see 'who is WORTHY',  rather than ACCIDENTLY giving eternal life to someone I DON'T want to spend eternity with.  

I think it all started with 'the New Jerusalem' coming down to the earth.  I thought (better put 'Gods words caused me to think') ANOTHER JERUSALEM?  I wonder how many 'Jerusalem's' there have been?  

Well,  SUDDEN DESTRUCTION is seen here.  

BUT what really GOT ME was 

"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times." Psalms 12:6 KJV

I know, just some random thoughts that leave no questions unanswered, LIKE the end times beginning back with Jesus.  Wasn't that more of a beginning?  Why keep saying the end, the latter days.  And HOW does what is taking place COME QUICKLY when it is taking a couple thousand years?  Well, if it is at the end of a LONG JOURNEY and this is the 2nd to last 'test', it all makes sense.  

again, just some random thoughts that have come from pondering on what is written.  

BUT what if God did give me these thoughts and I DIDN'T share them?  That would be ON ME, and not on anyone else.  THIS WAY, it isn't.  

Edited May 14, 2023 by DeighAnn