Reconciling 6 Days with 13.7 Billion Years

[Retrobyter]

19 hours ago, teddyv said:

Time dilation is part of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity which also includes mass and length components for objects traveling at relativistic speeds. Mass of an object will increase as you approach the speed of light, hence the need for massive powerful machines to push particles in accelerators. 

Time dilates for the object in motion. It does not change because of the distance from the earth. 

Shalom, teddyv.

Time dilation is only necessary when one holds to the premise that the speed of light doesn't change, that it is held to 186,000 mps as a constant velocity. WE DON'T KNOW THAT! It's not been proven by experimentation, nor by mathematics that has not already been formed by that premise! When one is discussing the speed of a wave, one must first be sure that one is measuring the speed of the wave and not the speed of the medium. They are not the same speed!

When one wants to measure the speed of the waves upon a river, for instance, one must know the speed of the wave propagation AND the speed of the water down the river! While their combined speeds may be some constant, the speed of the wave upon the river's surface and the speed of the water in the river may both be changing with respect to each other.

However, what IS proven (because it was written down for us by the Eye Witness of all that He created) is that God created light FIRST and THEN He created the "round objects" (Hebrew: kowkhaViym) that modern science calls "the source of the light."

Another factor involved is the red or blue shifts of the spectra of a particular light "source." It is ASSUMED that these red or blue shifts are caused by the Dopplar Effect on lightwaves,  based presumably on how fast the "source" is moving toward us (blue shift) or away from us (red shift). And, again, this is based upon an assumed constant speed of light for both the observer and the observed "source" as the speeds are measured in fractions of that speed of light. It is because scientists have noticed more red shifts in the spectra than blue shifts that they have concluded we have an "expanding universe." This, in turn, has given rise to the hypothesis of a "Big Bang" as the starting point of the expansion.

It's not hard to see, but it does take an open mind, which most old-agers don't have the willingness to possess.

[Retrobyter]

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

I'm not sure if he is still alive.  I met him about 10 years ago and he was in ill health.

Shalom, FreeGrace.

Okay. Well, in the Resurrection then, at least.

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

That wasn't my impression.  

It's just not a good idea to be heavily reliant upon any one study help. Still I do like BibleHub.com.

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

Because God hasn't given any details, I don't have a reason.  I just believe that v.2 indicates that the earth became a wasteland, and I will probably learn the reason after I step into eternity.  

But to guess, it seems related to Satan and his horde of rebel angels, so I'm glad God didn't give details.  It would be too easy for some to apply whatever issues were involved then to humans, which would be "apples to oranges" and just provide more confusion to man's issues.  We don't need to have details about what God did to the angels, if anything.

So, the theory is accepted because it's a way to show "Satan and his horde of rebel angels" and what they did, and how God may have responded to their rebellion. And, I suppose that how God responded to the rebellion caused the earth to become a wasteland.

However, you should be aware that haSatan (the Enemy), who was said to be the "original serpent," was a CREATED BEING. Thus, he is PART of the Creation week! Neither he nor the other messengers ("angels") were present at the beginning of the Creation Week. That is a position adopted by Theology, particularly Angelology, and even more specifically, Satanology. Most of this theological rhetoric, however, stems from the Dark Ages and has little backing from the Scriptures.

Psalm 104 is NOT talking about Creation at all; it is talking about the process of reforming the earth after the Flood of Noach's day. The reasoning is fairly simple:

Psalm 104:1-9 (KJV)

1 Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. 2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: 3 Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: 4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains. 7 At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away. 8 They go up by the mountains (the waters went up mountains that arose); they go down by the valleys (the waters went down into valleys sunk) unto the place which thou hast founded for them. 9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

So, when we read,

Job 38:1-11 (KJV)

1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,

2 "Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? 3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, 10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, 11 And said, 'Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?'"

God is NOT talking about the Creation at all! He is talking about the reforming of the earth AFTER the Flood!

UNDERSTAND THIS: If this was the Creation Week, then two things don't fit: First, there shouldn't be clouds because the antediluvian world didn't have rain before the Flood:

Genesis 2:4-6 (KJV)

4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

 This is why the antediluvian world was taken by surprise by the rains that fell! The nature of clouds is that they exist because water condenses in the cooler air above, and there are usually dust motes upon which they condense. Therefore, there was no mention of clouds before the Flood, but while an "argument from silence," these are good scientific reasons to believe that the dew point was too low for clouds to form in the skies. Instead, during the day there was a fog on the ground, as there frequently is in the mountains of North Carolina during the morning hours. And, this was the way that God chose to water the plants He made. The waters came from below ground - the "fountains of the deep." And, these were broken apart at the start of the Flood.

Genesis 7:11-12 (KJV)

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. 12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Second, the foundations of the earth were laid so they wouldn't be removed AGAIN, and the continental shelves were formed so that waves wouldn't be able to continually wash over the earth's surface. (Job 38:11 above. Included with this, we read the same thing in Psalm 104:9 above.)

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

I do understand your criticism of my data.  I suppose one who had nothing but time on their hands could note all 111 verses and then check EVERY English translation of every verse.  And keep count of all the "became/become"s and "and"s and give a report.  However, I don't have that much time.

Nor do I! That's why I DON'T BOTHER with translations! I go to the SOURCE - the original languages of the Bible. However, to do so, one must realize that one cannot just go to lexicons and dictionaries! One must learn the GRAMMAR of a particular language, AND one must go to the history and the culture of the various books and their authors. Without this, the pages are MEANINGLESS! One cannot just rely on other human beings to do things for you; other human beings are just as fallible as you are! One must go to the WAY that the Bible was translated! See, it all goes back to the little diddy:

"Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
TEACH a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime!"

We can likewise say,

"Give a man a translation, and he understands some things in the Bible.
TEACH a man to translate, and he can open up all the treasures of the Bible for himself!"

People are afraid to do this because of ONE verse:

2 Peter 1:19-21 (KJV)

19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that NO PROPHECY OF THE SCRIPTURE IS OF ANY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

But, this simply means that one should not try to translate the Scriptures without input from the Ruwach haQodesh (the Holy Spirit of God). Since "holy men of God spoke under the INSPIRATION of the Holy Spirit," then we shouldn't expect to understand what they wrote without likewise being under the INSPIRATION of the Holy Spirit of God.

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

 And biblehub didn't cherry pick the translations they provided.  They sometimes included KJV, but most of the verses had "NAS" and "INT" and I don't even know what INT means.  

Sure it did! Look at how many translations are available to read! They offer "NIV, NLT, ESV, BSB, KJV, NKJ, NAS, AMP, CSB, HCS, CEV, GNT, ARA, ASV, DST, DRB, ERV, GWT, ISR, ISV, KJP, NET, NHE, OJB, and the WEB! The INT means the "Biblios Interlinear Bible." If you park on the "INT" in blue, it will give you this info. I believe that it's obvious that they prefer the New American Standard version; however, they also provide the much-loved KJV on many occasions (when it suits them) as well as the HEB (Hebrew) and the INT (Interlinear) version.

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

So I think they were consistent.  They stuck with just 2 or 3 translations.

I don't mind any question.    I counted every verse that was translated as either "became" or "become" or "and".

Okay! Then, you used the verses that were included in a particular translation for the 111 verses listed for that form, correct?

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

...

Except the LXX begins v.2 with a disjunctive translated in the Greek as "δὲ"

Doing an internet search I found this at the top of the search:

• Here in Genesis 1:2, we have the conjunction waw followed by the articular noun ha`erets, “earth,” which is in turn followed by the 3rdperson Qal perfect form of the verb hayah, “became.” This is what we call an interclausal waw, which is followed by a noun and not a verb, thus it has what we call a “disjunctive” function in the sentence.
• On   https://www.wenstrom.org/downloads/written/exposition/genesis/genesis_1_2.pdf#:~:text=Here in Genesis 1%3A2%2C we have the conjunction,we call a “disjunctive” function in the sentence.

• So how should we translate the conjunction waw? We have here in the Hebrew text is what we call in Hebrew grammar a “waw-disjunctive construction” where we have the conjunction waw plus a noun and a verb. Here in Genesis 1:2, we have the conjunction waw followed by the articular noun ha `erets, “earth,” which is in turn followed by the 3rd person Qal perfect form of the verb hayah, “became.”

  There are 2 common types of disjunction: (1) A continuity of scene and participants but a change of action. (2) Where the scene and participants shift.

  If the disjunctive waw is used in a situation with continuity of setting, the clause it introduces may contrast with the preceding, specify contemporary circumstances, or causes, or provide a comparison. It is clear from the Hebrew text of verse 2 describes the creation as a desolation and empty with the implication of a catastrophic judgment having taken place.

God DID create (bara) many things during the restoration.  I have no problem with that.  In v.9-10 He was merely pre-arranging the surface of the planet, which would be necessary after becoming a wasteland.   

I don't accept that earth wasn't fully formed at creation.  If you like "without form" for tohu, then you still have a contradiction with Isa 45:18 which says "God did NOT create the earth tohu".  I don't see how you can get around that.

I agree about being created once, and I have already rejected any idea of a "re-creation", which a restoration isn't.  As to "last forever", I recall REv 21:1.  

But you just said the it will 'last forever'.  

It BECAME one.  Change of state.  Hebrew disjunctive.

This is all restoration in my view.  And does no harm to anything in the Bible.  It does do harm to YEC views.

And none of all this damage from the flood would have "aged" the earth to what scientists can measure objectively.

And still doesn't age the earth.

btw, even with all the damage the flood did, is there any mention in the Bible that God had to re-form the earth?  No.  So NONE of the damage resulted in an earth so messed up that God had to intervene.  In fact, the opposite it true.  Immediately after the flood dissipated and there was land, Noah and family and animals were able to get off the boat.

I'm not one of them.    

And there is no mention in the Bible of God having to re-arrange the landscape.  

We all know that.  But what is being described perfectly FITS Satan's rebellion.  Which many scholars readily agree.

OK, a lot of scholars are bozos then.

Simple bottom line is:  something resulted in the earth becoming a wasteland.  And that wouldn't necessarily involve a short amount of time.  We simply don't know the length of time, but leaves the obvious possibility of a great amount of time.

As has been already noted, scientists have objective measurements that show a very old universe/earth.  No reason to doubt them merely on the basis of a faulty translation of Gen 1:2, which creates a contradition with isa 45:18.  And no way can any object be "formless".  That isn't even possible.  Even gas has form when visible.

See above.   

Well, if one is honest, one will also find this translation of the LXX under www.BibleStudyTools.com:

Genesis 1:2

2 But the earth was unsightly and unfurnished, and darkness was over the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the water.

So, it should come as no surprise that the LXX uses the word "de" in tranlation. It doesn't contrast two different creations; it contrasts what was made with what God's goal was to make.

Instead, you went directly to a version and an explanation from a person who already believes in the gap theory. I'd be willing to bet he WASN'T an expert on Hebrew, because he didn't understand the vav (or waw) used to connect sentences into a paragraph, ending with the "pei." He was only thinking in English translations!

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

Now, we know that God is perfect and His creation of the heavens and the earth was perfect, therefore, a comparison of verse 1 and 2 clearly indicates that a contrast is in view between these 2 verses.

You're confusing "God's perfection" with "His completion of His creation." God created matter and energy on the first day; however, as good as they were, they were not yet in their final form! They were merely CHEMICALS with no final structure to support life! They were "perfect" chemicals, but that's ALL they were! They needed MORE! On each of the subsequent days, God created more that would sustain life, and then He created life upon and within that biosphere! 

On 7/17/2023 at 9:55 AM, FreeGrace said:

The combination of the connective waw and a nominal form (as opposed to a finite verb) plus Qal perfect form of the verb hayah, “became” indicates contrast in Hebrew, that is to say, much more of a "but, however" than an "and"

We will translate waw with the English “however” rather than “but” since the English but marks an opposition or contrast though in a causal way whereas the English “however” indicates a less marked opposition, but displays a second consideration to be compared with the first.

I guess you will still resist.  But this does remove any contradiction between v.2 and isa 45:18, which no other explanation does.

Translate it any way you wish, but you're NOT reflecting the intention of the Author! The Author used HEBREW, not English!

[FreeGrace]

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

So, the theory is accepted because it's a way to show "Satan and his horde of rebel angels" and what they did, and how God may have responded to their rebellion. And, I suppose that how God responded to the rebellion caused the earth to become a wasteland.

As I said, I'm not into theories.  Just facts.  And given the 4 or 5 points that show that the TT of Gen 1:2 cannot be accurate, I will believe that the earth is much older than Adam and that God restored the earth for man's use.  Everything else is a theory.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

However, you should be aware that haSatan (the Enemy), who was said to be the "original serpent," was a CREATED BEING.

Sure.  Ezek 28:15 - You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Thus, he is PART of the Creation week!

Nope.  All the angels were witnesses of Gen 1:1.  

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Neither he nor the other messengers ("angels") were present at the beginning of the Creation Week.

The Bible says otherwise.   Job 38:3-7

Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.  “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?  Tell me, if you understand.  Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!  Who stretched a measuring line across it?  On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone — while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

That is a position adopted by Theology, particularly Angelology, and even more specifically, Satanology. Most of this theological rhetoric, however, stems from the Dark Ages and has little backing from the Scripture.

Only 1 verse proves a fact.  Job 38:3-7 is that proof.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Psalm 104 is NOT talking about Creation at all; it is talking about the process of reforming the earth after the Flood of Noach's day. The reasoning is fairly simple:

Psalm 104:1-9 (KJV)

1 Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. 2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: 3 Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: 4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains. 7 At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away. 8 They go up by the mountains (the waters went up mountains that arose); they go down by the valleys (the waters went down into valleys sunk) unto the place which thou hast founded for them. 9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

What does this have to do with the issue of Gen 1:1,2? 

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

So, when we read,

Job 38:1-11 (KJV)

1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,

2 "Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? 3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, 10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, 11 And said, 'Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?'"

God is NOT talking about the Creation at all! He is talking about the reforming of the earth AFTER the Flood!

Just because the word "foundations" is in Job 38 and Psa 104?

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

UNDERSTAND THIS: If this was the Creation Week, then two things don't fit: First, there shouldn't be clouds because the antediluvian world didn't have rain before the Flood:

I don't believe in a "creation week".  I believe in a restoration week.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Well, if one is honest, one will also find this translation of the LXX under www.BibleStudyTools.com:

Genesis 1:2

2 But the earth was unsightly and unfurnished, and darkness was over the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the water.

So, it should come as no surprise that the LXX uses the word "de" in tranlation. It doesn't contrast two different creations; it contrasts what was made with what God's goal was to make.

Well, I'm honest and I fully agree that God DID NOT create the earth "unsightly".  That word definitely fits "wasteland", but not original creation.

you still have the problem of Isa 45:18 that plainly says that "God did NOT create the earth tohu".  Yet, the TT of Gen 1:2 says that He did.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Instead, you went directly to a version and an explanation from a person who already believes in the gap theory. I'd be willing to bet he WASN'T an expert on Hebrew, because he didn't understand the vav (or waw) used to connect sentences into a paragraph, ending with the "pei." He was only thinking in English translations!

I already provided what a Hebrew disjunctive is and how it shows a contrast between v.1 and v.2.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

You're confusing "God's perfection" with "His completion of His creation."

You are free to believe that God created the earth "unsightly" all you want.  I believe everything He created is GOOD.  Not "unsightly".  Ever.

3 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

God created matter and energy on the first day; however, as good as they were, they were not yet in their final form! They were merely CHEMICALS with no final structure to support life! They were "perfect" chemicals, but that's ALL they were! They needed MORE! On each of the subsequent days, God created more that would sustain life, and then He created life upon and within that biosphere! 

Translate it any way you wish, but you're NOT reflecting the intention of the Author! The Author used HEBREW, not English!

We will just have to agree to disagree.  From Psa 33:6,9 I am convinced that God simply and immediately spoke everything into existence.  

And when He restored the earth for man's use, He spoke into existence a number of things.

Explain how "unsightly" can be the same thing as "without form".  It isn't possible.

But I CAN explain how "unsightly" DOES describe a "wasteland".  Easily.

[teddyv]

18 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, teddyv.

Time dilation is only necessary when one holds to the premise that the speed of light doesn't change, that it is held to 186,000 mps as a constant velocity. WE DON'T KNOW THAT! It's not been proven by experimentation, nor by mathematics that has not already been formed by that premise! When one is discussing the speed of a wave, one must first be sure that one is measuring the speed of the wave and not the speed of the medium. They are not the same speed!

There is plenty of experimentation of the speed of light. I'm not sure what you are referring to the speed of the medium. The common velocity of light is of course based on a vacuum.

18 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

When one wants to measure the speed of the waves upon a river, for instance, one must know the speed of the wave propagation AND the speed of the water down the river! While their combined speeds may be some constant, the speed of the wave upon the river's surface and the speed of the water in the river may both be changing with respect to each other.

Velocity of light is not dependent on the velocity of the emitting body. Assuming a pressure wave behaves the same as light is problematic.

18 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

However, what IS proven (because it was written down for us by the Eye Witness of all that He created) is that God created light FIRST and THEN He created the "round objects" (Hebrew: kowkhaViym) that modern science calls "the source of the light."

That's circular reasoning followed by interpretative speculation.

18 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Another factor involved is the red or blue shifts of the spectra of a particular light "source." It is ASSUMED that these red or blue shifts are caused by the Dopplar Effect on lightwaves,  based presumably on how fast the "source" is moving toward us (blue shift) or away from us (red shift). And, again, this is based upon an assumed constant speed of light for both the observer and the observed "source" as the speeds are measured in fractions of that speed of light. It is because scientists have noticed more red shifts in the spectra than blue shifts that they have concluded we have an "expanding universe." This, in turn, has given rise to the hypothesis of a "Big Bang" as the starting point of the expansion.

Sure, these are assumptions, but as the observations made confirm the assumption of constancy, that only strengthens the underlying assumption.

Also, there is other evidence of space expanding, in fact, expanding at a far greater rate than originally predicted.

18 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

It's not hard to see, but it does take an open mind, which most old-agers don't have the willingness to possess.

You can't just start messing around with the velocity of light as that will have some profound implications in lots of other areas.

As for having an open mind, it's good to have a screen to keep the bugs out.

[JimmyB]

9 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, FreeGrace.

Okay. Well, in the Resurrection then, at least.

It's just not a good idea to be heavily reliant upon any one study help. Still I do like BibleHub.com.

So, the theory is accepted because it's a way to show "Satan and his horde of rebel angels" and what they did, and how God may have responded to their rebellion. And, I suppose that how God responded to the rebellion caused the earth to become a wasteland.

However, you should be aware that haSatan (the Enemy), who was said to be the "original serpent," was a CREATED BEING. Thus, he is PART of the Creation week! Neither he nor the other messengers ("angels") were present at the beginning of the Creation Week. That is a position adopted by Theology, particularly Angelology, and even more specifically, Satanology. Most of this theological rhetoric, however, stems from the Dark Ages and has little backing from the Scriptures.

Psalm 104 is NOT talking about Creation at all; it is talking about the process of reforming the earth after the Flood of Noach's day. The reasoning is fairly simple:

Psalm 104:1-9 (KJV)

1 Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. 2 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: 3 Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: 4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains. 7 At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away. 8 They go up by the mountains (the waters went up mountains that arose); they go down by the valleys (the waters went down into valleys sunk) unto the place which thou hast founded for them. 9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

So, when we read,

Job 38:1-11 (KJV)

1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,

2 "Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? 3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.

4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. 5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? 6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, 10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, 11 And said, 'Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?'"

God is NOT talking about the Creation at all! He is talking about the reforming of the earth AFTER the Flood!

UNDERSTAND THIS: If this was the Creation Week, then two things don't fit: First, there shouldn't be clouds because the antediluvian world didn't have rain before the Flood:

Genesis 2:4-6 (KJV)

4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

 This is why the antediluvian world was taken by surprise by the rains that fell! The nature of clouds is that they exist because water condenses in the cooler air above, and there are usually dust motes upon which they condense. Therefore, there was no mention of clouds before the Flood, but while an "argument from silence," these are good scientific reasons to believe that the dew point was too low for clouds to form in the skies. Instead, during the day there was a fog on the ground, as there frequently is in the mountains of North Carolina during the morning hours. And, this was the way that God chose to water the plants He made. The waters came from below ground - the "fountains of the deep." And, these were broken apart at the start of the Flood.

Genesis 7:11-12 (KJV)

11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. 12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Second, the foundations of the earth were laid so they wouldn't be removed AGAIN, and the continental shelves were formed so that waves wouldn't be able to continually wash over the earth's surface. (Job 38:11 above. Included with this, we read the same thing in Psalm 104:9 above.)

Nor do I! That's why I DON'T BOTHER with translations! I go to the SOURCE - the original languages of the Bible. However, to do so, one must realize that one cannot just go to lexicons and dictionaries! One must learn the GRAMMAR of a particular language, AND one must go to the history and the culture of the various books and their authors. Without this, the pages are MEANINGLESS! One cannot just rely on other human beings to do things for you; other human beings are just as fallible as you are! One must go to the WAY that the Bible was translated! See, it all goes back to the little diddy:

"Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
TEACH a man to fish, and he eats for a lifetime!"

We can likewise say,

"Give a man a translation, and he understands some things in the Bible.
TEACH a man to translate, and he can open up all the treasures of the Bible for himself!"

People are afraid to do this because of ONE verse:

2 Peter 1:19-21 (KJV)

19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that NO PROPHECY OF THE SCRIPTURE IS OF ANY PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

But, this simply means that one should not try to translate the Scriptures without input from the Ruwach haQodesh (the Holy Spirit of God). Since "holy men of God spoke under the INSPIRATION of the Holy Spirit," then we shouldn't expect to understand what they wrote without likewise being under the INSPIRATION of the Holy Spirit of God.

Sure it did! Look at how many translations are available to read! They offer "NIV, NLT, ESV, BSB, KJV, NKJ, NAS, AMP, CSB, HCS, CEV, GNT, ARA, ASV, DST, DRB, ERV, GWT, ISR, ISV, KJP, NET, NHE, OJB, and the WEB! The INT means the "Biblios Interlinear Bible." If you park on the "INT" in blue, it will give you this info. I believe that it's obvious that they prefer the New American Standard version; however, they also provide the much-loved KJV on many occasions (when it suits them) as well as the HEB (Hebrew) and the INT (Interlinear) version.

Okay! Then, you used the verses that were included in a particular translation for the 111 verses listed for that form, correct?

Well, if one is honest, one will also find this translation of the LXX under www.BibleStudyTools.com:

Genesis 1:2

2 But the earth was unsightly and unfurnished, and darkness was over the deep, and the Spirit of God moved over the water.

So, it should come as no surprise that the LXX uses the word "de" in tranlation. It doesn't contrast two different creations; it contrasts what was made with what God's goal was to make.

Instead, you went directly to a version and an explanation from a person who already believes in the gap theory. I'd be willing to bet he WASN'T an expert on Hebrew, because he didn't understand the vav (or waw) used to connect sentences into a paragraph, ending with the "pei." He was only thinking in English translations!

You're confusing "God's perfection" with "His completion of His creation." God created matter and energy on the first day; however, as good as they were, they were not yet in their final form! They were merely CHEMICALS with no final structure to support life! They were "perfect" chemicals, but that's ALL they were! They needed MORE! On each of the subsequent days, God created more that would sustain life, and then He created life upon and within that biosphere! 

Translate it any way you wish, but you're NOT reflecting the intention of the Author! The Author used HEBREW, not English!

This is a very odd post.  You seem to think that translating from ancient languages that were written to be understood by ancient people into a modern language that conveys the same understanding to today's readers is a straight-forward process.  Clearly it isn't!  That is one of the reasons that we have a variety of translations.

I prefer the work of committees of scholars using the best available source documents and the best translation techniques to convey the content of the ancient writings to our modern minds.  I do not accept the opinions of one person as being valid.

[The Barbarian]

3 hours ago, teddyv said:

Velocity of light is not dependent on the velocity of the emitting body. Assuming a pressure wave behaves the same as light is problematic.

Yes.   Morely-Michaelson showed that.

3 hours ago, teddyv said:

You can't just start messing around with the velocity of light as that will have some profound implications in lots of other areas.

For example, the rate of radioactive decay depends on the speed of light.   If the speed of light was once much faster in the past, all life on Earth would have been fried by ionizing radiation.

 

[Retrobyter]

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

As I said, I'm not into theories.  Just facts.  And given the 4 or 5 points that show that the TT of Gen 1:2 cannot be accurate, I will believe that the earth is much older than Adam and that God restored the earth for man's use.  Everything else is a theory.

Shalom, FreeGrace.

One isn't using facts when one suggests that there was an "original creation!" That's not a fact; that's a FICTION! There is not ONE SHRED of evidence that supports that nonsense! The earth WAS created for mankind's use, but from the VERY BEGINNING!

God didn't have to change His plans because of haSatan's involvement! One should NOT give haSatan the credit for throwing God's creation into disarray! That puts him on equal footing with YHWH God Almighty! There is absolutely NO COMPARISON! HaSatan did NOT succeed in destroying some fictional "First Creation!" He is NOT the "yang" to God's "yin!" There is NO OTHER LIKE God!                                                                                                       

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Sure.  Ezek 28:15 - You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you.

Yechezk'eel (Ezekiel) was NOT talking about haSatan! One will NOT find that designation ANYWHERE in the chapter! To the contrary, one WILL FIND that the prophecy was against the ruler of Tyre (Hebrew: Tsowr).

Ezekiel 38:1-10 (KJV)

1 The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,

2 "Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus,

"'Thus saith the Lord GOD;

"'"Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, 'I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas'; yet THOU ART A MAN, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God: 3 Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee: 4 With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures: 5 By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:"

6 "'Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD;

"'"Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; 7 Behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness. 8 They shall bring thee down to the pit, and THOU SHALT DIE THE DEATHS OF THEM THAT ARE SLAIN IN THE MIDST OF THE SEAS. 9 Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, 'I am God'? but thou shalt be A MAN, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee. 10 THOU SHALT DIE THE DEATHS OF THE UNCIRCUMCISED BY THE HAND OF STRANGERS: for I have spoken it," saith the Lord GOD.'"

It's just hard to communicate sarcasm in print!

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Nope.  All the angels were witnesses of Gen 1:1.  

The Bible says otherwise.   Job 38:3-7

Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.  “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?  Tell me, if you understand.  Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!  Who stretched a measuring line across it?  On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone — while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?

Only 1 verse proves a fact.  Job 38:3-7 is that proof.

EXCEPT, by the contextual clues, one can know that Job 38:3-7 is NOT talking about the Creation of Genesis 1 and 2! He was talking about the REFORMING of the earth after the Flood! LOOK AT THE CLUES!

Job 38:6-11 (KJV)

6 "Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; 7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? 8 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb? 9 When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it, 10 And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, 11 And said, 'Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed' ?"

There were no clouds before the Flood! This occurred AFTER the Flood in the Flood's aftermath! A "corner stone" is "אֶ֣בֶן פִּנָּתָֽהּ" or "'EVen pinnaataah," a "stone of-its-pinnacle," a CAPSTONE! The first part of this verse says,
"עַל־מָ֭ה אֲדָנֶ֣יהָ הָטְבָּ֑עוּ" or "`al-mah 'adaaneyhaa haaTbaa`uw," "against-what [were]-its-foundations sunk?"

Here's the Hebrew of verse 8:

"וַיָּ֣סֶךְ בִּדְלָתַ֣יִם יָ֑ם בְּ֝גִיחֹ֗ו מֵרֶ֥חֶם יֵצֵֽא׃"

It transliterates to ...

8 Vayyaacekh bidlaatayim yaam bgiychow meerechem yeetsee':"

And, this translates word-for-word to ...

8 And-who-shut in-doors [the]-sea when-it-burst-out from-the-womb issued?

First, God is referring to the fact that "the fountains of the great deep were broken up" (Genesis 7:11). So, this verse is talking about the forming of the CONTINENTAL SHELVES and ROCKY BEACHES that limit the sea from washing over the land again. These are the "doors" or "dalaatayim," a word which is neither singular nor plural, but DUAL in number!

He is talking about the SEA being limited AFTER the Flood, because He sure didn't limit it BEFORE the Flood! The Flood HAPPENED!

In verse 9, God said,

"בְּשׂוּמִ֣י עָנָ֣ן לְבֻשֹׁ֑ו וַ֝עֲרָפֶ֗ל חֲתֻלָּתֹֽו׃"

Transliterated, this is ...

"9 Bsuwmiy `aanaan lVushow va`araafel chatullaatow:"

Translated word-for-word, this is ...

"9 When-I-made clouds into-its-garments and-heavy-clouds its-swaddling-clothes."

Babies are loosely "swaddled" today in blankets (1) to cuddle them and help them sleep, (2) to keep them on their backs preventing SIDS, and (3) to keep them from scratching themselves with their own nails as their arms flail about before they have good motor control.

This is CLEARLY after the Flood, because from Genesis 2:4-6, we learn there were no clouds before the Flood, just a mist - a fog - during the daytime that watered the plants! This is probably due to the higher atmospheric pressure - enough pressure to keep the flying reptiles aloft in flight. It meant that the dew point was too low to allow clouds to form above it in the atmosphere.

In verses 10 and 11, God reinforce the "bars and doors" concept of the limitation of the seas to the sea beds.

So, these verses are NOT about Genesis 1 or Genesis 2. They are about the FLOOD of Noach in Genesis 7-9! 

Furthermore, I submit to you that the term "sons of God" NEVER refer to "angels!" They are ALWAYS about human beings! We read in Genesis 4,

Genesis 4:25-26 (KJV)

25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. 26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

This doesn't mean that it was then people began to pray! It means that it was then that people began to give themselves names using the name of God as a TALISMAN to better their luck!

 So, after the genealogy in chapter 5, we read in Genesis 6:

Genesis 6:1-8 (KJV)

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the "sons of God" saw the "daughters of men" that they were fair; and they TOOK (Hebrew: vayyiqchuw from laaqach meaning "to take by force" or "to buy." "and-they-took-by-force"; "and-they-bought") them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said,

"My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

4 There were giants (Hebrew: nefaaliym = "wood-cutters; lumberjacks")  in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the "sons of God" came in unto the "daughters of men," and they bare children to them, the same (the "sons of God") became mighty men (heroes) which were of old, men of renown (popular men).

5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said,

"I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them."

8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

Verse 2 talks about "buying women" or "taking women by force" for wives! This is what God responded to by giving them a time limit of 120 years.

Then, verse 4 talks about these guys being "lumberjacks" and "strong men" ("mighty men"). They were the gangs, the "bikers," the cartel of the antediluvian world! And, they weren't despised; they were POPULAR! These men (and they WERE "men") were anything BUT "sons of God," yet they called themselves that!

But, what about these other "men" and their "daughters?" Where did they come from? Well, there's a back-story to that found in Genesis 4 and 5:

Genesis 4:1-16 (KJV)

1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain (Hebrew "Qayin" = "Acquired"), and said,

"I have gotten (acquired) a man from the LORD."

2 And she again bare his brother Abel (Hebrew: "HeVel" = "vapor; breath"). And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. 3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. 4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: 5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. 6 And the LORD said unto Cain,

"Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."

8 And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.

9 And the LORD (YHWH) said unto Cain,

"Where is Abel thy brother?"

And he said,

"I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?"

10 And he (YHWH) said,

"What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground (Hebrew: min-haa'adaamaah = "from - the-ground"). 11 And now art thou cursed FROM THE EARTH (Hebrew: min-haa'adaamaah = "from the-ground"), which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand; 12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a FUGITIVE and a VAGABOND shalt thou be IN the earth." 

13 And Cain said unto the LORD,

"My punishment is greater than I can bear (more than I deserve)! 14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the (sur)face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond IN the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me!"

15 And the LORD said unto him,

"Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold."

And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod (Hebrew: "Nowd" = "Wandering"), on the east of Eden.

Then, we read this about the fate of Qayin:

Genesis 4:17-24 (KJV)

17 And Cain (1st generation underground) knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, "Enoch." (Hebrew: "Chanowkh" = "palate; roof of the mouth") (second generation)  18 And unto Enoch was born Irad (3rd generation): and Irad begat Mehujael (4th generation): and Mehujael begat Methusael (5th generation): and Methusael begat Lamech (6th generation). 19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. 20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. 21 And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. 22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.

23 And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah,

"Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. 24 If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold."

He killed another in self-defense. However, GOD didn't say Lemekh would be avenged, nor did He set a mark on HIM!

I believe that Lemekh and His family had to leave Chanowkh to get away before someone came to try to avenge the life Lemekh took. They were not safe there any longer, no matter what Lemekh claimed about self-defense!

Remember that Adam lived 930 years, and his son, Sheit ("Seth") lived for 912 years, and the first 6 generations after Adam on the surface had an average of 115 years between generations. If we take this to be the average underground as well, then between 690 and 1590 years passed after Chanowkh was built before Lemekh took the life in self-defense.

One of his sons, YaaVaal, was the first to live in tents and to raise cattle. Why? Well, his family were used to having a roof over their heads in "Chanowkh," the "ROOF of the mouth!" Having left the sanctuary of Chanowkh, they made their own house to carry with them, and it was YaaVaal's invention.

So, now, there were TWO groups of human beings: the group that was allowed to live above ground from the beginning (the sons of Sheit or "Seth") and the group that was just now emerging from underground. The group above ground CALLED THEMSELVES "sons of God" referring to the fact that THEY were allowed to live above ground under the Face of God and were therefore the "superior" group. The "inferior" group were mere "men." As such, the daughters of these mere men were fair game to take or to buy from those who took them!

I should mention, too, that the Jewish rabbis believe that Na`amaah was the only female named because she became Noach's wife.

My point in all this is simply to say that the "sons of God" here were NOT "angels" but were men using the term as a term of prejudice! If they had been "angels," then why did God punish HUMANS for the sins of the "angels?"

So again, I say that "sons of God" NEVER refers to "angels!"

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

What does this have to do with the issue of Gen 1:1,2? 

Well, I was talking about Psalm 104, which is often used to suggest that the "laying of the foundation of the earth" occurred in Genesis 1; however, since it doesn't but refers rather to the REMAKING of the earth after the Flood, then this "laying of the earth's foundations" isn't part of the Creation account.

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Just because the word "foundations" is in Job 38 and Psa 104?

Yes, and to show that the "angels" were NOT present at the laying of these foundations.

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

I don't believe in a "creation week".  I believe in a restoration week.

That's your own misunderstanding, and not how the text should be taken.

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Well, I'm honest and I fully agree that God DID NOT create the earth "unsightly".  That word definitely fits "wasteland", but not original creation.

The original Creation is found in the whole of Genesis 1 and 2.

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

you still have the problem of Isa 45:18 that plainly says that "God did NOT create the earth tohu".  Yet, the TT of Gen 1:2 says that He did.

I already discussed this. Look above to a previous post. I've already covered the fact that there was NO contradiction between Isaiah 45:18 and Genesis 1:2. NONE.

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

I already provided what a Hebrew disjunctive is and how it shows a contrast between v.1 and v.2.

First, there's NO SUCH THING as a "Hebrew disjunctive." That's just goofy, and it shows a lack of understanding in the Scriptures' languages. What you MEAN is a "GREEK disjunctive" used to translate the Hebrew vav-connective. This also shows that (1) the Greek translators of the Hebrew may not have fully known how the Hebrew worked, OR more likely (2) that the Greek translators were getting their disjunctive from the rest of the text, i.e., from its CONTEXT! I doubt (1) is true.

Second, such a contrast DOES NOT MEAN that there were two different creations! It just means that the original formation of the MATTER of the earth, although perfect as far as it could go, was not the FINAL form that God would give it in the days to follow.

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

You are free to believe that God created the earth "unsightly" all you want.  I believe everything He created is GOOD.  Not "unsightly".  Ever.

We will just have to agree to disagree.  From Psa 33:6,9 I am convinced that God simply and immediately spoke everything into existence.  

So, you simply believe that God went "<POOF!> It's all finished"? He PURPOSELY TOOK HIS TIME TO CREATE IT ALL! That's what Genesis 1 and 2 are all about! I can't tell you WHY fully that He took six days to create it all, but if He said that's what He did, then I believe Him! He did NOT say that He created some "creation ahead of Genesis 1 and 2 and that it was destroyed, either by Himself in response to haSatan's actions or by the actions of haSatan himself, but either way, the Scriptures DO NOT SUPPORT SUCH A FABLE! I believe that God PURPOSELY introduced the 6 work days and the 7th day as a Day of Rest, a "Shabbat" ("Sabbath") for human beings to give Him His time, a time when human beings could rest, and spend time with their Maker, instead of always being consumed in the pursuits of work and wealth!

3 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

And when He restored the earth for man's use, He spoke into existence a number of things.

Explain how "unsightly" can be the same thing as "without form".  It isn't possible.

But I CAN explain how "unsightly" DOES describe a "wasteland".  Easily.

How about this: If you're married, you and your wife move into a new house. It's great, but it's not how she pictures it to be. It is "without form"; the "form" she has in her mind for how the furniture must be added and arranged to make that house into a HOME, YOUR home with her! To her, the bare house is "unsightly"; not that it's a mess, but that it is not her HOME, yet!

The earth is OUR HOME with God. The "third earth" - the "NEW earth" (2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1-4) will be our "backyard," and God will bring down and sink the foundations of the New Jerusalem into the crust to form our "new house," and together, the House and the Backyard, will be our New Home for all eternity!

Peter mentions three such earths and their skies:

2 Peter 3:3-13 (KJV)

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying,

"Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation." (Uniformitarianism)

5 For this they WILLINGLY are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens (1st skies) were of old, and the earth (1st earth) standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished (the FLOOD of Noach's day, in Genesis 7): 7 But the heavens (2nd skies) and the earth (2nd earth), which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men (the FIRE at the Great White Throne Judgment in Revelation 20).

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens (2nd skies) shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth (2nd earth) also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 

13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens (3rd skies) and a new earth (3rd earth), wherein dwelleth righteousness.

[Retrobyter]

18 hours ago, teddyv said:

There is plenty of experimentation of the speed of light. I'm not sure what you are referring to the speed of the medium. The common velocity of light is of course based on a vacuum.

Shalom, teddyv.

Sorry to "burst a bubble," but there's really not enough experimentation, especially in light of the facts as now assumed. If 70% of the universe is filled with "dark matter," then how is that a "vacuum?" String theory also assumes that space is really filled with particles that were not known before. So, do we REALLY know the "speed of light" is constant in a "vacuum?"

The speed of a medium is the speed upon which the waveform is found. In water, the water moves at a different speed - a different velocity - than does the waveform found upon the water's surface. In still water, we can assume that the speed of the water is practically zero. However, if one drops a pebble into the water and watches the wave grow outwardly in concentric circles, how fast is the wave growing? THAT is the speed of the wave upon the water. Flowing water gives us different values. The propagation of the wave may not fluctuate much, because it is based upon the surface tension of the water, but now the water itself has a velocity! What does that do to the waveform?

We call light "electromagnetic radiation" because we've discovered that a dying magnetic field will generate an electric field at right angles to its flow from the magnetic field, and a dying electric field will generate a magnetic field at right angles to its flow from the electric field. Thus, it's waves will spiral out from the source, and such a packet of electric fields and magnetic fields is called a "photon" a "waveform particle."

The original experiments to discover the speed of light were conducted with the possibility of an "aether", or an "ether," that MAY have been the medium in which lightwaves propagated, but because the experiments showed that light had the same speed no matter the orientation of the experiment, the idea of an "ether" was dropped. But, as a human race, what were we measuring? Were we measuring the speed of the waveform or the speed of the medium conducting the waveform?

Let's just say that I don't believe the experiments that are meant to determine the speed of light are as conclusive as they need to be.

18 hours ago, teddyv said:

Velocity of light is not dependent on the velocity of the emitting body. Assuming a pressure wave behaves the same as light is problematic.

I understand this. So, how is the Dopplar Effect not problematic when it comes to light waves? Why do we give credence to the "red shift" and "blue shift" of light frequencies?

18 hours ago, teddyv said:

That's circular reasoning followed by interpretative speculation.

Oh, really? Show me how it's circular.

18 hours ago, teddyv said:

Sure, these are assumptions, but as the observations made confirm the assumption of constancy, that only strengthens the underlying assumption.

Also, there is other evidence of space expanding, in fact, expanding at a far greater rate than originally predicted.

And, what is this "other evidence?" Isn't it still based upon the assumptions made about red shift and blue shift? Aren't they still based upon what we can see (or detect) in the spectra of stars and galaxies?

18 hours ago, teddyv said:

You can't just start messing around with the velocity of light as that will have some profound implications in lots of other areas.

As for having an open mind, it's good to have a screen to keep the bugs out.

I AGREE! But, I still say that we need a better understanding of light, and it won't be discovered until we have a better understanding of a universal field theory.

[FreeGrace]

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, FreeGrace.

One isn't using facts when one suggests that there was an "original creation!"

I am convinced that Gen 1:1 is a FACT.  Which is supported by Psa 33:6,9

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

That's not a fact; that's a FICTION! There is not ONE SHRED of evidence that supports that nonsense! The earth WAS created for mankind's use, but from the VERY BEGINNING!

I believe this to be an opinion.  Based on the traditional translation (TT) of Gen 1:1,2, which I have shown cannot be accurate.  No such thing as "without form" and and the contradition with Isa 45:18, etc.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

God didn't have to change His plans because of haSatan's involvement!

I never said nor hinted that He did.  In FACT, God has NO "plan B".  Because He is omniscient.  He has always known everything.  He has but one plan.    No back ups.

So your statement here shows that you do not even understand my posts.  Why you would even think that my view is that God had to "change plans" is ludicrous.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

One should NOT give haSatan the credit for throwing God's creation into disarray!

We've been over this already.  God has ALLOWED sin to enter the world, or didn't you know that?  You think God caused satan to deceive the woman??

There is NO credit to the idiot angel satan.  God knew exactly what he was going to do and He let him do it.  I can't imagine what you think God did.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

That puts him on equal footing with YHWH God Almighty!

Absolutely NOT.  Ludicrous idea.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

There is absolutely NO COMPARISON! HaSatan did NOT succeed in destroying some fictional "First Creation!" He is NOT the "yang" to God's "yin!" There is NO OTHER LIKE God!

As I have already said previously, there is only 1 creation.  Your comments are rather odd, given all I have posted.  To think that I have communicated what you are denying here is ludicrous.  I haven't compared anything and there is no reason for you to think I have.  your comments demonstrate that either you aren't understanding my views, or you are twisting them.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

Yechezk'eel (Ezekiel) was NOT talking about haSatan! One will NOT find that designation ANYWHERE in the chapter! To the contrary, one WILL FIND that the prophecy was against the ruler of Tyre (Hebrew: Tsowr).

Go tell all the scholars who disagree with you.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

Furthermore, I submit to you that the term "sons of God" NEVER refer to "angels!" They are ALWAYS about human beings!

Tell that to all the scholars who disagree with you.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

 So, after the genealogy in chapter 5, we read in Genesis 6:

Genesis 6:1-8 (KJV)

1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the "sons of God" saw the "daughters of men" that they were fair; and they TOOK (Hebrew: vayyiqchuw from laaqach meaning "to take by force" or "to buy." "and-they-took-by-force"; "and-they-bought") them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the LORD said,

"My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

4 There were giants (Hebrew: nefaaliym = "wood-cutters; lumberjacks")  in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the "sons of God" came in unto the "daughters of men," and they bare children to them, the same (the "sons of God") became mighty men (heroes) which were of old, men of renown (popular men).

5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said,

"I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them."

8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

Verse 2 talks about "buying women" or "taking women by force" for wives! This is what God responded to by giving them a time limit of 120 years.

Then, verse 4 talks about these guys being "lumberjacks" and "strong men" ("mighty men"). They were the gangs, the "bikers," the cartel of the antediluvian world! And, they weren't despised; they were POPULAR! These men (and they WERE "men") were anything BUT "sons of God," yet they called themselves that!

You are free to believe what you want.  But 1 Pet 3:19, 2 Pet 2:4 and Jude 6 indicate otherwise.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

The original Creation is found in the whole of Genesis 1 and 2.

You just said that "original creation" is a myth.  You called that a fiction, not a fact.  See above.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

I already discussed this. Look above to a previous post. I've already covered the fact that there was NO contradiction between Isaiah 45:18 and Genesis 1:2. NONE.

Your claim is not backed up with facts.  The TT says the OPPOSITE of Isa 45:18.  That is a FACT.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

First, there's NO SUCH THING as a "Hebrew disjunctive." That's just goofy, and it shows a lack of understanding in the Scriptures' languages.

When I search "Hebrew disjunctive" this is what appears at the top of the page:

• A unit of two words with disjunctive accents results from a division process in which a disjunctive accent appears in place of a conjunctive accent. If a vowel-final word carries a disjunctive accent, spirantization does not occur because that disjunctive functions as a separator.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

What you MEAN is a "GREEK disjunctive" used to translate the Hebrew vav-connective. This also shows that (1) the Greek translators of the Hebrew may not have fully known how the Hebrew worked, OR more likely (2) that the Greek translators were getting their disjunctive from the rest of the text, i.e., from its CONTEXT! I doubt (1) is true.

To say that the translators of the LXX "may not have fully known how the Hebrew worked" is ludicrous.  They would know far better than any translator of today.  Koine Greek was a living language then.  Unlike today.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

Second, such a contrast DOES NOT MEAN that there were two different creations!

Please pay more attention. I NEVER said anything about "two different creations", so why do you continue to push that FALSE narrative?  Again, demonstrating that you either do not understand my posts or you are twisting them knowingly.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

It just means that the original formation of the MATTER of the earth, although perfect as far as it could go, was not the FINAL form that God would give it in the days to follow.

Again, you highlight the glaring problem with your view.  To even say "final form" proves that there was an "initial form", thus making the translation "without form" or "formless" a ludicrous one.  

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

So, you simply believe that God went "<POOF!> It's all finished"? He PURPOSELY TOOK HIS TIME TO CREATE IT ALL! That's what Genesis 1 and 2 are all about!

Gen 1:1 wasn't a "poof", but much more probably a loud bang!  What follows is the restoration.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

I can't tell you WHY fully that He took six days to create it all, but if He said that's what He did, then I believe Him!

I believe Him too.  He took 6 days to restore earth before placing man on it.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

He did NOT say that He created some "creation ahead of Genesis 1 and 2 and that it was destroyed, either by Himself in response to haSatan's actions or by the actions of haSatan himself, but either way, the Scriptures DO NOT SUPPORT SUCH A FABLE!

Again, you fail to understand my posts.  I NEVER said there was "some creation ahead of Gen 1 and 2" so why do you keep saying what you say?  There is one creation and one restoration that you deny.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

I believe that God PURPOSELY introduced the 6 work days and the 7th day as a Day of Rest, a "Shabbat" ("Sabbath") for human beings to give Him His time, a time when human beings could rest, and spend time with their Maker, instead of always being consumed in the pursuits of work and wealth!

Everything that God does is PURPOSEFUL.  

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

How about this: If you're married, you and your wife move into a new house. It's great, but it's not how she pictures it to be. It is "without form"; the "form" she has in her mind for how the furniture must be added and arranged to make that house into a HOME, YOUR home with her!

Again, it isn't "without form", it is simply NOT in the "form" that the wife wants.  So you are AGAIN proving that everything HAS form.  Why can't you see this?

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

To her, the bare house is "unsightly"; not that it's a mess, but that it is not her HOME, yet!

Give me a break!  "tohu wabohu" is used both in Gen 1:2 and Jer 4:23, which described the condition of "the land" AFTER the besieging army did their thing.  You'd better bet that the wasteland was unsightly.  I think you are missing the logic here.

1 minute ago, Retrobyter said:

The earth is OUR HOME with God. The "third earth" - the "NEW earth" (2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1-4) will be our "backyard," and God will bring down and sink the foundations of the New Jerusalem into the crust to form our "new house," and together, the House and the Backyard, will be our New Home for all eternity!

Not relevant to Gen 1:2.

[Retrobyter]

18 hours ago, JimmyB said:

This is a very odd post. 

Shalom, JimmyB.

Thank you! I work hard at being "very odd!" It's fun!

18 hours ago, JimmyB said:

You seem to think that translating from ancient languages that were written to be understood by ancient people into a modern language that conveys the same understanding to today's readers is a straight-forward process.  Clearly it isn't!  That is one of the reasons that we have a variety of translations.

I never said it was. On the other hand, I DO believe that God gives us EVERY means by which to understand His Word better. At certain times, a translation would come out to better reflect NOT the original writing from the ancient languages, but to adapt to the changes that were made in the living language of English, for example.

See, it is my opinion that we should NOT be looking for a better translation but that we should be working toward a better understanding of the original languages, particularly Hebrew! Greek had its part to play as did Latin and German, but the authors of Scripture were HEBREWS, and most in particular were JEWS (children of Yhudah or Judah), as was Yeeshuwa`! When He returns to reign as as His Empire grows, Hebrew will be the new "lingua franca" of the world. So, why not learn it today? Why must that be a "top priority" in the Millennium? Get 'er done, boys!

18 hours ago, JimmyB said:

I prefer the work of committees of scholars using the best available source documents and the best translation techniques to convey the content of the ancient writings to our modern minds.  I do not accept the opinions of one person as being valid.

Committees are good - up to a point. Ever hear the phrase, "bogged down in committee?" Sometimes, contentions arise in differences of opinion, and these must be rectified in some manner. If "everyone is on the same page," then committees work, because they work together!

Also, who determines which are the "best available source documents" and what are "the best translation techniques?" Just another committee of HUMAN BEINGS? or is there a particular HUMAN BEING who makes the final decisions? If there IS a particular HUMAN BEING, then you ARE accepting the opinions of one person as being valid! And, HUMAN BEINGS are fallible. We ALL make mistakes! Hopefully, the "hive mind" will correct mistakes made by each individual, but even the "hive" can be wrong! This is why it is SO VITAL to seek the mind of the Spirit of God for EVERY WORD selected in a translation! But, human beings are frail, impatient, and can be just lazy at times. Everyone can have a bad day.