Reconciling 6 Days with 13.7 Billion Years

[JimmyB]

13 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Error alert!!  No, it is how particular words (plural) in Gen 1:2 are translated elsewhere in the OT.  Hardly a "single word" as you suppose/guess/opine.

Based on how the particular words are translated elsewhere, this is the best rendering:

But the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland.

The LXX translates the "waw" as a conjunction of contrast.  The particular verb form is translated as "became/become" in 59% of ALL occurrences in the OT, and "tohu" is translated elsewhere as "waste", "2 words wasteland" "waste place" and "chaos".

And the same two words "tohu wabohu" (without form and void) occurs in Jer 4:23 in a passage that describes a "besieging army" that DESTROYS "the land".  So, how does an invading army leave "the land" FORMLESS AND VOID?  Can you explain that with a straight face?

What is credible is how particular words are translated in the rest of the Bible.  And understanding that the 2 words in v.2 are found in Jer 4:23 which describes what a besieging army does to "the land".  It sure isn't "formless and void".  The passage plainly uses the word destruction to describe what the army does to "the land".

LOL!  You keep repeating this same mistranslation.  You haven't given a single answer to the question: HOW did this supposed decay/destruction occur?  What god/being destroyed God's creation?

[JimmyB]

13 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Error alert!!  No, it is how particular words (plural) in Gen 1:2 are translated elsewhere in the OT.  Hardly a "single word" as you suppose/guess/opine.

Based on how the particular words are translated elsewhere, this is the best rendering:

But the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland.

The LXX translates the "waw" as a conjunction of contrast.  The particular verb form is translated as "became/become" in 59% of ALL occurrences in the OT, and "tohu" is translated elsewhere as "waste", "2 words wasteland" "waste place" and "chaos".

And the same two words "tohu wabohu" (without form and void) occurs in Jer 4:23 in a passage that describes a "besieging army" that DESTROYS "the land".  So, how does an invading army leave "the land" FORMLESS AND VOID?  Can you explain that with a straight face?

What is credible is how particular words are translated in the rest of the Bible.  And understanding that the 2 words in v.2 are found in Jer 4:23 which describes what a besieging army does to "the land".  It sure isn't "formless and void".  The passage plainly uses the word destruction to describe what the army does to "the land".

You have focused on "tohu" as the significant word, now you're changing it!  Again, please explain HOW this happened. Since you haven't done so after several requests, it is obvious that you can't.

[Duncan]

4 hours ago, Tristen said:

I was contesting that there is anything between these verses - and you criticized my view as being "only [my] opinion".

That’s criticizing ? You ain’t to sensitive are you? And what I said and meant was it’s obvious what comes after verse 1.

and your reasoning is your opinion. That’s criticizing you? 🤔

4 hours ago, Tristen said:

You then said, "The best way to prove anything theologically is through scripture". Well - 100% of my "attention" is on what the "scripture" actually says.

I'm not exactly sure where we disagree.

 

Not important to me. 🙂

Edited July 11, 2023 by Duncan

[JimmyB]

I have better ways to spend my time than continuing to discuss this fallacy.

Genesis 1:1-2 (NRSVue) says "When God began to create the heavens and the earth, the earth was complete chaos, and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. (my emphasis).  This excellent translation is a recent update of a well-regarded translation.  That is good enough for me.  It certainly has more validity than one person's opinion.

The NET translation, with its extensive footnotes, has this regarding the start of Genesis 1:2: The disjunctive clause (conjunction plus subject plus verb) at the beginning of v. 2 gives background information for the following narrative, explaining the state of things when “God said…” (v. 3). Verse one is a title to the chapter, v. 2 provides information about the state of things when God spoke, and v. 3 begins the narrative per se with the typical narrative construction (vav [ו] consecutive followed by the prefixed verbal form). (This literary structure is paralleled in the second portion of the book: Gen 2:4 provides the title or summary of what follows, 2:5-6 use disjunctive clause structures to give background information for the following narrative, and 2:7 begins the narrative with the vav consecutive attached to a prefixed verbal form.) Some translate 1:2a “and the earth became,” arguing that v. 1 describes the original creation of the earth, while v. 2 refers to a judgment that reduced it to a chaotic condition. Verses 3ff. then describe the re-creation of the earth. However, the disjunctive clause at the beginning of v. 2 cannot be translated as if it were relating the next event in a sequence. If v. 2 were sequential to v. 1, the author would have used the vav consecutive followed by a prefixed verbal form and the subject."

This also has more validity than one person's opinion.

QED.

Edited July 11, 2023 by JimmyB

[FreeGrace]

16 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Anyone can look at the translations at biblehub, 99% is was not became.

Wow.  Really?  Do you know how to do a search of the exact same verb form on that site?  Only 4% of the time the verb form was translated as "was".  THE MOST COMMON translation of that verb form is "became/become".

16 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Again the Hebrew Bible never taught a earth that became a wasteland.

The LXX translates Gen 1:2 as "unsightly".  Why do you insist that "without form" is even a real status?  You haven't given any examples of any object that is formless.

16 hours ago, BeyondET said:

That's why they are deemed mistranslations of the original scripture.

It's not maybe the OT has errors in the original word of God, it doesn't.

You want to justify the lxx at the expense of the original OT that's outrageous.

Nonsense.  You want to accept a totally bogus transation of "tohu" as "without form" when that condition cannot exist in reality.
And as is, Gen 1:1,2 contradicts Isa 45:18.  And you haven't explained why it isn't.

And you can't explain why God would DECEIVE mankind by creating a universe with apparent age.  

There is no defense for your claims.

[FreeGrace]

12 hours ago, NConly said:

59% vs 41% ?

Please clarify?  I know that the exact same verb form in Gen 1:2 is translated as "became/become" in 59% of all occurrences.  I don't know what "41%" refers to.

[FreeGrace]

11 hours ago, BeyondET said:

This is similar in the beginning, God mentions the ark before telling how to form it, the ark was formless until the gosher wood was collected and milled and it was void of desks until it was built. It was the first and only of such a vessel.

This is a good example of how confusion looks.

"the ark was formless until gosher wood was collected/milled".

To be clear there was NO ark until Noah put it all together.  THEN and THEN ONLY was it an ark.  So see?  You are just rather confused about what words mean.

Again, EVERY object HAS form.  The ark isn't an ark until it is built.  God didn't create parts of the universe, and then put it all together as if "forming" it.

No, He spoke the entire universe into existence.  

11 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Gen 6

14Make for yourself an ark of gopher wood; make rooms in the ark and coat it with pitch inside and out.

15And this is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high.

16You are to make a roof for the ark, finish its walls a cubit from the top, place a door in the side of the ark, and build lower, middle, and upper decks.

In the beginning God created earth "ark" and was hovering over the waters "gosher wood" in which earth was divided from. Like the ark the hull, desks, doors then the formation of dryland and seas, vegetation, animals, man. These accounts are no difference in creating things rather the universe or an ark.

Just confusion all the way.  you seem to think that even before an object is an object, it exists in its parts.  Well, that would be quite wrong.

Just ask anyone who puts cars together on an assembly line.  Do they consider the huge bin of parts to be a car already?  That would be ridiculous to think that way.

[BeyondET]

11 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

This is a good example of how confusion looks.

"the ark was formless until gosher wood was collected/milled".

To be clear there was NO ark until Noah put it all together.  THEN and THEN ONLY was it an ark.  So see?  You are just rather confused about what words mean.

Again, EVERY object HAS form.  The ark isn't an ark until it is built.  God didn't create parts of the universe, and then put it all together as if "forming" it.

No, He spoke the entire universe into existence.  

Just confusion all the way.  you seem to think that even before an object is an object, it exists in its parts.  Well, that would be quite wrong.

Just ask anyone who puts cars together on an assembly line.  Do they consider the huge bin of parts to be a car already?  That would be ridiculous to think that way.

God mentioned a ark before it was built, you can't except that just like you can't except a earth was mentioned before it was divided from the water.

1:1 is the title of the book period.

[BeyondET]

35 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

Wow.  Really?  Do you know how to do a search of the exact same verb form on that site?  Only 4% of the time the verb form was translated as "was".  THE MOST COMMON translation of that verb form is "became/become".

The LXX translates Gen 1:2 as "unsightly".  Why do you insist that "without form" is even a real status?  You haven't given any examples of any object that is formless.

Nonsense.  You want to accept a totally bogus transation of "tohu" as "without form" when that condition cannot exist in reality.
And as is, Gen 1:1,2 contradicts Isa 45:18.  And you haven't explained why it isn't.

And you can't explain why God would DECEIVE mankind by creating a universe with apparent age.  

There is no defense for your claims.

Do you know how to read all the translations of Gen 1:2 on biblehub. 99% of the translations have it as was.

For the forth time Jewish people don't teach a earth that became a wasteland nor does the verse in Hebrew the original language of the Bible speak of it.

Edited July 11, 2023 by BeyondET

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, BeyondET said:

God mentioned a ark before it was built

Everyone mentions what they plan to build.  How is that even close to creating the universe.  Gen 1:1 SAYS that God created the universe/earth.  What it doesn't say is that God began thinking about making various things with which to create the universe.  That seems to be about what you think "create" means.

1 hour ago, BeyondET said:

you can't except that just like you can't except a earth was mentioned before it was divided from the water.

Please read v.1 carefully.  It doesn't say God began to create.  It says He created.  And Psa 33:9 says He spoke into existence.

1 hour ago, BeyondET said:

1:1 is the title of the book period.

No, it is a statement of fact.  He created the universe.  He didn't begin to think about what He needed in order to put the universe together.  You know, like matter, molecules, etc.