Questions for evolution believers

[RV_Wizard]

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Actually, not.  Since Adam, everyone's age is literal,

We were discussing the age of the earth, not the timeline of man.  Please stay focused.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Could you point me to the verse,

Coal takes tens if not hundreds of millions of years to form; it all starts with living plants that eventually fossilize.  source

The misconception exists that Ussher and Jones were the only ones to arrive at a date of 4000 B.C.; however, this is not the case at all. Jones lists several chronologists who have undertaken the task of calculating the age of the earth based on the Bible, and their calculations range from 5501 to 3836 B.C.  source

So if the earth is 6000-7000 years old, and coal takes hundreds of millions of years to form, where did the coal come from?  You can't use your pretend previous world, because no living thing existed before day three.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

You don't know what the planet was ready for when created.

Considering that plants, animals, birds, fish and man were all in existence by the sixth day, I'd say it's pretty self-explanatory that it was ready to support life.  God, being perfect, created a perfect world.  He didn't have an Earth-By-Numbers kit from Hobby Lobby.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

I never said anything about lost years.  Why do you insist on trying to feed me your diet of red herrings?

You're the one claiming an ancient earth that had to be renovated because the previous tenants left it in a terrible mess.  Did God not check references?

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

Since the literal Hebrew clearly INDICATES that the earth was restored,

See your previous statement.  You are arguing with yourself... and losing.  The problem that arises when you make things up that are not in the Bible you can't be consistent.  I'm consistent.  I have never once agreed with ancient earth teaching.

 

[FreeGrace]

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

We were discussing the age of the earth, not the timeline of man.  Please stay focused.

You don't have to worry about my focus.  It's yours that is a concern.  I've given you plenty of clear evidence for Genesis 1 being a restoration after the earth became a mess.  As to age of earth vs age of man.  Same principle.  From the moment they were created time began for them.  

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Coal takes tens if not hundreds of millions of years to form; it all starts with living plants that eventually fossilize.  source

The misconception exists that Ussher and Jones were the only ones to arrive at a date of 4000 B.C.; however, this is not the case at all. Jones lists several chronologists who have undertaken the task of calculating the age of the earth based on the Bible, and their calculations range from 5501 to 3836 B.C.  source

So if the earth is 6000-7000 years old, and coal takes hundreds of millions of years to form, where did the coal come from?

A very old earth, of course.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  You can't use your pretend previous world, because no living thing existed before day three.

Are you being difficult on purpose?  I've never ever said anything about a previous world, so why do you keep embarrassing yourself with such silly language?

There is one earth.  God created it (v.1).  Then, the earth became a mess (v.2).  So God restored it for man's use.  This is really a simple concept.  

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Considering that plants, animals, birds, fish and man were all in existence by the sixth day, I'd say it's pretty self-explanatory that it was ready to support life.

Sure, the reason God restored it.  To support life, as you say.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  God, being perfect, created a perfect world.

Now, wait a minute.  You seemed perfectly happy with tohu being translated as "chaos", "waste", "desolation", "unsightly", and the like.  

I agree that v.1 is a perfect world.  But between the 2 verses, something occurred that wrecked the earth so God restored it, in 6 days.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  He didn't have an Earth-By-Numbers kit from Hobby Lobby.

If you believe some of the English translations, it sure sounds like it, IF IF IF Genesis 1 WERE describing original creation of earth in v.2.

And you still can't explain the glaring contradiction between the KJV translation with isa 45:18.

KJV  God created the earth and the earth WAS tohu

Isa 45:18  God did not create the earth tohu

If you don't see a contradiction, either you CAN'T read, or you just don't want to.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

You're the one claiming an ancient earth that had to be renovated because the previous tenants left it in a terrible mess.

I never said anything about "tenets".  So there you go again, putting words in my mouth.  That's really dishonest.  Or just snotty.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  Did God not check references?

More snot.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

See your previous statement.  You are arguing with yourself... and losing.  The problem that arises when you make things up that are not in the Bible you can't be consistent.

This is simply delusional.  I've stayed with the literal Hebrew the whole time, so you are very much in error.  On purpose, it seems.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

I'm consistent.

The better word is stubborn.

9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  I have never once agreed with ancient earth teaching.

Well, bully for you.  But since I've given you lots of clear evidence from Scripture itself, I'd not be so proud of your FAILURE to realize the truth.

[RV_Wizard]

14 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

There is one earth.  God created it (v.1).  Then, the earth became a mess (v.2).  So God restored it for man's use.  This is really a simple concept.  

It is a simple concept.  So is evolution, Buddhism, Islam, Mormonism, Scientology or any other false teaching.  The problem is that it isn't a TRUE concept.  There aren't millions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.  The earth didn't "become" anything in the absence of light, heat or life.  It began life as a formless blob and was formed into a vibrant planet teeming with life in a vast solar system.  No restoration needed or indicated.

25 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

But between the 2 verses, something occurred that wrecked the earth so God restored it, in 6 days.

Please cite for us the force capable of wrecking God's creation.

27 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

I never said anything about "tenets".

You said something wrecked God's planet so He had to restore it.  It MUST have been bad tenants.  It couldn't have been meteors, the universe hadn't been created yet.

34 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

I've stayed with the literal Hebrew the whole time,

You've stayed with your distorted translation the entire time.  However you aren't posting in Hebrew so why should anyone give credence to an agenda driven translation that somehow invents an entirely different historical narrative?  It's not only a bad translation, it's a dumb concept.  No, God did NOT make a faulty world that He had to go back and fix.  He made all living things in their maturity and put them on a mature planet with all the resources they would ever need.  God doesn't need do-overs.  He is perfect every time.

38 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

But since I've given you lots of clear evidence from Scripture itself,

You've given an entirely new theology which is stark contradiction to what the church taught for 57 centuries based on YOUR faulty translation of two words.  That's not much to base a new theology upon.

[BeyondET]

On 3/9/2024 at 10:13 PM, The Barbarian said:

It does if you use the common definition of "morning."   If you have to use a personal definition, that's a pretty good indication there's something wrong with your interpretation.

Pretty much the question I asked you.   "Morning" has a very definite meaning, in Hebrew and in English.   If you have to change it to fit a new narrative, it's an indication you've gone wrong somewhere.

 

Here's a common definition, twelve zero one in the morning goes to eleven fifty nine in the evening.

The Bible doesn't require you to know Hebrew or English to understand Morning, to be correct. If you think people need to freshen up on Hebrew or English definitions to comprehend scripture you've definitely gone wrong somewhere.

Edited March 12, 2024 by BeyondET

[BeyondET]

On 3/10/2024 at 7:53 PM, FreeGrace said:

According to the very text, there were 6 24 hour days.  So, no, the 6th day was no longer than any other day.

Show me the very text in Genesis about it being 24 hours each day not what you think is a day but the actual numbers 24 or 60 minutes an hour anything like that? Or are you assigning the evening and morning length.

Job 38:12

In your days, have you commanded the morning or assigned the dawn its place,

 

Edited March 12, 2024 by BeyondET

[RdJ]

6 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Show me the very text in Genesis about it being 24 hours each day not what you think is a day but the actual numbers 24 or 60 minutes an hour anything like that? Or are you assigning the evening and morning length.

Job 38:12

In your days, have you commanded the morning or assigned the dawn its place,

If these are not normal days, but periods of millions of years (with evening and morning? The plants would get no light) then how does that work? Cause this is what I thought would have to be the meaning when I studied Geography and the study books said it was all the truth, so I didn't question it, but that did not work. 

God made the trees and plants on day 3, and the animals on day 6. How have all those trees and plants survived all these years without animals that provide pollination and fertilization? Plants and animals need each other. One cannot have arisen millions of years after the other.

 

Edited March 12, 2024 by RdJ

[FreeGrace]

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

FreeGrace said: 

There is one earth.  God created it (v.1).  Then, the earth became a mess (v.2).  So God restored it for man's use.  This is really a simple concept.  

It is a simple concept. 

And I proved it is what v.2 says.  You have the evidence.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

So is evolution, Buddhism, Islam, Mormonism, Scientology or any other false teaching.

What does any of these false teachings have to do with truth?  Nothing.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  The problem is that it isn't a TRUE concept.

I've proved it is from the literal Hebrew which you reject.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  There aren't millions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

I don't know or care how many years there are between the 2 verses.  what I KNOW from the literal Hebrew is that the earth became a mess so God restored it for man's use.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  The earth didn't "become" anything in the absence of light, heat or life.

If you would only open your eyes to objectivity.  The "absence of light, leat or life" was the RESULT of the earth becoming a mess.  

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

It began life as a formless blob and was formed into a vibrant planet teeming with life in a vast solar system.

Why would God "begin life as a formless blob" anyway?  That's really weird, esp since He is more than able to speak a planet into existence that would support man.  

And you just shot yourself in the foot AGAIN.  What is a "formless" blob?  The very word "blob" is a description of form.  

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  No restoration needed or indicated.

Clearly indicated by the literal Hebrew.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Please cite for us the force capable of wrecking God's creation.

Please ask God what happened.  Only He knows.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

You said something wrecked God's planet so He had to restore it.

I didn't say it.  I repeated what God's Word said.  "tohu wabohu" is the key.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  It MUST have been bad tenants.  It couldn't have been meteors, the universe hadn't been created yet.

I don't care.  God didn't say.  I'm quite ok with that.  Maybe you should just move on.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

You've stayed with your distorted translation the entire time. 

You haven't proven even a little bit that I've distorted anything.

otoh, I've proven over and over your complete distorted view of the meaning of words.

For example, you accept the mindless word "formless" as being reality, when you can't even provide any example of such a state.

Also, in ALL the other uses of "tohu" alone and "tohu wabohu" together, by far the most common translation is "waste", "chaos", "desolation", "confusion", "unsightly", etc.  

And you think those words are ok for describing God's creative ability.  

Talk about distortion.  

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

However you aren't posting in Hebrew so why should anyone give credence to an agenda driven translation that somehow invents an entirely different historical narrative?

Why would I "post in Hebrew".  Neither of us read Hebrew.  But I have shown where the Hebrew is translated, which you don't care.  Your pet theory is threatened.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  It's not only a bad translation, it's a dumb concept.

No, "formless' IS BAD and STUPID.  It doesn't exist in reality.  

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  No, God did NOT make a faulty world that He had to go back and fix.

You really love to make up stuff, huh.  Your argument is as flawed as your theory.

I never said God made a faulty world.  That's what YOU seem to believe, given how "tohu" is translated elsewhere.  See above for the words used to translate it.

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

  He made all living things in their maturity and put them on a mature planet with all the resources they would ever need.  God doesn't need do-overs.  He is perfect every time.

No question.  But that doesn't address v.2 and the literal Hebrew.  The earth became a mess, destroyed, uninhabitable.  

13 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

You've given an entirely new theology which is stark contradiction to what the church taught for 57 centuries based on YOUR faulty translation of two words.  That's not much to base a new theology upon.

There is no "theology" here.  Just a FACT about creation.   Nothing in the Bible is threatened or changed, nor have you shown any.

God gave us the FACT about earth.  If you can't accept the FACT, don't sweat it.  

The only real difference between your read of Genesis 1 and mine is that the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland, and God restored it in 6 days.

Which means God spoke the heavens and earth into existence in one breath.  No 6 days to create the universe/earth.

Other than that, there is no difference.  

[FreeGrace]

7 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Show me the very text in Genesis about it being 24 hours each day not what you think is a day but the actual numbers 24 or 60 minutes an hour anything like that? Or are you assigning the evening and morning length.

Arguing for specific wording to refute another is ridiculous.  Everyone understands what "morning and evening" means.  If not you, then get educated on the fact.

7 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Job 38:12

In your days, have you commanded the morning or assigned the dawn its place,

Proving what, exactly?

[BeyondET]

On 3/12/2024 at 8:20 AM, RdJ said:

If these are not normal days, but periods of millions of years (with evening and morning? The plants would get no light) then how does that work? Cause this is what I thought would have to be the meaning when I studied Geography and the study books said it was all the truth, so I didn't question it, but that did not work. 

God made the trees and plants on day 3, and the animals on day 6. How have all those trees and plants survived all these years without animals that provide pollination and fertilization? Plants and animals need each other. One cannot have arisen millions of years after the other.

 

 

Just like today 20% of the earth's plant population do auto fertilization and don't require animals for pollinating.

How many days are in a year and how long is a galactic tic? Because it's spinning too.

 

Read Gen days, 1,2,4,3,5,6, and you don't have to come up with theories about how can plants grow without sun light.

Edited March 14, 2024 by BeyondET

[BeyondET]

6 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Arguing for specific wording to refute another is ridiculous.  Everyone understands what "morning and evening" means.  If not you, then get educated on the fact.

Proving what, exactly?

Who's arguing I'm just dandy how about you?

Yes the morning can be from after 12 o'clock midnight all the way to eleven fifty nine a.m or when the sun rises or on Venus where it takes 243 days on earth to complete a morning and evening.

Proves you are using your education to determine a day length before humans were even around.

Edited March 12, 2024 by BeyondET