Rev 16:18 suggests the earth is much older than Adam/Eve

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

On 12/10/2023 at 5:05 PM, FreeGrace said:

Rev 16:18 - And there were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, and a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth, so great was that earthquake.   English Standard Version

If Genesis 1 is the acccount of original creation, then why didn't John just say "since the creation of the earth", since Genesis 1:1 does begin with original creation.  Why even mention man at all?  Of course there was no earthquake at all between day 1 and day 6 when Adam was created.  

However, when one realizes that v.2ff is actually describing a restoration of an earth that "BECAME an UNINHABITABLE WASTELAND", as the Hebrew words are translated elsewhere in Scripture, then we see that it is possible that there WERE earthquakes BEFORE Adam was created.  This supports an undetermined time gap between 1:1 and 1:2.

Words mean things.  And this verse gives support to an earth very much older than Adam.

 

The book of Revelation is still yet future, and the events in it have not yet occurred. The event John was seeing in chapter 16 was yet future, after the thousands of years of man being here now. The earthquake of chapter 16 will be the worst earthquake ever to shake the earth. 

[FreeGrace]

29 minutes ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

The book of Revelation is still yet future, and the events in it have not yet occurred. The event John was seeing in chapter 16 was yet future, after the thousands of years of man being here now. The earthquake of chapter 16 will be the worst earthquake ever to shake the earth. 

True.  My point is focused on John's mention of "a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth".  

If Genesis 1 is an account of original creation of the earth and man placed on it 6 days later, why even mention "since man was on the earth".  If the account is about creation, obviously man being on earth would be irrelevant.  John could have just said "since the creation of the earth, since it is clear that there is no mention of any quake before Adam was put on earth.

otoh, if the earth is much older than Adam, there sure could have been a stronger quake before Adam, so Adam's time on earth would be relevant in that case.  

[BeyondET]

4 hours ago, NConly said:

Eph 3

I have read a lot of post in this thread maybe not all. Not sure if this has been posted.

1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

2 Pet 3

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.

5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

7 ""But the heavens and the 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.

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.

I know there is a thread about the whole world being wasteland before the beginning of man  but v 7 seems to say different.imo

 

Verse 7 says but the heavens and earth which are now. Is saying there was a prior heavens and earth before the now heavens and earth.

[NConly]

5 hours ago, BeyondET said:

Verse 7 says but the heavens and earth which are now. Is saying there was a prior heavens and earth before the now heavens and earth.

Only if one does not read the second half of the verse. when something is reserved and or stored it is the part that remains the part that was not reserved and or stored will perish. imo

 

[Dennis1209]

On 12/10/2023 at 6:05 PM, FreeGrace said:

Rev 16:18 - And there were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, and a great earthquake such as there had never been since man was on the earth, so great was that earthquake.   English Standard Version

If Genesis 1 is the acccount of original creation, then why didn't John just say "since the creation of the earth", since Genesis 1:1 does begin with original creation.  Why even mention man at all?  Of course there was no earthquake at all between day 1 and day 6 when Adam was created.  

However, when one realizes that v.2ff is actually describing a restoration of an earth that "BECAME an UNINHABITABLE WASTELAND", as the Hebrew words are translated elsewhere in Scripture, then we see that it is possible that there WERE earthquakes BEFORE Adam was created.  This supports an undetermined time gap between 1:1 and 1:2.

Words mean things.  And this verse gives support to an earth very much older than Adam.

 

I have my thoughts and notes, but they would be much too long and detailed to post, and no one would read them anyway. Suffice it to say, Jews in antiquity believed in the old earth theory. The young earth theory is recent in historical terms. 

On the subject, how do we interpret Jeremiah 4:23-26, and Isaiah 45:18?

[BeyondET]

11 hours ago, NConly said:

Only if one does not read the second half of the verse. when something is reserved and or stored it is the part that remains the part that was not reserved and or stored will perish. imo

 

Can you explain that a bit more, earth has a reservation in fire it is stated in Revelation earth will be cast into fire.

I don't get your point?

[FreeGrace]

18 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

I have my thoughts and notes, but they would be much too long and detailed to post, and no one would read them anyway. Suffice it to say, Jews in antiquity believed in the old earth theory. The young earth theory is recent in historical terms. 

On the subject, how do we interpret Jeremiah 4:23-26, and Isaiah 45:18?

Jer 4 is an account of a "besieging army" (v.16) and a "destroyer of nations" (v.7) has "left his place to lay waste your land" (v.7).

This is the context.  And v.23 describes what this besieging army did to the land:  "tohu wabohu", or total destruction.

Isa 45:18 is a state about how God did NOT create the earth.  He did not "create the earth tohu".  This statement is in direct contradiction to the traditional English that says that God created and earth (v.1) and the earth WAS tohu.  No, it wasn't created tohu.

It became tohu.

And Isa 34:11 shows God destroying the land (tohu wabohu).  Same 2 Hebrew words in Gen 1:2.

Edited January 2 by FreeGrace

[Dennis1209]

5 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

Jer 4 is an account of a "besieging army" (v.16) and a "destroyer of nations" (v.7) has "left his place to lay waste your land" (v.7).

This is the context.  And v.23 describes what this besieging army did to the land:  "tohu wabohu", or total destruction.

Isa 45:18 is a state about how God did NOT create the earth.  He did not "create the earth tohu".  This statement is in direct contradiction to the traditional English that says that God created and earth (v.1) and the earth WAS tohu.  No, it wasn't created tohu.

It became tohu.

And Isa 34:11 shows God destroying the land (tohu wabohu).  Same 2 Hebrew words in Gen 1:2.

That is what I was hinting at. 

[RV_Wizard]

On 12/10/2023 at 7:05 PM, FreeGrace said:

If Genesis 1 is the acccount of original creation, then why didn't John just say "since the creation of the earth", since Genesis 1:1 does begin with original creation.

John was not God.  He was told to accurately recount the vision that was given to him as it was given to him.  His vision dealt with the end of man on earth, not the beginning.  He would not reference things outside of his vision.  He would reference the history of man because that's what the vision was about.

Regarding this nonsense of an earth that was and became desolate, what was it with no lights, no heat, and no establishment of time?  With no source of heat, how did it exist?  How could it exist?  For how long?  Why doesn't a single English translation of the Bible agree with you?  The notion of long ages was proposed so that people would swallow the lie of common descent.  The thing is, without a source of light or heat, NOTHING could live on the planet.  Light came the same day after the creation of the earth, and man arrived on the six day.  This is what the Bible teaches, and this is what makes sense.  You're claiming the earth became desolate.  That would require God to have made a mistake.  He doesn't make mistakes.

As God Himself wrote in Exodus 20:11, for in six days the Lord created the heavens, the earth, and all that is within them.  The Fourth Commandment is one of the basic tenants of our faith; just as the other nine are.  God created the universe and said that it was good.  No mulligans.  No errors.  No imperfections of any kind.

[FreeGrace]

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

FreeGrace said: 

If Genesis 1 is the acccount of original creation, then why didn't John just say "since the creation of the earth", since Genesis 1:1 does begin with original creation.

John was not God.

Irrelevant.  John was inspired to write by God the Holy Spirit.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

  He was told to accurately recount the vision that was given to him as it was given to him.

And he did.  And the mention of man is instructive.  Indicating that there is much more history to the earth than just 5 days.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

  His vision dealt with the end of man on earth, not the beginning.

Actually, the phrase "since man was on the earth" DOES deal with the beginning of man's life on earth.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

  He would not reference things outside of his vision.  He would reference the history of man because that's what the vision was about.

You are seeing things in a very very narrow way.  Open your eyes.  If earth was only 5 days only than Adam, there would have been NO NEED to even mention "man".  John would have written "since the earth was created.  Man's appearance would have been irrelevant.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

Regarding this nonsense of an earth that was and became desolate, what was it with no lights, no heat, and no establishment of time?

v.2 says what it says, but you have chosen to believe silly English translations.  The Hebrew clearly shows differently.  And you still have that pesky contradiction with Isa 45:18 that you cannot fix.

Ask God.  He didn't give us any details, so your questions are unanswerable.  You will know in eternity.  As to "no heat" etc, that was the state of the earth AFTER it became a wasteland.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

  Why doesn't a single English translation of the Bible agree with you?

I answered that.  The better question is:  why have so many English translators ignored the Hebrew and continued the fallacy of the first English translation.  Not even the LXX agrees with any English translation.

Do you honestly believe that God's original creation of earth was "unsightly", as the LXX translates v.2?

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

  The notion of long ages was proposed so that people would swallow the lie of common descent.

Common descent means Adam was the first human.  That didn't take long ages.  It has been estimated, measured, etc that Adam was on earth about 6,000 yrs ago.  Read Acts 17:26 that speaks of common descent.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

  The thing is, without a source of light or heat, NOTHING could live on the planet. 

And, that's the thing!  When we get to v.2, the earth is an uninhabitable wasteland, no light, heat, anything.  And unlivable.  So you are correct, nothing could live on the planet.  Which is why God restored the earth so man COULD live on it.  Totally logical.

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

Light came the same day after the creation of the earth, and man arrived on the six day.  This is what the Bible teaches, and this is what makes sense.  You're claiming the earth became desolate.  That would require God to have made a mistake.  He doesn't make mistakes.

Why do you continue with your "mistake" nonsense?  God made no mistakes.  He restored what was destroyed and He didn't tell us by what or whom.  

45 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

As God Himself wrote in Exodus 20:11, for in six days the Lord created the heavens, the earth, and all that is within them.  The Fourth Commandment is one of the basic tenants of our faith; just as the other nine are.  God created the universe and said that it was good. 

Are you still on about Ex 20:11?  Are you really not teachable?  The word in Ex is "asah" which means to make/create out of existing materials.  Yet the Bible says God spoke the universe into existence.  Gen 1:1 says that God created (bara) the heavens and earth.

Not the same word.  Gen 1:1 is about an ex nihilo creation, out of nothing.  Ex 20 is about a restoration.