FreeGrace Posted March 26 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,415 Content Per Day: 8.22 Reputation: 609 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/07/2022 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 26 Some posts back you quoted a source regarding shape vs form. Shape being 2 dimentional and form being 3 dimensional. Most people think of the words as being synonymous, so the information is helpful for those who equate them. In the process, you have further proved my point about 'form'. Since form is 3 dimentional, every object HAS form, since every object is 3 dimentional. If you can see it, you are seeing its ____________ . Fill in the blank. OK, I'll help you. You are seeing its FORM . Therefore, just as God cannot sin, He cannot create a contradiction. When He creates something, anything, it HAS form. Even your term "formless blob" HAS form. Everyone can visualize what a 'blob' is and looks like. So there is no such thing a s a formless blob. I think you confuse regular form with irregular form. Seems you think if a form is irregular, the form is formless. However, that is a contradiction. Why would God create a contradiction? That makes no sense. Maybe you can help me understand such a scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RV_Wizard Posted March 27 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 738 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 313 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/22/2021 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1962 Share Posted March 27 14 hours ago, FreeGrace said: But, an old earth has NO NEED of evolution It DOES need an ancient earth, and SOME validation from the Scriptures. Instead we have the six day creation certified by God himself in Exodus 20:11. 14 hours ago, FreeGrace said: But your heavily biased view deprives God of that ability to create the vast universe in a moment, a breath of spoken word. The universe came about on day four. Prior to that, there was just the earth and the entity called light which may or may not have been the sun, or some precursor. There was no prior civilization which fell into destruction. It never happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RV_Wizard Posted March 27 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 738 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 313 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/22/2021 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1962 Share Posted March 27 14 hours ago, FreeGrace said: So there is no such thing a s a formless blob. If a blob had a form it wouldn't be a blob, now would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeGrace Posted March 27 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,415 Content Per Day: 8.22 Reputation: 609 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/07/2022 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 27 9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said: FreeGrace said: But, an old earth has NO NEED of evolution It DOES need an ancient earth, and SOME validation from the Scriptures. An old earth doesn't "need an ancient earth". It is one. As to validation, I have proven from the Hebrew that the earth became a wasteland, which led to the restoration. 9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said: Instead we have the six day creation certified by God himself in Exodus 20:11. I've repeatedly pointed out that Moses used "asah" in that verse, yet he used "bara" in Gen 1:1. Different words with different meanings. bara is creation out of nothing, or ex nihilo. asah is making things out of existing materials. That is what a restoration is. Ex 20:11 is NOT describing original creation, but the restoration that took 6 days. 9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said: The universe came about on day four. According to Gen 1:1 God created the heavens (universe) and earth. Can you explain why the LXX begins v.2 with a conjunction of contrast (but)? 9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said: Prior to that, there was just the earth and the entity called light which may or may not have been the sun, or some precursor. There was no prior civilization which fell into destruction. It never happened. Your theory never happened. The Hebrew is clear enough. But you won't bother to accept how tohu wabohu is used elsewhere in the OT, which proves my view. All you have is the KJV translation, from 10th Century manuscripts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeGrace Posted March 27 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,415 Content Per Day: 8.22 Reputation: 609 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/07/2022 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 27 9 hours ago, RV_Wizard said: FreeGrace said: So there is no such thing a s a formless blob. If a blob had a form it wouldn't be a blob, now would it? By your own words and the source you quoted from, the word "form" is 3 dimensional. Does a blob have 3 dimensions? Of course. It seems you've lost all sense of reality here. The word 'blob' is used to describe something that is quite malleable and oozes. So when dropped on a floor or ground, it FORMS what we call a "blob" of whatever it is. This is universally known. Just go ask your neighbors what a blob is. Can you see a blob? Then you are seeing the FORM of that blob. Your desperation to defend the lousy translation of "formless" in Gen 1:2 has led you into insanity regarding reality. The word 'blob' actually describes a FORM. Your denial of that FACT is meaningless. Since "form" is 3 dimensional, anything and everything you can see HAS form. Or you can't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted March 27 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 597 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,122 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,852 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 27 285 posts and counting. My, My, My, will there never be consensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeGrace Posted March 27 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,415 Content Per Day: 8.22 Reputation: 609 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/07/2022 Status: Offline Author Share Posted March 27 3 hours ago, other one said: 285 posts and counting. My, My, My, will there never be consensus. Only when the Hebrew is properly understood. Not until then. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RV_Wizard Posted March 28 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 6 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 738 Content Per Day: 0.80 Reputation: 313 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/22/2021 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1962 Share Posted March 28 11 hours ago, other one said: 285 posts and counting. My, My, My, will there never be consensus. No. He is in love with his false doctrine. I love the word of God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted March 28 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 597 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,122 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,852 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted March 28 2 hours ago, RV_Wizard said: No. He is in love with his false doctrine. I love the word of God. If that is the case, I would think after 285 posts, one might think changing his mind just isn't going to happen, and the more you discuss it with him the more he gets to spread his doctrine. Just something to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RdJ Posted March 28 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 66 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,090 Content Per Day: 0.35 Reputation: 610 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/11/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/25/1970 Share Posted March 28 22 hours ago, FreeGrace said: An old earth doesn't "need an ancient earth". It is one. As to validation, I have proven from the Hebrew that the earth became a wasteland, which led to the restoration. I've repeatedly pointed out that Moses used "asah" in that verse, yet he used "bara" in Gen 1:1. Different words with different meanings. bara is creation out of nothing, or ex nihilo. asah is making things out of existing materials. That is what a restoration is. Ex 20:11 is NOT describing original creation, but the restoration that took 6 days. According to Gen 1:1 God created the heavens (universe) and earth. Can you explain why the LXX begins v.2 with a conjunction of contrast (but)? Your theory never happened. The Hebrew is clear enough. But you won't bother to accept how tohu wabohu is used elsewhere in the OT, which proves my view. All you have is the KJV translation, from 10th Century manuscripts. But it says womb. Job sounds like it's not a recreation, because it says womb. “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? “Or who shut in the sea with doors, When it burst forth and issued from the womb; When I made the clouds its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band; When I fixed My limit for it, And set bars and doors; When I said, ‘This far you may come, but no farther, And here your proud waves must stop!’ Job 38:4-11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts