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

[FreeGrace]

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

No.  He is in love with his false doctrine.  I love the word of God.

Rather, you love a lousy English translation.  I love the TRUTH.

[FreeGrace]

8 hours ago, other one said:

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.

I think you mean spread the TRUTH.  What the Hebrew actually says.

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, RdJ said:

But it says womb.

I don't what what "it" refers to, but I've not been talking about wombs.  The discussion  is Ex 20:11 and the use of 'asah' for the 6 days.

1 hour ago, RdJ said:

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

So God gave birth to the earth??  Is that what you think Job is saying?  Psa 33:6 and 9 tells us that God spoke things into existence.  Doesn't sound like giving birth to me.

I think Job was using metaphors here.  

btw, what immediately precedes "issued from the womb"?  Not the earth.  The SEA.  Job was describing how it must have looked when the oceans were contained.

None of this supports original creation during the 6 days of Genesis 1.  

If you go back through many pages, you will learn how the 2 Hebrew words, "tohu wabohu" in Gen 1:2 (formless and void) are used throughout the OT.  No way those words can describe construction or creation.  Rather, they describe destruction and chaos.

[RdJ]

15 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

I don't what what "it" refers to, but I've not been talking about wombs.  The discussion  is Ex 20:11 and the use of 'asah' for the 6 days.

So God gave birth to the earth??  Is that what you think Job is saying?  Psa 33:6 and 9 tells us that God spoke things into existence.  Doesn't sound like giving birth to me.

I think Job was using metaphors here.  

btw, what immediately precedes "issued from the womb"?  Not the earth.  The SEA.  Job was describing how it must have looked when the oceans were contained.

None of this supports original creation during the 6 days of Genesis 1.  

If you go back through many pages, you will learn how the 2 Hebrew words, "tohu wabohu" in Gen 1:2 (formless and void) are used throughout the OT.  No way those words can describe construction or creation.  Rather, they describe destruction and chaos.

Yes I know that and it sounded very plausible to me that it was a recreation, but Job 38 says that God laid the corner stone, so that is not a recreation, but the start of creating the earth and the morning stars were singing and then He said to the water that came out of the womb of the earth He just started to create: stop, go no further and He made the darkness as a swaddle band, also baby talk, sounds like a just created earth to me with Pangaea. Compare that with the darkness in Genesis. That sounded like evil darkness to me because of satan's fall, but compared with Job it's just swaddle bands for the new born baby earth.

I don't believe that the angels were created on day 1, because it says about satan on the day you were created until there was found iniquity in you, so that sounds like quite some time and then he fell and then God started to create the natural. I may be wrong though cause I wasn't there, just like Job.

[FreeGrace]

26 minutes ago, RdJ said:

Yes I know that and it sounded very plausible to me that it was a recreation, but Job 38 says that God laid the corner stone, so that is not a recreation, but the start of creating the earth and the morning stars were singing and then He said to the water that came out of the womb of the earth He just started to create: stop, go no further and He made the darkness as a swaddle band, also baby talk, sounds like a just created earth to me with Pangaea.

First, I've never used the word "recreation".  That came from rv, since he just couldn't bring himself to say "restore".  The words are different.  Yes, God did create some things during the restoration, but I reject "recreation".

Second, let's not ignore the Hebrew words, "tohu wabohu".  What 'tohu' cannot mean is 'formless'.  rv himself proved it can't be a real state, even though he claims so.  He quoted a source that defines "shape" as 2 dimensional and "form" as 3 dimensional.  That means every object has a form, by definition.  The only way "formless" is legitimate is when comparing an object with other objects of the same kind, yet the object lacks some or all of the particular forms that the other same objects have.  But it doesn't mean that object has no form.  It just doesn't have the exact same form as all the other objects of the same kind.  So it's used comparatively.

When researching ALL the uses of "tohu" in the OT, this is what we find, per biblehub.com:

Tohu occurs 10 times in the OT

Genesis 1:2
NAS: The earth was formless and void,

1 Samuel 12:21
NAS: futile things which

Job 26:7
NAS: over empty space And hangs

Isaiah 24:10
NAS: The city of chaos is broken down;
KJV: The city of confusion is broken down:

Isaiah 34:11 Describes the total destruction of the land
NAS: it the line of desolation And the plumb line
KJV: upon it the line of confusion, and the stones

Isaiah 44:9
NAS: are all of them futile, and their precious things
KJV: a graven image [are] all of them vanity; and their delectable things

Isaiah 45:18   Directly contradicts Gen 1:2 usual translation
NAS: it [and] did not create it a waste place, [but] formed
KJV: it, he created it not in vain, he formed

Isaiah 45:19
NAS: Seek Me in a waste place; I, the LORD,
KJV: Seek ye me in vain: I the LORD

Isaiah 59:4
NAS: They trust in confusion and speak
KJV: they trust in vanity, and speak

Jeremiah 4:23   Describes the total destruction of the land by an invading army
NAS: and behold, [it was] formless and void;
KJV: the earth, and, lo, [it was] without form, and void;

chaos, desolation, futile, waste place (3), confusion, formless (2).  But Jer 4:23 cannot be ‘formless’ since it describes the total destruction of land by a besieging army that destroys nations (from context).  So should be 4 x for “wasteland/place”.  None of these words can be applied to original perfect creation of the earth.  ALL of these translations describe very negative conditions.

rv just ignores all these words, none of which can be used for creation.  

26 minutes ago, RdJ said:

Compare that with the darkness in Genesis. That sounded like evil darkness to me because of satan's fall, but compared with Job it's just swaddle bands for the new born baby earth.

The darkness can be described either way.  This isn't proof of creation.

26 minutes ago, RdJ said:

I don't believe that the angels were created on day 1, because it says about satan on the day you were created until there was found iniquity in you, so that sounds like quite some time and then he fell and then God started to create the natural. I may be wrong though cause I wasn't there, just like Job.

Right, none of us were there, including Moses, who wrote Genesis.  And Exodus.

Moses used "bara" in Gen 1:1 for creation of the heavens and earth, but in Ex 20:11, he used "asah" for the 6 days.  This is significant because 'bara' means to create out of nothing, which we see from Psa 33:6 and 9, where God spoke things into existence.  The word "asah" is translated as "made", which indicates making something out of existing materials, which is what occurs during a restoration.

Consider Jer 4:23, where "tohu wabohu" occurs.  The context is the warning of a "besieging army" (v.16) that is a "destroyer of nations" (v.7) that is bringing "terrible destruction" on Israel (v.6) and "lay waste to the land" (v.7).  rv claims Moses quoted Gen 1:2 to describe how God began his creation, with a formless blob.  What make-believe!!  

No, Jeremiah used the same 2 words as Moses did to describe terrible destruction and laying waste the land by a besieging army that destroys nations.  He certainly wasn't describing original creation.  Neither was Moses.

What we don't have are any details of what or when or by who the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland.  But it did.  Since it all occurred before God created man and put him on the earth, it appears obvious that man doesn't need the details, and God left them out.

Studying all 10 uses of "tohu" in the OT makes it clear what the word means.

[other one]

6 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

I think you mean spread the TRUTH.  What the Hebrew actually says.

Goodness, how many posts does it take to do that?

[FreeGrace]

1 hour ago, other one said:

Goodness, how many posts does it take to do that?

Only one.  But rv won't accept what the Hebrew of Gen 1:2 actually says, so we go over and over with his attempted defense.

[other one]

2 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

Only one.  But rv won't accept what the Hebrew of Gen 1:2 actually says, so we go over and over with his attempted defense.

Are you going to be able to change his mind?

[FreeGrace]

2 hours ago, other one said:

Are you going to be able to change his mind?

No.  He has been clear that he refuses to accept any view, even the meaning of the Hebrew words, if they indicate the earth is much older than Adam.

He cannot bring himself to accept the truth from the original language, and holds tightly to English translations that failed to translate correctly in Gen 1:2, even though they translate "tohu" correctly elsewhere.  

People believe things for a variety of reasons.  He prefers a young earth, in spite of highly sensitive scientific equipment and what the Hebrew actually means.

I'm more interested in those who may read threads but never post.  They are most likely searching for answers themselves, and use the threads to get information.

[other one]

12 minutes ago, FreeGrace said:

No.  He has been clear that he refuses to accept any view, even the meaning of the Hebrew words, if they indicate the earth is much older than Adam.

He cannot bring himself to accept the truth from the original language, and holds tightly to English translations that failed to translate correctly in Gen 1:2, even though they translate "tohu" correctly elsewhere.  

People believe things for a variety of reasons.  He prefers a young earth, in spite of highly sensitive scientific equipment and what the Hebrew actually means.

I'm more interested in those who may read threads but never post.  They are most likely searching for answers themselves, and use the threads to get information.

Then just let it go. People reading the thread will see what you are saying, and you can all just ignore him if that's what it takes.