Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 51 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,176 Year: 5,433/9,624 Month: 458/323 Week: 98/204 Day: 14/26 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does the Bible say the Earth was created in 6 days, 6000 years ago?
Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 3 of 319 (489612)
11-28-2008 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
11-28-2008 2:55 PM


hi integral,
Yes i've also come to appreciate this point about genesis
those opening words are merely a title..the title being 'in the beginning, God created the heavens and earth' (basically Moses is identifying his God as the creator of all things)
then vs two suggests that the earth was standing as part of the universe for it says
genesis vs2 writes:
'Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God’s active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters
so clearly, water deep was already there, as was the darkness upon its surface so the account is not describing God as actually making the planet, rather its describing him preparing the planet for habitation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 11-28-2008 2:55 PM Admin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by kuresu, posted 11-28-2008 4:42 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 17 of 319 (489809)
11-30-2008 5:22 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by DevilsAdvocate
11-29-2008 11:23 AM


Re: Post Hoc Rationalisation
you will also notice that no other ancient creation accounts describe the order of earths creation
An existing Planet
Atmosphere Created
Dry Land Bought Forth
Sea Creatures Created
Flying Creatures Created
Vegetation created
Land Animals Created
Mammals Created
Mankind Created
you wont find another creation account as believable as this one

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-29-2008 11:23 AM DevilsAdvocate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Brian, posted 11-30-2008 5:30 AM Peg has replied
 Message 24 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-30-2008 11:22 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 31 by kuresu, posted 12-01-2008 10:41 AM Peg has replied
 Message 51 by Rrhain, posted 12-05-2008 12:55 AM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 19 of 319 (489812)
11-30-2008 5:38 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Brian
11-30-2008 5:30 AM


Re: Post Hoc Rationalisation
one thing is the order of events
atmosphere- land - sea creatures - flying creatures - vegetation - land animals - man
i believe that sits pretty well with current scientific knowledge ... pretty amazing that an ancient could have got this order of events even partially correct
and he doesnt have any of those crazy gods stories like one who fought with his wife and used part of her body to create the sea and another to create the land and then when they had a child, that childs tears dripped onto a leaf that turned into a human

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Brian, posted 11-30-2008 5:30 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Brian, posted 11-30-2008 6:05 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 22 by Granny Magda, posted 11-30-2008 8:23 AM Peg has replied
 Message 25 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-30-2008 3:36 PM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 27 of 319 (489925)
11-30-2008 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Granny Magda
11-30-2008 8:23 AM


Re: Post Hoc Rationalisation
in a thick atmosphere, the light from the sun could have reached the earth without the sun being visible. Just like on an overcast day, there is still light coming through but no sun. there is nothing unscientific about that.
the next day is the 2nd day in which it is said that an 'expanse' is made between the 'waters above and the waters below' this same expanse is later said to be where the flying creatures fly, therefore, the primitive atmosphere was a lot thicker and its logical that the light from the sun came thru it gradually
photosynthesis happens where there is no direct sunlight...there are plenty of shade loving plants that thrive where there is no sun, and just look in a rainforest...the lushest undergrowth comes from plants that NEVER see the sun
and finally, in the first instance of Genesis the expression 'let light come to be' uses a hebrew word which means 'general light'
but in the second instance when its talking about the sun and moon coming to be, it uses a different hebrew word which means 'source of light'
this tells us that the initial light was coming from the sources of light, but not directly so because the atmosphere was so overcast...but once that all cleared, then the sources of light could be seen in the sky.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Granny Magda, posted 11-30-2008 8:23 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Granny Magda, posted 11-30-2008 11:08 PM Peg has not replied
 Message 32 by Blue Jay, posted 12-01-2008 12:44 PM Peg has replied
 Message 52 by Rrhain, posted 12-05-2008 1:05 AM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 28 of 319 (489926)
11-30-2008 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by DevilsAdvocate
11-30-2008 3:36 PM


Re: Post Hoc Rationalisation
thanks for that brian,
its true there are some horrible tales in the bible
the bible doesnt shy away from telling of the faults and crimes of the people. That in itself is evidence to me that they really are inspired by God. Nor do the writers hold back from recording their punishments by God when they had gone astray.
but lets be honest, im sure we can read even more horror stories in the daily paper.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-30-2008 3:36 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 39 of 319 (490065)
12-02-2008 3:05 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by kuresu
12-01-2008 10:41 AM


Re: Post Hoc Rationalisation
hey kuresu,
i've read a lot of information to the contrary, this is what confuses me about evolutionary science....there are sooooo many different opinions
kuresu writes:
Dry land did not appear from out of water. If anything, water came after dry land (planet had to cool enough to not vaporize bodies of water, after all).
The Book of Popular Science says: “From [earliest] times down to the present, the perpetual process of building and destroying mountains has continued. ... Not only have mountains originated from the bottom of vanished seas, but they have often been submerged long after their formation, and then re-elevated.”
The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “The average depth of all the seas has been estimated at 3,790 metres (12,430feet), a figure considerably larger than that of the average elevation of the land above the sea level, which is 840 metres (2,760feet). If the average depth is multiplied by its respective surface area, the volume of the World Ocean is 11 times the volume of the land above sea level.”14 So, if everything were leveled out”if the mountains were flattened and the deep sea basins filled in”the sea would cover the whole earth to a depth of thousands of meters.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by kuresu, posted 12-01-2008 10:41 AM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Rrhain, posted 12-05-2008 1:17 AM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 40 of 319 (490066)
12-02-2008 3:21 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Blue Jay
12-01-2008 12:44 PM


Re: Post Hoc Rationalisation
Bluejay writes:
I'm afraid I don't understand how creating a firmament/expanse/atmosphere between the oceans and the clouds translates into Adam's time having a thicker atmosphere than today.
that atmosphere wasnt in Adams day... i dont believe the bible is talking about a literal 6 days of creation
the hebrew word translated 'day' in english, means 'period of time' ... the development of the earth for habitation would have been a long long process... we know that dinosaurs existed for instance and they died out millions of years before mankind came along
they would have been created in the 'day' or period of time where the sea monsters and land animals were created
bluejay writes:
I prefer to think that He either used the right words, or that He didn't actually write the Bible and won't be docking us points for things that Moses got wrong.
If only we could all speak ancient hebrew
thankfully, there are people who actually can....these are the ones why we do well to get our information from

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Blue Jay, posted 12-01-2008 12:44 PM Blue Jay has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Granny Magda, posted 12-02-2008 5:13 AM Peg has replied
 Message 45 by Brian, posted 12-02-2008 8:20 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 47 by Blue Jay, posted 12-03-2008 12:24 AM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 42 of 319 (490073)
12-02-2008 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Granny Magda
12-02-2008 5:13 AM


Re: Post Hoc Rationalisation
GrannyMagda writes:
Why then does it refer to evening and morning?
it was a simple way to explain the end of the creative period, when the sun rises again, a new day begins, its a new day
this is how moses wrote so that the people could understand
Also, an interesting point is the fact that the 7th creative 'day' did not finsih with "there came to be evening and their came to be morning"
it just finishes with "and there came to be evening a 7th day and God proceeded to rest"
more than 4,000 years after the seventh day, or God’s rest day, commenced, the Apostle Paul indicated that it was still in progress. At Hebrews 4:1-11 he referred to the earlier words of David (Ps 95:7, 8,11) and to Genesis 2:2 and urged: “Let us therefore do our utmost to enter into that rest.” By the apostle’s time, the seventh day had been continuing for thousands of years and had not yet ended.
this gives proof that Moses did not have a literal 24hr period of time in mind when he wrote the account. a creative 'Day' was obviously a very long period of time.... just as the hebrew word suggests.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Granny Magda, posted 12-02-2008 5:13 AM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Granny Magda, posted 12-02-2008 6:39 AM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 118 of 319 (492523)
01-01-2009 5:41 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Rrhain
01-01-2009 1:15 AM


Rrhain writes:
"In the beginning." Thus, there is no "before." It wouldn't be a beginning if there were a "before."
Was this the beginning? No? They why say, "In the beginning"? Was this not the first 24-hour period? No? Then why use a phrase that specifically indicates that it was?
Moses, in keeping with the method of writing in his day, simply used this first phrase as the subject title of the writing that was to follow.
the Assyrians, Babylonians & chaldeans all wrote in this same method. The first line of any tablet they wrote on, was the title of work that followed.
Today, we might use just a few words to describe the chapter of a book and it is separate to the paragraph, making it clear that it is a title. Well the ancients did not do that and this is an example of it.
you noticed that vs 2 said...'and the earth proved to be formless and waste...'
What we call 'verse 2' is actually the beginning of the account and it indicates that the earth was already existing.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Rrhain, posted 01-01-2009 1:15 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by ICANT, posted 01-01-2009 10:49 AM Peg has replied
 Message 124 by Rrhain, posted 01-01-2009 5:55 PM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 131 of 319 (492653)
01-02-2009 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by ICANT
01-01-2009 10:49 AM


Re: Re Title
ICANT writes:
You stated that verse 2 was the beginning of the account and that the earth already existed.
Verse 2 is the beginning of something but it is not the beginning of the events that took place in Genesis 1:1 as that was a completed action.
If you look for it you can find a description of what happened in Genesis 1:1. I think it would be called history or generations as the Hebrews reffered to it.
you might like to ask him what the Hebrew title of the book is. You might be interested to find out that Genesis” (meaning “Origin; Birth”) is the name given to the first of these books by the Greek Septuagint, whereas its Hebrew title Bere’·shith” (In the Beginning) is taken from the first words in its opening sentence.
but if he has a different answer, i'd be interested in hearing it.
About vs 1, it must be taken into consideration the style of ancient writings and the way they were constructed.
Moses was an ancient writer and therefore it would be pointless if we were to try and interpret his ancient style of writing as a modern style of writing,
If we compare other anceint writings, (Assyrian/Babylonian) we find that the first sentence is always the title of the work to follow. It is nothing more then a 'heading' or a 'chapter title'
so if we apply this rule to Moses writing, then, 'in the beginning God created the heavens and earth' is simply the name of his book.
Vs 2 really is the Vs 1 which states in the king james version
'And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters'
So, the earth here is already exisiting and at some point God begins to work on the earth to prepare it for habitation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by ICANT, posted 01-01-2009 10:49 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2009 1:51 AM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 132 of 319 (492654)
01-02-2009 12:41 AM
Reply to: Message 124 by Rrhain
01-01-2009 5:55 PM


Rhain writes:
Huh? How does one get "existing" from "formless and void"? "White" means "black" now?
if something is formless and void, it must also be existing...otherwise how could it be described in any way? Some have called a desert region a 'barren wasteland', of course we know the land exists...its just barren/waste/void etc... words to describe its condition.
you notice that the scripture says 'now the earth was formless and void.... and Gods active force was moving over the surface of the waters...'
the earth was an existing planet that was formless and void of life...the preparation of the planet spanned eons of time and each 'creative day' or 'creative period' was of unspecified length
the beginning of each new 'day' marked the beginning of a new phase in the process of Gods works to prepare earth for habitation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Rrhain, posted 01-01-2009 5:55 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by jaywill, posted 01-02-2009 12:20 PM Peg has not replied
 Message 187 by Rrhain, posted 01-09-2009 7:59 PM Peg has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 134 of 319 (492687)
01-02-2009 3:53 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by ICANT
01-02-2009 1:51 AM


Re: Re Title
You would certainly expect it to declare the God created the heavens and earth because it was an account about the creation of them.
All im saying is that we need to take in consideration the style of writing of ancient authors.
They all wrote in such fashion... just as today, all authors separate the title of each chapter from the body of text.
Chaldean Account of Genesis 1876 - George Smith - Google Books
this link provides you an evidence of how ancient writers wrote. On page 20-21 'Each subject or series of tablet had a title, the title being formed by the first phrase or part of phrase in the subject. Thus the series of astrological tabels...bore the title "When the Gods Anu, Elu...' this being the commencement of the first tablet'
Why would we not apply ancient styles of writing to Moses work, but apply it to all other ancient texts???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2009 1:51 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2009 1:54 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 142 of 319 (492834)
01-03-2009 7:06 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by lyx2no
01-02-2009 4:22 PM


Re: Re Judaism
and yet the 7th day, the day God proceeded to rest, does not end with 'and it came to be evening and morning' as in the case of each of the preceding five days, indicating that it continued. (Ge 2:1-3)
more than 4,000 years after the seventh day, or God’s rest day, Paul indicated that it was still in progress at Hebrews 4
has anybody ever considered this point?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by lyx2no, posted 01-02-2009 4:22 PM lyx2no has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Rrhain, posted 01-09-2009 8:32 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 148 of 319 (492897)
01-04-2009 4:56 AM


taps foot whilst waiting for someone to tackle the dilema over why the 7th day is not spoken of as coming to and end
'and there came to be evening and there came to be morning a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th & 6th day'.... but no 7th day
Gen 2:2 '2And by the seventh day God came to the completion of his work that he had made, and he proceeded to rest on the seventh day from all his work that he had made. 3And God proceeded to bless the seventh day and make it sacred, because on it he has been resting from all his work that God has created for the purpose of making.'
why doesnt the 7th day come to an end???
anyone???

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2009 10:24 AM Peg has replied
 Message 170 by jaywill, posted 01-05-2009 8:56 PM Peg has not replied
 Message 171 by ICANT, posted 01-05-2009 10:45 PM Peg has replied
 Message 197 by Rrhain, posted 01-09-2009 10:14 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5040 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 158 of 319 (492950)
01-04-2009 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Dawn Bertot
01-04-2009 10:24 AM


Bertot writes:
Your kidding ofcourse, correct? Do you need to be told that it came to an end,to know that it did? Further, of what value would it be to you even if it directly stated it did? Isnt it a reasonable conclusion that if the others did that this one did as well. if the rest of the scriptures speak of other days beginning and ending after this seventh day, happenings in peoples lives, so to speak, would it not be reasonable to conclude the seventh day was a 24 hour peiod as well. Im missing the validity of your point.
the point is that many claim that the 'days' of genesis are literally 24hrs in length
each creative day ends with 'and there came to be evening and there came to be morning'
but this statement does not appear for the 7th day. However the Apostle Paul says 4,000 years later that the 7th day was still in progress and christians had the opportunity to 'enter into Gods rest day'
so, how can it be deducted that the genesis 'days' are literally 24hours long in light of these facts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Dawn Bertot, posted 01-04-2009 10:24 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by Rrhain, posted 01-09-2009 10:38 PM Peg has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024