Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9173 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,565 Year: 4,822/9,624 Month: 170/427 Week: 83/85 Day: 0/20 Hour: 0/0


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?
ICANT
Member (Idle past 104 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 301 of 319 (496335)
01-27-2009 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 300 by New Cat's Eye
01-27-2009 3:30 PM


Hi CS,
Catholic Scientist writes:
It remains unnecessary even though I've proved that you are wrong.
I was playing around with numbers a little and I think you haven't proved your absurd point yet.
All of the things in chapter 4 had to take place before that Adam could have had a son named Seth as that is listed last.
Therefore if that Adam was say 40 when Cain was born which is very conservative according to chapter 5's generations.
Then I use the same ages as Seth's descendants for the rest.
Cain was 105 when he bare Enoch.
Enoch was 90 when he bare Irad.
Irad was 70 when he bare Mehujael.
Mehujael was 65 when he bare Methusael,
Methusael was 62 when he bare Lamech.
Lamech was 65 when he bare Jabal
That would make Adam 487 years old when Seth was born.
But then when you get to Genesis 5:3 Adam is 130 years old when he has a son named Seth.
So no the man in Genesis 2:7 and the man in Genesis 5:3 can not be the same man.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 300 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-27-2009 3:30 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 302 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-27-2009 10:59 PM ICANT has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 302 of 319 (496383)
01-27-2009 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 301 by ICANT
01-27-2009 7:52 PM


I was playing around with numbers a little and I think you haven't proved your absurd point yet.
This game of keeping the Bible literal and inerrant by making up whatever you want, as long as you can still twist the Bible verse to fit it and you don't contradict science, in order to maintain the inerrancy is bad theology, ICANT. Its dishonest and shameful. You should realize that it is not inerrant when literal, and learn from all that it has to offer as it is what it is.
Don't you see the ridiculous mental gymnastics that you have to perform in order to maintain the literal inerrancy?
So no the man in Genesis 2:7 and the man in Genesis 5:3 can not be the same man.
So now that you have proven that they cannot be the same man and I have proven that they cannot be different men, can you finally realize that if we read it literally then it cannot be inerrant?
And that it can only be inerrant if we do ridiculous mental gymnastics in the sole attempt to maintain the inerrancy by making up non-literal interpretations that defy logic?
If not, is there anything at all that is even possible of convincing you of this bad theology that you are employing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 301 by ICANT, posted 01-27-2009 7:52 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 305 by ICANT, posted 01-28-2009 4:24 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 303 of 319 (496407)
01-28-2009 5:10 AM
Reply to: Message 274 by ICANT
01-23-2009 7:52 PM


Re: Same Adam
ICANT writes:
The man formed from the dust of the ground in Genesis 2:7 was formed and became a living soul prior to any animal, plant, or fowl there was no water creatures. The woman was cloned from a rib taken from the man last.
The man created in the image/likeness of God in Genesis 1:27 was created at the same time as the woman, which was not cloned from one of his ribs.
They were created after all animals, plants, fowl and water creatures.
Please explain how these two men and women can be the same.
genesis is not a chronological account of creation. You seem to be looking at two separate 'accounts' of the same event and assuming them to be two seperate 'events'
is this an attempt to reconcile evolution with the bible?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by ICANT, posted 01-23-2009 7:52 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by ICANT, posted 01-28-2009 3:34 PM Peg has not replied

ICANT
Member (Idle past 104 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 304 of 319 (496513)
01-28-2009 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 303 by Peg
01-28-2009 5:10 AM


Re: Same Adam
Hi Peg,
Peg writes:
is this an attempt to reconcile evolution with the bible?
No.
I could care less whether they agree or not.
I just want to know what the Bible says.
Peg writes:
genesis is not a chronological account of creation. You seem to be looking at two separate 'accounts' of the same event and assuming them to be two separate 'events'
But it is a chronological account of two separate events.
Scholars agree that there are two creation events in Genesis. But most attribute that to different writers.
I read the creation account when I was ten years and brought a Wenesday speech on what I understood about the creation. This was in 1950.
I presented it as two events one happening in a day. The other happening over a period of days. It took me four years of arguing with my great uncle who was my pastor before I came to the conclusion that they happened a long time apart.
I have asked hundreds of sixth graders to read Genesis 1:1 and then continue reading until they came to a verse that refereed to Genesis 1:1. 90% stop at Genesis 2:4.
Genesis 2:4 is the generations (history) of that day.
One day.
Not six days.
You seem to like to argue about things so since no one else will why don't you take Message 292 and show me where I go wrong.
I have been trying for 50 years of which 5 was spent in college to get someone to explain how Genesis 2:4-4:24 is not the history of Genesis 1:1.
I look at it this way either the earth and universe is 6,000 years old and God is a liar.
Or that,
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" and no one knows when that was.
God is eternal, so when was the beginning?
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by Peg, posted 01-28-2009 5:10 AM Peg has not replied

ICANT
Member (Idle past 104 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 305 of 319 (496516)
01-28-2009 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 302 by New Cat's Eye
01-27-2009 10:59 PM


Re The Game
Hi CS,
Catholic Scientist writes:
This game of keeping the Bible literal
It may be a game to you but it is no game to me.
I will accept what the Bible says as long as it is rightly divided.
These are the two accepted rules of Bible Analysis.
A. The Five Point Question Rule.
(1) Who is speaking or writing?
(2) To whom or about whom is he speaking or writing?
(3) About what subject is he speaking or writing?
(4) When or about what time is he speaking or writing?
(5) What is the occasion for the speaking or writing?
B. The Proper Application Rule.
(1) The general application of a truth or deed to every person.
(2) The particular application of a truth or deed to an individual or particular group.
Catholic Scientist writes:
If not, is there anything at all that is even possible of convincing you of this bad theology that you are employing?
Sure.
A great start would be to convince me that Genesis 2:4 does not say that it is the generations (history) of the heaven and the earth in the day God made them.
Not days.
Day. One single light period.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 302 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-27-2009 10:59 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 306 of 319 (496588)
01-29-2009 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 292 by ICANT
01-24-2009 6:38 PM


understanding Genesis
Hi ICANT,
i appreciate you've spent a lot of time on this, this is how i've been taught to understand Genesis
Genesis 1:1
quote:
'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth'
this is a title. Its how all ancient writers wrote. The assyrian library has hundreds of clay tablets which all begin in much the same way...the first sentence is the title of the work to follow.
the account begins at vs 2
quote:
'Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep and Gods active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters'
the existing planet originally was submerged in water, it was without form and God began to work on an already existing planet.
It continues on to give a general account of the creative work relative to the earth. This is accomplished in six time periods called days, each beginning with an evening, when the creative work for that period is undefined, and ending in the brightness of a morning, as the glory of the creative work becomes clearly manifest.
Genesis 2;1-2
quote:
Thus the heavens and the earth and all their army came to their completion. And by the seventh day God came to the completion of his work that he had made and he proceeded to rest...'
The account next gives a close-up, or magnified view, of God’s creative work as regards man.
It describes the garden of Eden and its location, states God’s law of the forbidden tree, relates Adam’s naming of the animals, and then gives the account of Jehovah’s arranging the first marriage by forming a wife from Adam’s own body and bringing her to Adam.
These are two separate accounts of the same event. the first is focused on the creation of the earth with a little explanation of man coming after it all. The latter opens with a brief explanation of the earth but then focus's on mankind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by ICANT, posted 01-24-2009 6:38 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 307 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2009 9:57 AM Peg has not replied

ICANT
Member (Idle past 104 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 307 of 319 (496610)
01-29-2009 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 306 by Peg
01-29-2009 7:17 AM


Re: understanding Genesis
Hi Peg,
Peg writes:
i appreciate you've spent a lot of time on this, this is how i've been taught to understand Genesis
I understand what you were taught.
I was taught the same things before I went to college.
I was taught the same thing in college with a couple of other possibilities.
But when I presented my view in 1964 I was told you will get over it this is the way it has always been taught.
The first story is the creation and the second story just amplifies the first.
Well I still don't buy it. I have not been convinced yet.
Peg writes:
this is a title. Its how all ancient writers wrote.
That being the case.
Exodus 1:1 Now these are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob.
Would be the title of Exodus.
So the book of Exodus is about the children of Israel going into Egypt. Everyone that went with Jacob.
Leviticus 1:1 And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,
Would be the title of Leviticus.
Leviticus is about God speaking to Moses.
Numbers 1:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tabernacle of the congregation, on the first day of the second month, in the second year after they were come out of the land of Egypt, saying,
Would be the title of Numbers.
So the book of Numbers is about God speaking unto Moses.
Deuteronomy 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab.
Would be the title of Deuteronomy.
So the book of Deuteronomy is all the words Moses spoke unto all Israel before they crossed Jordan.
I think in light of these other books as well as the remainder of Genesis that your assertion that the first verse is a title is unfounded and is based on wishful thinking.
These five books of Moses whether he recorded them or they were handed down by word of mouth until recorded makes no difference which.
They all belong to one source Moses, who was one of the most Educated men of his day. He was educated in the best schools of Egypt as he was raised in Pharaoh's house.
If Egypt had a written language at that time Moses would have been able to read and write it.
The children of Israel were making clay bricks for the Egyptians to build buildings out of. They could have produced any clay tablets Moses would have needed to write on.
They had 40 years of wandering around in the desert to accomplish the task.
Peg writes:
the account begins at vs 2
If the account of creation began at verse two there would be absolutely no thing there.
Peg writes:
the existing planet originally was submerged in water, it was without form and God began to work on an already existing planet.
Where did the earth that was covered in water come from?
When did God create that mess described in verse 2?
I do agree that there is an earth in verse 2 that is covered with water.
We just don't agree how it got there.
It seems according to your view that it just happened to be there and needed to be worked on.
I can not find where you are quoting this from:
quote:
'Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep and Gods active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters'
I searched: KJV, NKJV, NLT, NIV, ESV, RVR, NASV, RSV, ASV, YNG, DBY, WEB, HNV, VUL, LXX, AND HEBREW.
I find none of them have a word proved in the second verse of Genesis.
Hebrew text:
Genesis 1:2 ‘ —- — —-
The Hebrew word is the only word that could be translated proved but the primary meaning of hayah is 1) to be, become, come to pass.
How anyone can get anything out of that other than "came to be", or "become" is beyond comprehension.
That is comparable to someone looking up the word black in the dictionary and translating it as white.
Peg writes:
The account next gives a close-up, or magnified view, of God's creative work as regards man.
That account begins in Genesis 2:4 which states:
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
Does this verse say it is the history of the day God made the earth and the heavens?
Which of the 6 days recorded in Genesis 1:2-2:3 is it referring too?
Peg writes:
It describes the garden of Eden and its location, states God's law of the forbidden tree, relates Adam's naming of the animals, and then gives the account of Jehovah's arranging the first marriage by forming a wife from Adam's own body and bringing her to Adam.
I agree it covers these things.
Peg writes:
These are two separate accounts of the same event. the first is focused on the creation of the earth with a little explanation of man coming after it all. The latter opens with a brief explanation of the earth but then focus's on mankind.
You have made this assertion several times.
Why not indulge me and go back and take my message 292 as I asked you to do and explain the differences to me so I can understand how it is one story amplified by the other.
Problems like:
Man in Genesis 2:7 formed from dust of the earth.
Woman formed from rib of man after all animals, and fowl formed from the ground.
Plants and trees called from the ground. (no seed involved)
No fish at all.
Man and woman in Genesis 1:27 formed at the same time.
Animals called from the ground after their kind.
Fowl called from the sea after their kind.
Plants and trees called from seed that was on the ground.
Whales and water creatures produced from the waters.
There are enough differences here to prove that they are two different events being described.
And those are just a few of the differences.
I know what you have been taught. I was taught the same thing.
But is what you have been taught what the Bible says?
I think not.
I am not going to waste my time restating all the thing I have stated in this thread. So I would appreciate it if you would take Message 292 and show me where I am reading or understanding the Bible wrong. Take into consideration I studied Hebrew and Greek for 5 years, and have been applying it to study for 38 years.
I ask no one to agree with me.
I just ask for anyone to show me where I am wrong.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by Peg, posted 01-29-2009 7:17 AM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Modulous, posted 01-31-2009 7:42 AM ICANT has replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 308 of 319 (496667)
01-29-2009 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by ICANT
01-24-2009 6:38 PM


ICANT, i have no intention of pointing out where you're wrong. There are literally thousands of different christian chruch's with varying teachings and its up to each individual to analyse those teachigns and decide what is most logical to them. So if this is logical to you, then who am i to tell you you're wrong?
Now if you want to believe that each creative 'day' was a literal 24 hours long, you'd need some pretty strong evidence and frankly, i dont see it. The evidence i see is:
1. the earth is much older then 6,000 years old. That is fact.
2. in Genesis 1:5 God himself is said to divide day into a smaller period of time, calling just the light portion “day.” This shows that 'day' is not always a 24hr period of time. Another example is Prov25:13, here “The day of harvest” involves many days over a period of time.
these are just two very good reasons why i cannot believe that the genesis 'day' was 24hrs long.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by ICANT, posted 01-24-2009 6:38 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 309 by ICANT, posted 01-30-2009 10:45 AM Peg has replied
 Message 310 by Brian, posted 01-30-2009 7:29 PM Peg has replied

ICANT
Member (Idle past 104 days)
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 309 of 319 (496758)
01-30-2009 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 308 by Peg
01-29-2009 8:51 PM


Re Intention
Hi Peg,
Peg writes:
ICANT, i have no intention of pointing out where you're wrong.
Kinda late for that, you have done that several times in the past 2+ months.
Peg writes:
Now if you want to believe.
Peg it doesn't make any difference what I have been taught or what I believe.
It doesn't make any difference what you have been taught or what you believe.
It doesn't make any difference what the 1,280 different denominations in the US or the 34,000 different religions in the world believe.
The only thing that matters is what God said.
I want to know what God said.
Peg writes:
Now if you want to believe that each creative 'day' was a literal 24 hours long, you'd need some pretty strong evidence and frankly,
Lets examine what God said.
Genesis 1:2 there was darkness.
Genesis 1:3 God said "let there be light".
Genesis 1:4 God divided the light from the darkness.
Genesis 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Light period = day (daylight).
Darkness = night (dark period).
Evening = the end of a light period. (day)
Morning = the end of a dark period. (night)
The combination of the first evening which had concluded the first light period. That ended with the Morning of the first dark period God declared the first day.
We have this repeated for each following day except the seventh day. Which God ceased from His creation.
Now if you want a long period of time to get an old earth you have only one place to put it.
That would be the first light period that ended with the first evening which was the darkness found in Genesis 1:2.
So I think I have pretty good authority that the days in Genesis are literal 24 hour days.
God said a light period and a dark period = one day.
The only place He did not say that was in verse 5 when He declared the first evening (end of a light period) and the following morning the first day.
Show me where God said something different.
Peg writes:
1. the earth is much older then 6,000 years old. That is fact.
I would agree with that.
If it is not God is a liar. Because He said:
1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Since God is eternal and had no beginning.
When was the beginning?
I believe the universe and earth have always been here and will until someone can tell me when the beginning was.
Peg writes:
2. in Genesis 1:5 God himself is said to divide day into a smaller period of time, calling just the light portion “day.” This shows that 'day' is not always a 24hr period of time. Another example is Prov25:13, here “The day of harvest” involves many days over a period of time.
The first part has been addressed but I would like to comment on Proverbs 25:13.
Out of my 44 Bibles the only one that comes near what you are quoting is Young's.
Pro 25:13 As a vessel of snow in a day of harvest, So is a faithful ambassador to those sending him, And the soul of his masters he refresheth.
That says a day meaning one single day during harvest.
What Bible do you use?
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Peg, posted 01-29-2009 8:51 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 312 by Peg, posted 01-31-2009 5:35 AM ICANT has replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 5035 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 310 of 319 (496815)
01-30-2009 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 308 by Peg
01-29-2009 8:51 PM


these are just two very good reasons why i cannot believe that the genesis 'day' was 24hrs long.
Why can't the days be 24 hours long and the story be a creation myth?
the earth is much older then 6,000 years old. That is fact.
how do you know the Earth is much older than 6000 years?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Peg, posted 01-29-2009 8:51 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 313 by Peg, posted 01-31-2009 5:43 AM Brian has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 311 of 319 (496852)
01-31-2009 5:27 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by ICANT
01-27-2009 12:13 AM


ICANT responds to me:
quote:
quote:
No, we're not. We're talking about the history of the universe and the timeline of when certain events happened such as the creation of the earth.
No, you are talking about the six days in Genesis 1:2-31.
First, keep going. The story of Gen 1 continues on to Gen 2:3.
Second, I fail to see how Gen 1:1 - Gen 2:3 doesn't coincide with "the history of the universe and the timeline of when certain events happened such as the creation of the earth."
So once again, "beginning" doesn't actually mean "beginning."
quote:
The history of the creation of the heavens and the earth are found in Genesis 2:4 - Genesis 4:24.
Then why does Gen 1:1 talk about "the beginning"? Why does the story of Gen 1 detail the creation of the heavens and the earth, the sun, the moon, and stars, plants, animals, even humans, giving specific days upon which they were created?
"Beginning" means "later," "first" means "not the first," "firmament" means "not the firmament," "god created" means "god didn't create it for it already existed," "earth" means "not the earth," "without form" means "has a form," "void" means "extant."
quote:
quote:
And yes, the Bible says "the beginning" happened less than 6000 years ago.
Could you produce a book, chapter, and verse to that effect?
Already did, many times:
Message 9
Genesis 1 gives the six, literal, 24-hour days of creation from "the beginning" through to the creation of humans.
Genesis 5 counts up the generations from the first human, Adam, to Noah of 956 years.
Genesis 8 says that Noah was 601 when the flood was over (1557 years total).
Genesis 11 has the generations of Noah to Abraham (292 years from the end of the flood to Abraham or 1849 total).
Genesis 12 tells us Abraham was 75 when god made his covenant with him (1924 years)
Galatians 3 says that the Exodus happened 430 years after the covenant (2354 years).
1 Kings 6 says that the building of the Temple of Solomon was begun 480 years after the Exodus (2834 years).
It is generally considered that the Temple of Solomon was begun in 956 BCE so this means that the earth is about 5800 years old from "the beginning."
But, "beginning" means "later" in your lexicon. "Beginning" means "later," "first" means "not the first," "firmament" means "not the firmament," "god created" means "god didn't create it for it already existed," "earth" means "not the earth," "without form" means "has a form," "void" means "extant."
quote:
If not I will assume Rrhain says the Bible says it happened 6000 years ago.
Incorrect. Instead, you will play dumb as if you don't know this. You play dumb as if you are expecting the Bible to say, "the Earth was created on Sunday the 21st of October, 4004 B.C., at exactly 9:00 A.M., because God liked to get work done early in the morning while he was feeling fresh" (points if you catch the reference).
quote:
Which of the six day's is the generations (history) of the heavens and the earth referring to in:
Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

Your question is nonsensical. Genesis 2 was written by a completely different author from Genesis 1 and thus has absolutely no connection to it. That's why it contradicts the story. Genesis 2 starts all over, completely ignorant of Genesis 1, and gets the order of creation different from the story we were just told (but still just as wrong compared to the actual history of life on this planet).
quote:
So what happened in the beginning?
Gen 1:1 - Gen 2:3. That's what happened "in the beginning."
But, "beginning" means "later" in your lexicon. "Beginning" means "later," "first" means "not the first," "firmament" means "not the firmament," "god created" means "god didn't create it for it already existed," "earth" means "not the earth," "without form" means "has a form," "void" means "extant."
quote:
And the Bible agrees as it contains no date for the beginning.
Incorrect. The Bible says it happened less than 6000 years ago. Let's not play dumb. There's a reason that the Jewish calendar, which starts counting from "the beginning," has today being 6 Sh'vat of the year 5769.
quote:
Actually it does not tell us God created light.
Incorrect:
Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Let us not play dumb about what that verse means.
But, an act of god's creation isn't actually god creating in your lexicon. "Beginning" means "later," "first" means "not the first," "firmament" means "not the firmament," "god created" means "god didn't create it for it already existed," "earth" means "not the earth," "without form" means "has a form," "void" means "extant."
quote:
So the Bible does not say God created light.
Incorrect:
Genesis 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Let us not play dumb about what that verse means.
But, an act of god's creation isn't actually god creating in your lexicon. "Beginning" means "later," "first" means "not the first," "firmament" means "not the firmament," "god created" means "god didn't create it for it already existed," "earth" means "not the earth," "without form" means "has a form," "void" means "extant."
quote:
Where was this light?
Separated from the darkness. Thus, the evening and the morning of the first day. A literal, 24-hour day from "the beginning."
But, "beginning" means "later" in your lexicon. "Beginning" means "later," "first" means "not the first," "firmament" means "not the firmament," "god created" means "god didn't create it for it already existed," "earth" means "not the earth," "without form" means "has a form," "void" means "extant."
quote:
quote:
It does not tell us how he created life,
Sure it does.
Incorrect. Gen 2:7 tells us what humans were made out of, but it doesn't tell us how god did it. Humans are made out of carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, and various other elements. But humans are not made by taking a lump of coal, a hunk of calcium, and dumping it into a vat of water and ammonia with some sludge at the bottom. Gen 2:7 certainly has more detail then Gen 1:27, but that isn't saying much.
quote:
The first living man was formed from the dust of the ground and God breathed the breath of life into him. This was the first life on earth.
Which, of course, is in complete contradiction to Gen 1:12 where the first life is plants, created on the third, literal, 24-hour day as measured from "the beginning." The first humans wouldn't come for three more days.
But, "beginning" means "later" in your lexicon. "Beginning" means "later," "first" means "not the first," "firmament" means "not the firmament," "god created" means "god didn't create it for it already existed," "earth" means "not the earth," "without form" means "has a form," "void" means "extant."
quote:
So you are telling me the universe was in the water.
No. I'm telling you that the Bible says that god divided the waters from the waters by creating the universe.
1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
1:7 And God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
quote:
Was and is the earth in the universe?
Eventually, but not until the waters under the heaven are gathered in one place to let the dry land appear.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by ICANT, posted 01-27-2009 12:13 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 316 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2009 3:12 PM Rrhain has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 312 of 319 (496853)
01-31-2009 5:35 AM
Reply to: Message 309 by ICANT
01-30-2009 10:45 AM


Re: Re Intention
Hi icant,
i agree with you, i have done that numerous times! My bad!
but i also agree with you that it doesnt matter what you and i have been taught, its only important what God actually says.
ICANT writes:
God said a light period and a dark period = one day.
thats not really what God said though.
He said vs 5 'And God called the light DAY, and the darkness he called NIGHT'
if you want to look at this verse literally, you'd have to agree that it implies that the 12 hours of daylight time, is being called 'day' and the 12 hours of dark time is being called 'night'
it doesnt say 'And God called the first 24 hours, Day'
24 hours is not mentioned anywhere in genesis. Apart from hearing the interpretation, Have you ever read a bible that specifically says that the day was 24 hours in lenght?
icant writes:
Since God is eternal and had no beginning.
When was the beginning?
I believe the universe and earth have always been here and will until someone can tell me when the beginning was.
good point and one i whole heartedly agree with. The earth was created with the heavens and the rest of the universe...we dont know when that happened in the stream of time, but we know from the evidence of the earth, that it was many millions if not billions of years ago.
I use a king james version, a new world kingdom interlinear translation and a good news paraphrased bible... i like to compare them
my kjv says 'As the cold of snow in the time of harvest'
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 309 by ICANT, posted 01-30-2009 10:45 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 317 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2009 3:50 PM Peg has not replied

Peg
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 313 of 319 (496854)
01-31-2009 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 310 by Brian
01-30-2009 7:29 PM


Brian writes:
how do you know the Earth is much older than 6000 years?
how long does coal diamonds or fossils take to form?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by Brian, posted 01-30-2009 7:29 PM Brian has not replied

Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 314 of 319 (496872)
01-31-2009 7:42 AM
Reply to: Message 307 by ICANT
01-29-2009 9:57 AM


Re: understanding Genesis
Deuteronomy 1:1 These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab.
Would be the title of Deuteronomy.
So the book of Deuteronomy is all the words Moses spoke unto all Israel before they crossed Jordan
It is. The Hebrew title of the work is "Devarim", which means 'words' as in "These be the words."
Numbers 1:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tabernacle of the congregation, on the first day of the second month, in the second year after they were come out of the land of Egypt, saying,
Would be the title of Numbers.
It is. The Hebrew title is 'wilderness', or in Hebrew "Bamidbar"
Leviticus 1:1 And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,
Would be the title of Leviticus.
It is titled "Vayikra", which means "And he called".
Exodus 1:1 Now these are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob.
Would be the title of Exodus.
Guess what this bit is called in Hebrew? Shemot, or "Names".
For what its worth in Hebrew, Genesis is titled "B'reshit" which means...In the beginning.
The names you and I are familiar with didn't appear until the Septuagint.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 307 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2009 9:57 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2009 7:09 PM Modulous has not replied

AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 315 of 319 (496873)
01-31-2009 7:54 AM


Wrap it up, please.
There don't seem to be too many regular participants left here. Those who would like to get 'one last post' in, get them in over the next 24 hours or so. After that the thread is getting closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024