Author Topic: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation  (Read 848 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 14:24:53 »
REFORMATION RUMBLINGS
BUFF SCOTT, JR.
__________________________
 
More On Genesis And The Age
Of Creation

    I am not a biblical literalist. I have never in my entire life as a believer and promoter of creation believed that all of the scriptures are to be understood literally. There are many scriptures that were written in the symbolic format, as there are many scriptures that were compiled in the literal format.

    Jesus called wicked King Herod a fox [Luke 13:32]. Common sense informs us that Jesus here is using figurative or symbolic language, for Herod was not a four-legged fox. He was sly like a fox. The books of Daniel and Revelation are pregnant with symbolic language, as well as Ezekiel and other portions of scripture.

    The problem is, some of us who profess to know the meaning of scripture find it difficult to distinguish the literal from the figurative. But it can be done, if we examine the context and compare it to other portions of scripture that address the same subject and/or subjects. If one portion of scripture, which we understand to be symbolic, collides with other portions of scripture on the same subject, which we understand to be literal, the fault lies in our method of interpretation.

    Another problem is that many evolutionists, perhaps the bulk of them, who assert most of the scriptures must be understood symbolically instead of literally, particularly the narratives about creation, the Flood, and other biblical accounts, have never sat down with a copy of the scriptures in hand and analyzed and evaluated them as they would analyze and evaluate other kinds of writings.

    If we assign millions/billions of years to the formation and creation of the Earth, as many believers have been academically tutored to believe, we are in direct conflict with God, who announced, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens [universe] and the earth” [Exodus 20:11]. There can be no doubt—except in the minds of evolutionists —but that the Lord is talking about six solar days when we contemplate that “six days” is used in the same manner as the “six days” in verse 9. “Six days you shall labor and do all your work,” God told Israel.

    My point is elementary, not encumbered with an array of humanistic rhetoric. If the “six days” of creation [v. 11] can be stretched over a period of millions and billions of years, so may the “six days” the children of Israel were to labor [v. 9]. I’ve checked the Hebrew text, and “six days” in both verses are used uniformly.

    A few years ago, I submitted this logic to one of my readers, a physics major. She accepted the six days of labor as solar days but rejected the six days of creation as solar days. This translates into a distortion of heaven’s message and disavows rational biblical hermeneutics. Is this not the history of many, perhaps even most, evolutionists? They fabricate a deduction, and then fit everything into that deduction—regardless of evidence.

    Physics tells this lady the Earth and universe are many millions of years old. It makes little or no difference what God says. It is sad that other evolutionists as well misrepresent heaven’s testimony to fit into their humanistic and academic deductions.

    The Lord spoke again about six days, when he reminded Israel, “For six days, work is to be done.” Two verses down, without changing the mode of computation, the Lord reminded them that “in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth” [Exodus 31:15-17]. There is absolutely no hint that the configuration of time changed from “six days of work” to “six days of creation.” The Hebrew text confirms this truth.

    But here’s another rampant inconsistency on the part of Christian evolutionists. Wherever “six days” are used in scripture, in both the old and new covenant writings, they accept them as six solar days, except—I repeat, except—when six days are mentioned in conjunction with creation. This is where the distortion begins. To me, this boils down to intellectual dishonesty.

    If I’m correct in my assessments, and if the biblical texts in Exodus are translated accurately, and they are, the evolutionary theory is bunk, poppycock, baloney, hogwash, nonsense. I think I’ll buy into reality, not drift into the realm of illusions.
« Last Edit: Sat May 01, 2021 - 14:35:53 by Reformer »

Offline fish153

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5675
  • Manna: 461
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #1 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 16:09:53 »
Buff—
God created time. There were no “solar days” on the first day of creation. There was no sun yet. How could the first day of creation be a “solar day” as you state it was?  Peter says “a day with the Lord is AS a thousand years, and a thousand years is AS a day”. This verse is saying that time is nothing to God. He could spend a thousand years observing one day!

God’s days are as different from ours as His thoughts. “For my thoughts are not your thoughts says the Lord. For as the heavens are high above the earth, so are my thoughts higher than your thoughts, and my ways above your ways”. The first day of creation could have been 4 billion years (in our years) long. Sure, God CAN do anything if he wants. But it appears God chose to allow great periods of time to pass in his creation. There is no doubt that the dinosaurs lived MILLIONS of years ago. God is not confined by time or space. One of His days could be ANY length.

Think of the Universe itself. The sun is 93,000,000 miles away. This is a FACT. Because we know the speed of light we can Mathematically figure out how long it would take us to get there traveling at a constant speed. Some galaxies are millions of light years away (the amount of distance light can travel in one year). If the the Universe is only 6,000 years old, how did those galaxies get MILLIONS of LIGHT YEARS away? “He created the stars also” Genesis says during one of the Creation Days. No. The Universe is billions of years old for a certainty. To God 14 billion years is NOTHING. He CHOSE to use billions of years to bring forth the earth. We don’t know why. God is God. He can do whatever he wants to do.

Offline Rella

  • ..
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8541
  • Manna: 659
  • Back to 11. Considering 12 to be out the door.
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #2 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 16:27:31 »
My reply from the other thread.

  In the case of evolution, it means you doubt God is powerful enough to create the world exactly as He said He did, in the time frame He said He did. 

I do not doubt that God is all powerful and capable of creating everything in a blink of an eye if He so wants to.

I am not an evolutionist by any stretch, but I am also not a young earth believer.

I see a such a distinct difference in the creation account of Genesis 1, and the more specific account in Genesis 2.

We do not know for fact that MOSES actually penned Genesis. Although credit has been given to him. And for that reason we do not know the mindset or relationship to God that the author had. Therefore penning things as he assumed th reader would understand
possibly because he did not understand himself or could not relate to anything before
man as we know him was created?

But the recount is almost as if 2 separate accounts , or accounts related by 2 separate people were recorded... so as not to miss anything? Even by the similarities in the verses from 1 to 2.

Personal belief... not just a thought up one either but of great study on the issue is
that The earth and part of creation was made before the creating of things that God put in place From Adam and forward for the plan He has that is waiting to be concluded.
But there is no question that it all came FROM God.

As to evolution. That is a dream trying to find a reality. The cross breeding from day one?
That is likely.

Someday Ill explain why we almost had a litter of racoodles.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #2 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 16:27:31 »

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11843
  • Manna: 316
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #3 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 17:42:28 »
REFORMATION RUMBLINGS
BUFF SCOTT, JR.
__________________________
 
More On Genesis And The Age
Of Creation
[/color]

How old is the world? Ancient commentators propose that the world may be simultaneously young and old.

One of the most obvious perceived contradictions between Torah and science is the age of the universe. Is it billions of years old, like scientific data, or is it thousands of years, like Biblical data? When we add up the generations of the Bible, we come to 5700-plus years. Whereas, data from the Hubble telescope or from the land based telescopes in Hawaii, indicate the age at about 15 billion years [later and more precise measurements puts it a 13.77 billion years --4WD]

Let me clarify right at the start. The world may be only some 6000 years old. God could have put the fossils in the ground and juggled the light arriving from distant galaxies to make the world appear to be billions of years old. There is absolutely no way to disprove this claim. God being infinite could have made the world that way. There is another possible approach that also agrees with the ancient commentators’ description of God and nature. The world may be young and old simultaneously. In the following I consider this latter option.


You can find the complete article here:  https://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48951136.html

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #3 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 17:42:28 »

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #4 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 18:41:51 »
fish153 - Rella - 4WD:

    Let us keep in mind that the Hebrew refines 6, as well as 7, as you would count the fingers on your hands. It may surprise some of you, and even disappoint a few, to learn that yom, the Hebrew word for “day,” is defined as a common solar day, beginning with verse five of chapter one. It is used in the same sense at least 358 times elsewhere in the Old Testament scriptures.

    There is no logical reason why the first chapter of Genesis would be the exception. When we contemplate God’s awesome power, there’s hardly any question but that He could have created everything instantaneously. “In the beginning” of time, however, He chose to complete His creation in six days, exactly as you and I configure 6 days. “For in six days the Lord made the heavens [universe and our solar system] and the Earth, the sea, and all that is in them” [Exodus 20:11].

    Many of our common versions say He “rested” on the seventh day. If the first six days consisted of billions of years, so did the seventh day. Does this mean God “rested” for billions of years? [The correct translation, of course, is that God “ceased” creating after the sixth day.]

    But another problem with the conception that God utilized billions of years to create everything is that He instructed the Jewish people to rest on the seventh day and keep it holy. If each day consisted of millions of years, were His people to rest millions of years on each seventh “day”?

    “Day” is employed in the same vein in referring to the seventh as it is used in referring to the other six. Thus whatever we attribute to the first six days, 24-hours or millions of years, we must also attribute to the seventh day. And if each of the six days comprised millions of years, the Jewish people, who were told to rest on the seventh, should have rested for millions of years. Sorry, but we cannot accept this logic.

    If we must understand the days of creation figuratively, what is wrong with understanding figuratively the days Jesus’ body was in the tomb—three solar days or millions of years? True, “day” is sometimes used symbolically in the scriptures, but not in relation to creation and the time Jesus’ body was in the tomb.

Buff
« Last Edit: Sat May 01, 2021 - 21:27:05 by Reformer »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #4 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 18:41:51 »



Offline fish153

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5675
  • Manna: 461
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #5 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 20:18:19 »
Buff—-

Your logic is very strange. “A day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as a day.” Did God create the world in 6 days or 6000 years? Why must it be solar days? I find the thought hilarious that the Lord would fool all of us by “putting” dinosaur bones in the ground. How preposterous. And he’s fooling us all with the galaxies being millions of light years away?

Man used to believe the earth was the center of the Universe. And man thought our galaxy WAS the Universe for a long time. Then they discovered there are BILLIONS of galaxies. There is no conflict between science and the Bible. Scientific facts are proven. Evolution is a “theory” though many treat it as fact. It is a fact that the sun is 93,000,000 miles away. No one doubts that. It is proven.

Jesus said “the very hairs of your head are all numbered”. For years many considered that to be metaphorical— that Jesus was trying to relate how closely God watches us and knows us. That is very true. But in the last 30 years, due to DNA, we know that the very hairs on our head ARE numbered. DNA is a description of exactly who we are. So science and the Bible are in complete harmony. This earth IS billions of years old. And so is the Universe. There is no conflict with the Bible. God is infinite. He CREATED time and space. He can use it as He wills. He did not put bones in the ground. Those are the remains of ancient creatures. We do not know WHY God created dinosaurs. The Bible says some mysteries are known ONLY by God. Perhaps one day He will share with us what the dinosaurs were, and why He created them. God is good!

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #5 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 20:18:19 »

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #6 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 21:37:10 »
fish153:

   "This earth IS billions of years old. And so is the Universe. There is no conflict with the Bible. God is infinite. He CREATED time and space. He can use it as He wills."

    You do not seem to be absorbing the facts and evidence I've offered thus far. Plus, this latest post of yours does zero nothing to counteract what I have presented.

    Consequently, you have given me no reason why I should "beat around the bush" with your "empty" remarks. I'll have more to say on this subject as time permits, but I will address the topic from a different angle.

Goodnight,

Buff

Offline fish153

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5675
  • Manna: 461
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #7 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 21:59:42 »
Buff—

You are not sharing facts and evidence at all. It’s YOUR belief that you are sharing. Science completely contradicts what you are stating. As I said Science and the Bible do not really conflict at all. As I stated, Jesus said “the very hairs of your head are all numbered”. Science many years ago, if they took that verse LITERALLY would say “what a preposterous notion. How could the hairs of your head be numbered?” But NOW Science must admit that the very hairs of our head ARE NUMBERED by the DNA which is a coded sequence that tells our cells EXACTLY how to form us. God DID number the very hairs of our heads!

And Science in many ways is correct also. We can not deny many scientific FACTS that PROVE our earth is VERY OLD. Mammoths frozen in ice are older than 6000 years for Pete’s sake. Scientists can test the ice and find it to be older than that. Mammoths died off 10,000 or so years ago. And dinosaurs are millions of years old. People who claim the earth is only 6000 years old come off as “kooks” with limited mentality. It’s too bad because many Christians are very intelligent people. Like Hugh Ross. Try reading one of his books. You’ll be enlightened and amazed at the same time.

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13454
  • Manna: 363
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #8 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 23:07:48 »
We do not know for fact that MOSES actually penned Genesis. Although credit has been given to him.
It can be demonstrated that Genesis is a collection of short works.  Assuming Moses was involved, he would have been the editor of Genesis.

I don't expect you to take my word for it, but if this subject interest you, try searching "toledoth statements in Genesis."

Jarrod

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #8 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 23:07:48 »

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13454
  • Manna: 363
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #9 on: Sat May 01, 2021 - 23:15:56 »
If we assign millions/billions of years to the formation and creation of the Earth, as many believers have been academically tutored to believe, we are in direct conflict with God, who announced, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens [universe] and the earth” [Exodus 20:11].
Do you know what a Biblical gloss is?

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11843
  • Manna: 316
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #10 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 05:40:17 »
Many of our common versions say He “rested” on the seventh day. If the first six days consisted of billions of years, so did the seventh day. Does this mean God “rested” for billions of years? [The correct translation, of course, is that God “ceased” creating after the sixth day.]
Yes, God ceased creating after the sixth day.  He rested the seventh day.  He is still resting from His creation. This is the seventh day.  We are in the seventh day even now.  So then God's seventh "day" is, so far, about 6000 years.

Buff, read the article that I posted.  It will explain how the six (actual 24-hour) days and billions of years are both correct and are not in contradiction.

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11843
  • Manna: 316
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #11 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 05:47:19 »
Buff—

You are not sharing facts and evidence at all. It’s YOUR belief that you are sharing. Science completely contradicts what you are stating. As I said Science and the Bible do not really conflict at all. As I stated, Jesus said “the very hairs of your head are all numbered”. Science many years ago, if they took that verse LITERALLY would say “what a preposterous notion. How could the hairs of your head be numbered?” But NOW Science must admit that the very hairs of our head ARE NUMBERED by the DNA which is a coded sequence that tells our cells EXACTLY how to form us. God DID number the very hairs of our heads!

And Science in many ways is correct also. We can not deny many scientific FACTS that PROVE our earth is VERY OLD. Mammoths frozen in ice are older than 6000 years for Pete’s sake. Scientists can test the ice and find it to be older than that. Mammoths died off 10,000 or so years ago. And dinosaurs are millions of years old. People who claim the earth is only 6000 years old come off as “kooks” with limited mentality. It’s too bad because many Christians are very intelligent people. Like Hugh Ross. Try reading one of his books. You’ll be enlightened and amazed at the same time.

Right on.  And speaking of Hugh Ross, he has written a very interesting book, "A Matter Of Days".  It is a very serious and detailed study of the use of the Hebrew word "yom" in the Bible.

Offline johntwayne

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5418
  • Manna: 144
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #12 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 06:15:50 »
Good post Reformer. +1 manna.

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11843
  • Manna: 316
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #13 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 07:23:12 »
Good post Reformer. +1 manna.
Yes, you could call it a good post; but it was wrong. 

Offline Alan

  • I AM Canadian!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8688
  • Manna: 301
  • Gender: Male
  • Politically Incorrect
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #14 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 12:15:39 »
Instead of debating over word play, simply look at the evidence that supports the age of the Universe and the Earth within.

Offline johntwayne

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5418
  • Manna: 144
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #15 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 12:28:00 »
Yes, you could call it a good post; but it was wrong.

I happen to agree with him on this.

Offline fish153

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5675
  • Manna: 461
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #16 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 15:11:22 »
4WD--
Thanks for that link to the article about the earth being both young and old at the same time. Very interesting!

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11843
  • Manna: 316
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #17 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 15:24:52 »
I happen to agree with him on this.
Yes, I know that. However, The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork (Psa 19:1). All the data from the sky above proclaims the age of the universe to be about 13.8 billion years.

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #18 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 20:28:21 »
Jarrod:

"Do you know what a Biblical gloss is?"

    If it is one of those academic icons you toss around, I venture to say it contradicts the number 6 in Exodus 20:11. In either case, I will except what our Creator said—and He said "six days." He also told Old Israel to work "six days" and rest on the seventh.

    In the Hebrew language, six and seven are translated as you would count the fingers on your hands. Again, I will go with God. Plus...I will believe and accept science as long as it coincides with what my Creator says.

Buff

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13454
  • Manna: 363
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #19 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 21:15:50 »
Jarrod:

"Do you know what a Biblical gloss is?"

    If it is one of those academic icons you toss around, I venture to say it contradicts the number 6 in Exodus 20:11. In either case, I will except what our Creator said—and He said "six days." He also told Old Israel to work "six days" and rest on the seventh.

    In the Hebrew language, six and seven are translated as you would count the fingers on your hands. Again, I will go with God. Plus...I will believe and accept science as long as it coincides with what my Creator says.

Buff
So... what I heard is that you don't know and you're not interested in learning.

Not much point in continuing to respond, I guess.

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #20 on: Sun May 02, 2021 - 23:10:38 »
Jarrod:

    You asked me if I knew what a Biblical gloss is? But you failed to tell me your understanding of the term. Feel free to share that information with me.

    As regards learning, I have never ceased - and never will. So continue to share your views and knowledge with me. Am I occasionally off center. Of course. We all are.

Kindly,

Buff

P. S. I'll post some additional info tomorrow on the age of creation.
« Last Edit: Sun May 02, 2021 - 23:14:51 by Reformer »

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13454
  • Manna: 363
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #21 on: Mon May 03, 2021 - 10:47:53 »
Jarrod:

    You asked me if I knew what a Biblical gloss is? But you failed to tell me your understanding of the term. Feel free to share that information with me.

    As regards learning, I have never ceased - and never will. So continue to share your views and knowledge with me. Am I occasionally off center. Of course. We all are.

Kindly,

Buff

P. S. I'll post some additional info tomorrow on the age of creation.
Okay.  You're gonna hate this.  ::noworries::

The term "gloss" is also used of words in the Bible itself that were not part of the original writing but were accidentally or intentionally embodied into the text by a transcriber. The existence of glosses in biblical manuscripts is universally admitted but often difficult to discern. Differences in style and vocabulary or an introductory phrase (e.g., "that is") are signs of a possible gloss. It is one of the tasks of the textual critic, frequently quite difficult, to disentangle a gloss from the genuine text.  From https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/glosses-biblical

Just to be clear, my contention here is that Exodus 20:11 is such a gloss.  That is to say, I don't think it was part of the original text.  I think it was a bit of commentary added by the Jewish priests in the margin or between the lines (such was a common practice).  As the text was re-copied over the years, the commentary was too, until it eventually just became part of the text.

Since that is a bold claim, I will offer a piece of evidence to back it up.  Exodus 20 is a re-statement of Deuteronomy 5; they duplicate each other.  The rest of the text of the 10 commandments appears in Deuteronomy, but this verse does not.

The upshot of this - while the numbers of days in Exodus 20:11 indubitably are meant in literal fashion (as you have contended), the authority and originality of the whole verse are redoubtable.  It would appear this is a bit of commentary, and not something inspired.

Jarrod

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #22 on: Mon May 03, 2021 - 18:59:52 »
Jarrod:

   "Just to be clear, my contention here is that Exodus 20:11 is such a gloss. That is to say, I don't think it was part of the original text.  I think it was a bit of commentary added by the Jewish priests in the margin or between the lines (such was a common practice).  As the text was re-copied over the years, the commentary was too, until it eventually just became part of the text."

    I could cite many other passages similar to Exodus 20:11, as it pertains to "six days" and "seven days." If this passage is a "gloss," as you claim, what about Exodus 31:15? This passage speaks of "six days" of work and "seventh day" of rest. Are those days a possible gloss and not to be understood literally?

    I could take your reasoning and claim that the story of Jesus being in the tomb three days is a "possible gloss." In fact, I could apply your principle of denial to just about any portion of scripture, especially if that scripture is contradictory to my doctrinal sentiments.

    So where is the end to the principle of "possible glosses"? The atheist and agnostic could use the "possible gloss" idea as evidence the scriptures are a fairy tale. Or that a Supreme Being does not exist.

    In fact, Jonah was not in the belly of the whale for three days, even though Jesus Himself said he was there for three days! My point, Jarrod, is that it is not a valid and scholarly practice to "hunt" for some way or look for some principle to refute that which is clear and precise. Even if I were to agree that Exodus 20:11 is as you say, there are dozens of other scriptures that authenticate the Earth and the Universe were created in six literal days.

    To clear the water a bit more, I agree "the term 'gloss' is also used of words in the Bible itself that were not part of the original writing but were accidentally or intentionally embodied into the text by a transcriber." Any biblical student can easily see this in some portions of scripture. But insofar as the actual number of days of creation, it won't work, even if Exodus 20:11 does, for there are many scriptures that relate to the literal number of days of creation—namely, six.

I'll post more information on the days of creation later today, if time permits.

Buff

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13454
  • Manna: 363
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #23 on: Mon May 03, 2021 - 22:30:02 »
    I could take your reasoning and claim that the story of Jesus being in the tomb three days is a "possible gloss." In fact, I could apply your principle of denial to just about any portion of scripture, especially if that scripture is contradictory to my doctrinal sentiments.

    So where is the end to the principle of "possible glosses"? The atheist and agnostic could use the "possible gloss" idea as evidence the scriptures are a fairy tale. Or that a Supreme Being does not exist.
No, you can't just call anything a gloss all willy-nilly.  There has to be some good reason to do so.  In this verse, the rationale is (a) that there is a parallel passage which does not contain this part of the text, as well as (b) the verse explains the verse preceding it, which is a telltale sign of a gloss.

   My point, Jarrod, is that it is not a valid and scholarly practice to "hunt" for some way or look for some principle to refute that which is clear and precise.
That's not how textual criticism works.  It's a systematic analysis of books from start to finish.

As for myself, it is a valid and scholarly practice to try to reconcile Scriptures when there are perceived contradictions by reading more about them... including textual criticism.

Even if I were to agree that Exodus 20:11 is as you say, there are dozens of other scriptures that authenticate the Earth and the Universe were created in six literal days.
None spring to mind.  You mentioned Exo 31:15, but it says nothing of the creation, and is just a re-statement of the command for Sabbath-keeping.

Jarrod

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #24 on: Mon May 03, 2021 - 22:55:02 »
A FEW QUESTIONS & ANSWERS FOR CLARIFICATION –

    QUESTION—Is it true the Hebrew “yom” may also be translated “era” or “epoch,” in addition to “day”?

    ANSWER— Some Hebrew scholars say “yom” may be thus translated. There are numerous complexities with this claim, however, when applied to the six days of creation. For if “yom” is translated “era” or “epoch” and applied to the six days of creation, sea creatures and the birds of the air lived to be millions of years old, for they were created before land animals and man. Sea creatures and birds were created on the fifth day; land animals and man were created on the sixth day.
 
    QUESTION— Are you saying there was no death of sea, air, and land animals prior to the Fall?

    ANSWER— That’s precisely what I’m saying! Adam’s fall resulted in both physical and spiritual death. It appears that death among sea, air, and land creatures was non-existent prior to the Fall. In regards to death before the Fall, we might ponder the words of the great apostle Paul. He wrote, “For since death came through a man [Adam], the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man” [I Cor. 15:21] . In the very next passage, Paul announces, “For in Adam all die.”

    QUESTION— Isn’t Paul alluding to humankind only in the scriptures you quoted? Surely he didn’t incorporate animals in his remarks!

    ANSWER— Paul spoke of death without distinguishing between man and animals, although man was the thrust of his point. The Garden of Eden was designed to be a faultless, immaculate Paradise—no pain, no sorrow, no diseases, and no death. It seems to me that if animals experienced cessation of life before the Fall, the Garden was less than a faultless Paradise. Death became a curse because of Adam’s sin. This curse applied to both man and animal, but not before the Fall.

    QUESTION— What about vegetation? If nothing died, and if vegetation was the diet of dinosaurs and other animals, something died.

    ANSWER— God’s sea, air, and land creatures [apparently] did not experience death until after the Fall. One of the purposes of vegetation was to provide food. Listen to our Creator as He speaks to Adam:

    “I give you every seed-bearing plant upon the face of the whole Earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the Earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food” [Genesis 1:29-30].

    The existence of plants in God’s Endemic economy was not death in the sense that we apply it to animals. Obviously, God did not consider the recycling of vegetation to be death because all creatures were given permission to eat vegetables without contradicting his original sinless created order. Prior to the Fall, the creation was not subject to the “bondage of corruption” mentioned in Romans 8:21. Recycling vegetative nutrients must not fall under the heading of “bondage of corruption” since it occurred prior to the Fall.”

    Of special note is that God did not tell Adam he could also kill and eat animals—any animal. The diet of both man and animals was vegetation and vegetable products. Apparently, the consumption of meat by animals and humans was unknown until after the Fall. It was then that animals began to consume one another, and man began to consume animals. The first indication of animals being killed for any purpose is in Genesis 4, sometime after the Fall, when Abel brought to God “fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock” [verse 4].

    One reader reminded me that the Second Law of Thermodynamics—a progression from order to disorder or degeneration—was not in place until after the Fall. That, too, is interesting. If valid, it would tend to bolster the possibility that death among animals was non-existent prior to sin. Too, it has been suggested that perhaps animals did not experience death inside the Garden of Eden, but did experience death outside of the Garden. The problem with that idea is that sin was nonexistent in the entire world until after the Fall. Death occurred worldwide only after sin entered.

    QUESTION— Is there a possibility dinosaurs existed long before man walked the Earth?

    ANSWER— If death was absent until Adam and Eve fell from God’s grace, as heaven’s testimony seems to teach, dinosaurs and man walked the Earth together. There’s no other logical conclusion. Dinosaurs probably became extinct shortly after the Flood, due to drastic climatical changes. But regardless of when they became extinct, the truth remains they and man existed in the same time span.

    According to the humanist theory, dinosaurs became extinct 60 to 70 million years before man walked the Earth. However, some years ago, near Glen Rose, Texas, in the Paluxy River bed, human footprints and dinosaur tracks were discovered side-by-side in the same layer of rock [stratum]. Evolutionary scientists admit the dinosaur prints are real, but they’re now claiming the human prints are bogus—and all because of evolutionary bias.

    Dr. Ronald T. Bird, a paleontologist, remarked, “Yes, they apparently were real enough—real as rock could be...the strangest things of their kind I had ever seen. On the surface of each was sprayed the near-likeness of a human foot, perfect in every detail” [Journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Nov/Dec., 1979, pages 87-88].

    But notice the outlandish turn of events. When Dr. Bird discovered there were also dinosaur tracks nearby, made in the same time span, he dismissed the human prints as skillful carvings because “no man had ever existed in the Age of Reptiles” [Natural History, May, 1939, pages 255-257]. Is this not the history of many, perhaps even most, evolutionists? They invent a deduction, and then fit everything into that deduction—regardless of the evidence.

    Dinosaur carvings have been found on the cliff walls of the Hava Supai Canyon of Arizona. I hiked this area 18 years ago. Not too far from this site, dinosaur tracks were discovered. The external, non-biblical evidence is clear-cut and testifies that dinosaurs and man existed in the same time span.

    This post is long enough. I hope to enlarge upon it in another post, if you will be patient with me.

Buff
« Last Edit: Mon May 03, 2021 - 23:04:08 by Reformer »

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #25 on: Mon May 03, 2021 - 23:21:17 »
Jarrod:

    ME: "Even if I were to agree that Exodus 20:11 is as you say, there are dozens of other scriptures that authenticate the Earth and the Universe were created in six literal days."

    JARROD: "None spring to mind." Let me give you another one.

    "It is a sigh forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He rested and was refreshed" [Exodus 31:17.

    I affirm this statement from God does not contain a "possible gloss." The numbers 6 and 7 are incorporated in this statement. Whatever age you apply to one applies to the other. You will note that God says "was refreshed," not "is being refreshed." "Was" places it in the past tense.

    Let's assume God made that affirmation only 7,000 years ago. Was He millions/billions of years old [measured by our time] at the time He made it? Again, "was" places it in the past tense not in a continual tense.

Buff
« Last Edit: Mon May 03, 2021 - 23:52:35 by Reformer »

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13454
  • Manna: 363
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #26 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 11:06:18 »
    I affirm this statement from God does not contain a "possible gloss." The numbers 6 and 7 are incorporated in this statement. Whatever age you apply to one applies to the other. You will note that God says "was refreshed," not "is being refreshed." "Was" places it in the past tense.

    Let's assume God made that affirmation only 7,000 years ago. Was He millions/billions of years old [measured by our time] at the time He made it? Again, "was" places it in the past tense not in a continual tense.
The Hebrew word is in the imperfect tense, which actually is the continual tense, as you put it.  ::lookaround::  Not a completed action; still ongoing.

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #27 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 14:38:18 »
Jarrod:

    "The Hebrew word is in the imperfect tense, which actually is the continual tense, as you put it. Not a completed action; still ongoing."

    Whether was refreshed or continues to be refreshed does not alter "in six days the Lord made heaven and earth."

    I've checked the Hebrew on the number "six" and, according to Hebrew Scholars Thayer and Strong, here is how "six" is defined.

    "...a primitive number; six (as an overplus (see H7797) beyond five or the fingers of the hand); as ordinal sixth..."

    Accordingly, if the Hebrew translation is correct, God is accurate and "creation evolutionists" are inaccurate.

    I appreciate the time you have indulged in by responding to many of my creation persuasions. I will be posting another one later today.  As usual, feel free to comment. As I've said before to others, "We may disagree but we're still blood brother of the Lamb."

Kindly,

Buff
« Last Edit: Tue May 04, 2021 - 14:40:45 by Reformer »

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #28 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 15:06:10 »
CREATION & ADAM –

    I have been told by creation evolutionists there’s a long time-span between Genesis 1 and 2, and verse 3? I do not buy that assumption, of course.

    In Exodus 20:11, God Himself said, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens [universe] and the Earth, the sea, and all that is in them.” If each day consisted of millions of years, not only were sea and air creatures millions of years old when man was made, but vegetation went without sunlight for millions of years, for vegetation was created on the third day and the sun on the fourth day.

    Geologists tell us the Earth is millions of years old and the universe is billions of years old. How do you refute their claim? Let me be clear at this point. Perhaps the Earth does appear to be millions of years old, and perhaps the universe appears to be billions of years old. However, if God’s awesome power could create an adult man [Adam], as opposed to a child, and make him look biologically older than he actually is, could He not create a planet and universe and make both appear older than they actually are? If not, why not?
 
    Yes, this in spite of National Geographic’s long essay on radioactive carbon dating and the “expansion rate of the universe,” known as the “Hubble constant” [Sept., 2001]. As I view it, God’s unequaled power created the stars and transported their light to Earth instantaneously—not over a period of billions of years.
 
    And speaking of National Geographic, they say their “evidence” “yields an age for the universe of about 13 billion years” [Sept., 2001]. “About 13 billion years?” They’re not always certain! Could they be “about 13 billion years” off? This is the history of evolutionists. They can’t even agree among themselves. I suggest they permit God to help them. He says “six says.” Evolutionists say 13 billion years. I’ll take God’s testimony above the reckless and uncertain testimony of evolutionists and atheists.

    “From one man [Adam] He made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole Earth; and He determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live” [Acts 17:26].

Our Creator is still in control. Praise His Holy Name!

Buff
« Last Edit: Tue May 04, 2021 - 15:08:51 by Reformer »

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11843
  • Manna: 316
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #29 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 15:28:38 »
Geologists tell us the Earth is millions of years old and the universe is billions of years old. How do you refute their claim? Let me be clear at this point. Perhaps the Earth does appear to be millions of years old, and perhaps the universe appears to be billions of years old. However, if God’s awesome power could create an adult man [Adam], as opposed to a child, and make him look biologically older than he actually is, could He not create a planet and universe and make both appear older than they actually are? If not, why not?
Yes, God certainly could have done that and there is no way to prove that He didn't.  However, all of the data that He put there, if He actually did that, tells us otherwise.  Why would He do that since it clearly is deceptive. i.e., not the truth?   The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork (Psa 19:1). God is not deceptive. God does not lie. Are you really so wrapped up in your insistence of a young earth that you would accuse God of lying?  Are you suggesting that the glory of God declared by the heavens and the His handiwork proclaimed by the sky is a lie?  Surely not.

And BTW, the earth is billions, not millions, of years old  --  about four and a half billion years old.

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #30 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 16:13:46 »
4WD:

    "God does not lie. Are you really so wrapped up in your insistence of a young earth that you would accuse God of lying?"

   I've checked the Hebrew on the number "six" and, according to Hebrew Scholars Thayer and Strong, here is how "six" in Exodus 20:11 is defined.

    "...a primitive number; six (as an overplus (see H7797) beyond five or the fingers of the hand); as ordinal sixth..."

    Did God lie when He said the Earth and the Universe were created in six days? Did Hebrew Scholars Thayer and Strong lie when they translated "six" adequately?

   Your propositions are unreliable and without evidence. I've never known evolutionists to be otherwise. Plus, try to cool down your rhetoric. Follow the personality examples of Jarrod.

Lunch Time,

Buff

« Last Edit: Tue May 04, 2021 - 16:17:42 by Reformer »

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13454
  • Manna: 363
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #31 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 17:09:57 »
4WD:

    "God does not lie. Are you really so wrapped up in your insistence of a young earth that you would accuse God of lying?"

   I've checked the Hebrew on the number "six" and, according to Hebrew Scholars Thayer and Strong, here is how "six" in Exodus 20:11 is defined.

    "...a primitive number; six (as an overplus (see H7797) beyond five or the fingers of the hand); as ordinal sixth..."

    Did God lie when He said the Earth and the Universe were created in six days? Did Hebrew Scholars Thayer and Strong lie when they translated "six" adequately?

   Your propositions are unreliable and without evidence. I've never known evolutionists to be otherwise. Plus, try to cool down your rhetoric. Follow the personality examples of Jarrod.

Lunch Time,

Buff
This is like the third or fourth time you've gone into the meaning of the number "six."  But why?  Nobody is disputing the meaning of this word. 

The word about which there is some dispute is "days," but someone else can argue for gap theory.  I don't believe in gap theory, so I won't take up that cause.

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #32 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 22:48:09 »

Jarrod:

   Six, sixty, or sixth means six, sixty, or sixth - nothing more, such as billions of years. This is substantiated in the Hebrew tongue/translations.

    You say "no one is disputing the meaning of this word." Come on now, brother, I can quote many statements in this dialogue where the word "six" is very definitely disputed.

Stay Safe & Saved,

Buff

Offline Reformer

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3500
  • Manna: 93
  • Gender: Male
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #33 on: Tue May 04, 2021 - 23:49:24 »
 A POSTSCRIPT TO THE ABOVE –

Thayer & Strong on “days” in Exodus 20:11 & 31:15. Note the bold face, which I have added.
_____

yome

    “From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): - age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.”


    “Days” in these two passages are not used figuratively, but literally—just as “days” is employed literally when Jesus “was three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” and Jonah “was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish” [Matt. 12:40].

Thayer & Strong on “days” in Matthew 12:40. Note the bold face, which I have added.
_____
   
hēmera
hay-mer'-ah


    Feminine (with G5610 implied) of a derivative of ἧμαι hēmai (to sit; akin to the base of G1476) meaning tame, that is, gentle; day, that is, (literally) the time space between dawn and dark, or the whole 24 hours (but several days were usually reckoned by the Jews as inclusive of the parts of both extremes); figuratively a period (always defined more or less clearly by the context) - age, + alway, (mid-) day (by day, [-ly]), + for ever, judgment, (day) time, while, years.


    The bottom line is whatever we attribute to “days” in Exodus is exactly what we must attribute to “days” in Matthew 12:40—24-hour periods or billions of years. Was Jonah in the whale billions of years? Was Jesus in the heart of the earth billions of years?

Buff
« Last Edit: Tue May 04, 2021 - 23:51:31 by Reformer »

Offline 4WD

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11843
  • Manna: 316
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: More On Genesis And The Age Of Creation
« Reply #34 on: Wed May 05, 2021 - 05:34:27 »
The bottom line is whatever we attribute to “days” in Exodus is exactly what we must attribute to “days” in Matthew 12:40—24-hour periods or billions of years. Was Jonah in the whale billions of years? Was Jesus in the heart of the earth billions of years?
Gen 2:4  These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens. So then in your view, is the day spoken of there 24 hours or 144 hours?  Clearly the subject is the entire history of God's creation.

Gen 2:3  So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation. How long was the seventh day of God's resting?  According to you, God rested for only 24 hours.  I don't know anyone except you who would agree with that.


 

     
anything