What is your understanding of this text?
- Thread starter TheLearner
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Verses 5 through 9 show conclusively that Noah's flood was not global.
Verses 29-30 here is a bad paraphrase. All the more accurate translations have it that God kills (takes away the breath) of animals and replaces them on a scale of the "face of the earth." These two verses predict the 5 major extinction events found in the geologic column.
See the KJ, NIV, ESV, NASV, etc. Ask; can these events take place in a 24hr period?
Verses 29-30 here is a bad paraphrase. All the more accurate translations have it that God kills (takes away the breath) of animals and replaces them on a scale of the "face of the earth." These two verses predict the 5 major extinction events found in the geologic column.
See the KJ, NIV, ESV, NASV, etc. Ask; can these events take place in a 24hr period?
I agree there was no evolution.., God created. In verse 30, badly translated in this paraphrase, "the radical creation verb "bara" is used. That is what God is resting from, now, but it is used in this verse, placing this verse's reference in the 5th or 6th "yom" during the Genesis creation account before the beginning of the 7th yom of rest, which continues to this day and we are invited to join him in "that" (Hebrews 4:1-9) rest from "bara" creation. The 7th yom is clearly thousands of years old and continuing. The YEC model is poor exegesis, ignoring Hebrew alternatives, conventions and practices, as well as Biblical examples. I believe the Bible teaches old earth, not the least of which are these verses in psalm 104, that are, I suggest, inconceivable to place in a 24 hr. yom. I'll spend a little time on it if anyone is interested.
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Deuteronomy 33:15-"ancient mountains." Habakkuk 3:6-"ancient mountains," "age old hills." Psalm 68:33-"ancient skies."
Judges 5:21-"ancient river."
If the universe is 6000 years old then Biblical "ancient" means, say, 3000 years before these verses were written. What then of the two thousand years waiting for Jesus to come "quickly?" Just a thought, this.
This is more to the point; In Daniel we see an example of the Hebrew word for "Father" used to denote "Grandfather." Many people groups employ this idiom. The hebrew word for "father" is the same Hebrew word used to say "ancestor." Note also that the Biblical Chronologies do not match each other. This is not error. There are two possible reasons for that. Traditionally, people of poor character were left out of chronologies. Also, Chronologies are given for different purposes. Who is it that demands that the chronologies used by Anglican Archbishop Ussher to arrive at a six thousand year old earth were in fact absolutely complete, and/or that "Father" was absolutely the correct Hebrew meaning? "When Seth had lived 105 years he became the ancestor of Enosh," is a perfectly legitimate translation. Who dogmatically constrains it to one generation? For what reasons?
A fact not often referenced is that in an "old earth," "yom=age" model, the universe, and the earth are old, but human beings are not.
They are, in fact, the youngest things of creation. We do not need very many bad characters left out of the chronologies to fit the observations. Still, a perusal of the Noah's flood account allows for very many bad characters, as well as in following times.
It has recently become a popular thing for young earth Christians to assert that "God created with an appearance of age." Note that this acknowledges that the earth "appears" old. This would be an example; The Eniwetok coral shows layers bearing pollen from seed bearing plants and shrubs occurring at 300ft., 1000ft., and 2780ft., when the coral must have been exposed to air during ice ages when sea levels were low enough to expose them. Did God (who "cannot lie") place those things to create an appearance of age, with a number of young earth Christians figuring it out nonetheless, in spite of God's efforts? I am not employing sarcasm here towards my Christian brothers and sisters, rather, I believe the question is warranted.
Judges 5:21-"ancient river."
If the universe is 6000 years old then Biblical "ancient" means, say, 3000 years before these verses were written. What then of the two thousand years waiting for Jesus to come "quickly?" Just a thought, this.
This is more to the point; In Daniel we see an example of the Hebrew word for "Father" used to denote "Grandfather." Many people groups employ this idiom. The hebrew word for "father" is the same Hebrew word used to say "ancestor." Note also that the Biblical Chronologies do not match each other. This is not error. There are two possible reasons for that. Traditionally, people of poor character were left out of chronologies. Also, Chronologies are given for different purposes. Who is it that demands that the chronologies used by Anglican Archbishop Ussher to arrive at a six thousand year old earth were in fact absolutely complete, and/or that "Father" was absolutely the correct Hebrew meaning? "When Seth had lived 105 years he became the ancestor of Enosh," is a perfectly legitimate translation. Who dogmatically constrains it to one generation? For what reasons?
A fact not often referenced is that in an "old earth," "yom=age" model, the universe, and the earth are old, but human beings are not.
They are, in fact, the youngest things of creation. We do not need very many bad characters left out of the chronologies to fit the observations. Still, a perusal of the Noah's flood account allows for very many bad characters, as well as in following times.
It has recently become a popular thing for young earth Christians to assert that "God created with an appearance of age." Note that this acknowledges that the earth "appears" old. This would be an example; The Eniwetok coral shows layers bearing pollen from seed bearing plants and shrubs occurring at 300ft., 1000ft., and 2780ft., when the coral must have been exposed to air during ice ages when sea levels were low enough to expose them. Did God (who "cannot lie") place those things to create an appearance of age, with a number of young earth Christians figuring it out nonetheless, in spite of God's efforts? I am not employing sarcasm here towards my Christian brothers and sisters, rather, I believe the question is warranted.
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801104.htm
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210228.htm
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/210228.htm
- Job 38:4
Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Psalm 82:5
They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Psalm 104:5
Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Proverbs 8:29
When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth:
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Isaiah 24:18
And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Isaiah 40:21
Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Isaiah 51:13
And forgettest the Lord thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and where is the fury of the oppressor?
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Isaiah 51:16
And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Jeremiah 31:37
Thus saith the Lord; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations - Micah 6:2
Hear ye, O mountains, the Lord's controversy, and ye strong foundations of the earth: for the Lord hath a controversy with his people, and he will plead with Israel.
Thanks for the links Learner. Reminding me of the libraries of competing explanations provided by so many for each word written in the Bible, which teaches that it, alone, is enough. I always try to remember that it was, many assume, written for all those who existed across 4,000 years or so, so far. I often, when contemplating the accomplished and erudite scholarship behind contradictory views, remind myself that "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Since I am an amateur, with no credentials, that is very appealing. My goal is to be a decent Berean. I have opinions. I'm not adverse to changing them, if it seems necessary.
Reading your links, in the (apparently) SDA link I found a surmise that the light in Genesis 1:3 came from God himself. That has been, it seems, the common view. My view is different. It seems that of the 3 heavens a Hebrew speaker envisions the second one is the realm of the sun, moon, stars, and planets. Since verse 1 includes the plural heavens, how can the celestial bodies not have existed, since the angels, who inhabit the third, were watching and applauding, (Job 38:7, and "stars" exist in this verse, as well, who are not angels). If the celestial bodies existed, and verse 1 says they did (does it not?) then light existed. In verse 2 darkness is localized at the surface, the face of the deep. I suggest Job 38:9 resolves the issue (As does Hugh Ross). Verse 8 could reference the water planet, and verse 9 says;
"-when I made clouds its garment and thick darkness its swaddling band" (ESV). Here God is making the earth dark with clouds, which seems wholly unnecessary if light did not yet exist.
-- What do you think?
Reading your links, in the (apparently) SDA link I found a surmise that the light in Genesis 1:3 came from God himself. That has been, it seems, the common view. My view is different. It seems that of the 3 heavens a Hebrew speaker envisions the second one is the realm of the sun, moon, stars, and planets. Since verse 1 includes the plural heavens, how can the celestial bodies not have existed, since the angels, who inhabit the third, were watching and applauding, (Job 38:7, and "stars" exist in this verse, as well, who are not angels). If the celestial bodies existed, and verse 1 says they did (does it not?) then light existed. In verse 2 darkness is localized at the surface, the face of the deep. I suggest Job 38:9 resolves the issue (As does Hugh Ross). Verse 8 could reference the water planet, and verse 9 says;
"-when I made clouds its garment and thick darkness its swaddling band" (ESV). Here God is making the earth dark with clouds, which seems wholly unnecessary if light did not yet exist.
-- What do you think?