6000 year old (or so) universe

[McCulloch]

The bible never claims that the universe is 6000 years old.

How old is the universe according to the writers of the Bible? Do they provide any information? How much of the data reported as fact does one have to ignore to believe that the Biblical writers would allow for a billions of years old universe?

[Goat]

God Himself seems to think He made the heaven and earth (and all that is in them) in 6 days:

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Well, the author of Genesis 20 did.. which is much different that 'God himself'.

[Fisherking]

God Himself seems to think He made the heaven and earth (and all that is in them) in 6 days:

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Well, the author of [strike]Genesis 20[/strike] [Exodus 20] did.. which is much different that 'God himself'.

And God spake all these words, saying, ....

According to the bible (the authority in this sub-forum) God spoke the words recorded in Exodus 20.
Don't worry you can play in this sandbox, but try to leave the rabbit track-maker in the other sandboxes.

[McCulloch]

God Himself seems to think He made the heaven and earth (and all that is in them) in 6 days: [quote="Exodus 20:8"]

Well, the author of Genesis 20 did.. which is much different that 'God himself'.

In this case, it makes little difference. The author of Genesis 20 believed that the six days of Genesis 1 were six days. Thus, Fisherking, supports the premise that the Bible claims a young universe.

[Goat]

God Himself seems to think He made the heaven and earth (and all that is in them) in 6 days:

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

9Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:

10But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

11For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Well, the author of [strike]Genesis 20[/strike] [Exodus 20] did.. which is much different that 'God himself'.

And God spake all these words, saying, ....

According to the bible (the authority in this sub-forum) God spoke the words recorded in Exodus 20.
Don't worry you can play in this sandbox, but try to leave the rabbit track-maker in the other sandboxes.

That's the problem with you folks using a translation, the English is so inadequate to translate the Hebrew.

From the Rashi commentary.


God spoke: Heb. �ֱלֹהִי�. [The word] �ֱֱלֹהִי� always means “a judge.� [This Divine Name is used here] because there are some sections in the Torah [that contain commandments] that if a person performs them, he receives a reward, but if not, he does not receive any punishment for them. I might think that so it is with the Ten Commandments. Therefore, Scripture says: “God (�ֱלֹהִי�) spoke,� [signifying God’s role as] a Judge, [Whose function is] to mete out punishment [when the Ten Commandments are not obeyed]. [from Mechilta]

[fredonly]

I have it on good authority that the universe is only several thousands of years old. Here's the authority: http://www.icr.org/article/does-genesis ... t-fact-cr/

Hi Fred,

Why is he a good authority?

Sorry - I was joking. I am most assuredly not a believer in that silliness. I get a lot of amusement reading through the garbage at the Institute for Creation Research. Everything they write has been debunked, and the debunking can be found at http://www.talkorigins.org/

I do think that an extremely literal interpretation of the Bible would lead one to believe the world is in the neighborhood of 6000 yrs old. Since this is clearly not true (e.g. starlight from >6K light years out wouldn't have reached us yet), then either the bible is wrong, or (at least) one is forced into a non-literal translation.

[myth-one.com]

Myth-one, you appear to be missing the whole point of the Genesis 1 narrative. Day by day, it explains how the creative God takes the raw materials of creation and shapes them, layer by layer, into a fully functioning universe. Your wild interpretation that inserts characters and actions between verse 1 and 2 destroy the direction of the narrative. God creates the heavens and the earth, in the beginning. The earth is not bad, per se, but unformed and unlit, a good raw ingredient from which the marvelous creator will fashion his universe. Then, each day, this god adds another element, light, separation of water from water, plants, stuff in the sky, animals and displaying the arrogant anthropocentric hubris of the myth makers, finally God makes humans in His own image.

The only two possibilities mentioned in this thread (I believe) and some comments are:

1) Genesis chapter 1 & 2 describe only one six-day original creation.

When the six-day creation was complete, God pronounced everything as "good":

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Yet after creating what you describe as "the raw materials of creation" in Genesis 1:1, God calls that creation formless, void, and dark in Genesis 1:2. Not the same as "bad" but also not the same as "good."

Question: Why could God not make the finished product directly as good?

Question: How much time did it take to make the "raw materials" in Genesis 1:1? Whatever time it took -- it puts the creation process as more than six days -- thus conflicting with other scripture!

Question: God says everything was good although the earth was formless, void, and dark. Did God lie in verse 1:31 when He called it good or was He simply confused?

Question: Why was only the earth found to be formless, void, and dark after the "raw materials were created?" The heavens apparently were made directly as good.

Question: Why does mankind have so many indications that the earth is much older than a few thousand years?

====================================================

2) There is an initial creation of the heavens and earth defined in Genesis 1:1, and Genesis 1:3 begins a recreation of an earth which has descended into a formless, void, and dark state.

No one knows when "In the beginning" was or how long the initial creation lasted. If "heavens" means everything in the universe, the beginning was about 13.75 ±0.17 billion years ago (the age of the universe) and lasted at least until around 4.54 billion years ago (the age of the earth) according to the best estimates of mankind.

Sometime after its creation, the earth (only) had become formless, void, and dark as described in Genesis 1:2. About 6,000 years ago, God returned to recreate this decimated earth beginning in Genesis 1:3.

This idea that the creation described in detail beginning in Genesis 1:3 is actually a recreation of a decimated earth is supported by other scripture verses:

Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

"Thou sendest forth thy spirit." From Genesis 1:2, "... and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

"They are created." Mankind are created.

"And thou renewest the face of the earth." It is a renewal or recreation of a decimated earth!

To say that the unformed earth of v2 is bad is to add your own spin to the tale. Flour is not a bad thing to a baker, but it is unformed.

The baker did not create the flour. Some farmer planted, grew, and harvested the grain; while some mill produced the flour. An all powerful baker would be expeditious and go straight to the finished products.

[Metatron]

Myth-one, you appear to be missing the whole point of the Genesis 1 narrative. Day by day, it explains how the creative God takes the raw materials of creation and shapes them, layer by layer, into a fully functioning universe. Your wild interpretation that inserts characters and actions between verse 1 and 2 destroy the direction of the narrative. God creates the heavens and the earth, in the beginning. The earth is not bad, per se, but unformed and unlit, a good raw ingredient from which the marvelous creator will fashion his universe. Then, each day, this god adds another element, light, separation of water from water, plants, stuff in the sky, animals and displaying the arrogant anthropocentric hubris of the myth makers, finally God makes humans in His own image.

The only two possibilities mentioned in this thread (I believe) and some comments are:

1) Genesis chapter 1 & 2 describe only one six-day original creation.

When the six-day creation was complete, God pronounced everything as "good":

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Yet after creating what you describe as "the raw materials of creation" in Genesis 1:1, God calls that creation formless, void, and dark in Genesis 1:2. Not the same as "bad" but also not the same as "good."

Question: Why could God not make the finished product directly as good?

Question: How much time did it take to make the "raw materials" in Genesis 1:1? Whatever time it took -- it puts the creation process as more than six days -- thus conflicting with other scripture!

Question: God says everything was good although the earth was formless, void, and dark. Did God lie in verse 1:31 when He called it good or was He simply confused?

Question: Why was only the earth found to be formless, void, and dark after the "raw materials were created?" The heavens apparently were made directly as good.

Question: Why does mankind have so many indications that the earth is much older than a few thousand years?

====================================================

Where does it state that God created the "raw materials of creation"? I see nothing in Genesis 1:1-2 that states that God created the earth as a formless wasteland. The passage implies that earth was ALREADY a formless wasteland when God created the heavens and the earth. You simply assume that God created these raw materials. For all we know, they could have pre-existed God's creation.

2) There is an initial creation of the heavens and earth defined in Genesis 1:1, and Genesis 1:3 begins a recreation of an earth which has descended into a formless, void, and dark state.

No one knows when "In the beginning" was or how long the initial creation lasted. If "heavens" means everything in the universe, the beginning was about 13.75 ±0.17 billion years ago (the age of the universe) and lasted at least until around 4.54 billion years ago (the age of the earth) according to the best estimates of mankind.

Sometime after its creation, the earth (only) had become formless, void, and dark as described in Genesis 1:2. About 6,000 years ago, God returned to recreate this decimated earth beginning in Genesis 1:3.

This idea that the creation described in detail beginning in Genesis 1:3 is actually a recreation of a decimated earth is supported by other scripture verses:

Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou renewest the face of the earth.

"Thou sendest forth thy spirit." From Genesis 1:2, "... and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

"They are created." Mankind are created.

"And thou renewest the face of the earth." It is a renewal or recreation of a decimated earth!

To say that the unformed earth of v2 is bad is to add your own spin to the tale. Flour is not a bad thing to a baker, but it is unformed.

The baker did not create the flour. Some farmer planted, grew, and harvested the grain; while some mill produced the flour. An all powerful baker would be expeditious and go straight to the finished products.

Impressive. You create and then destroy an entire world between Genesis 1:2 and 1:3 based on a totally unrelated Psalm. I hope you have more convincing evidence than this.

[myth-one.com]

Where does it state that God created the "raw materials of creation"?

The "raw materials" myth was created by McCulloch. He should defend his creation.

Impressive.

Thanks.

You create and then destroy an entire world between Genesis 1:2 and 1:3 based on a totally unrelated Psalm.

I had no responsible for creating nor destroying it. But, several billion years isn't sufficient?

How is Psalm 104:30 not unrelated to Genesis?

I hope you have more convincing evidence than this.

At this point, why do I need any?

[Metatron]

Where does it state that God created the "raw materials of creation"?

The "raw materials" myth was created by McCulloch. He should defend his creation.

Then ignore the term "raw materials" if you prefer. The point is that there is nothing in Genesis 1:1-2 that points to the earth as a formless waste having been created as such by God. The formless waste could have pre-existed creation or even God himself for all we know from the passage. There is no reason at all to assume the existence of a complete world before the creation events of Genesis 3 and on.

You create and then destroy an entire world between Genesis 1:2 and 1:3 based on a totally unrelated Psalm.

I had no responsible for creating nor destroying it. But, several billion years isn't sufficient?

Oddly, I can't find any reference to "several billion years" anywhere in Genesis. Indeed, I suspect that the entire concept of a billion was alien to any of the writers of the Bible.

How is Psalm 104:30 not unrelated to Genesis?

You are stripping a passage out of context from a long hymn praising God with no evidence that it refers to some "first" creation of Earth.

I hope you have more convincing evidence than this.

At this point, why do I need any?

Because at this point you have not presented an argument that would even satisfy most theist much less non-theist.

[McCulloch]

Yet after creating what you describe as "the raw materials of creation" in Genesis 1:1, God calls that creation formless, void, and dark in Genesis 1:2. Not the same as "bad" but also not the same as "good."

Perhaps that is why there is no mention of good or bad before the first day.

Question: Why could God not make the finished product directly as good?

Why could God not make the apparently ruined first creation better in one hour? Why wouldn't God have prevented the first creation from disintegrating? Your story of two creations (one hidden from the reader) makes no sense.

Question: How much time did it take to make the "raw materials" in Genesis 1:1? Whatever time it took -- it puts the creation process as more than six days -- thus conflicting with other scripture!

Not at all. Beginning of day one: dark and void. End of day one: Let there be light.

Question: God says everything was good although the earth was formless, void, and dark. Did God lie in verse 1:31 when He called it good or was He simply confused?

I must have missed the part where God says that the formless void dark earth is good. By 1:31, it is no longer formless, void or dark.

Question: Why was only the earth found to be formless, void, and dark after the "raw materials were created?" The heavens apparently were made directly as good.

No, the text does not say that the heavens were made directly as good. It does not say that they were formless and void either. However, God had to separate the waters below from the waters above and create a firmament called heaven. God had to put the sun moon and stars into the heavens. It appears as if the heavens were not quite good to go from day one either.

Question: Why does mankind have so many indications that the earth is much older than a few thousand years?

That question gets into apologetics not theology.

Sometime after its creation, the earth (only) had become formless, void, and dark as described in Genesis 1:2. About 6,000 years ago, God returned to recreate this decimated earth beginning in Genesis 1:3.

Why does mankind have so many indications that the earth was not formless, void and dark about 6,000 years ago?