When will the earth be 6,000 years old?

[Davy]

I believe when the earth, sun and moon reach being created 6,000 years ago, Jesus, the Creator, will return to rule the earth for 1,000 years. God does things in prophetic language. Because the earth was created in 6 days, it is appointed to man 6,000 years to overcome sin until Jesus returns for that 1,000 year Sabbath rest of trusting in Him as He rules the earth from Jerusalem.

It is hard for me to figure out when that 6,000 years ends. According to the Jewish calendar, in September their new year reached 5,786 years. By the Gregorian calendar of Constantine we are in 2,025 plus 4,004 years equals 6,029 years which is probably wrong. No wonder man does not know the day, nor the hour. We can't even figure out the year!

Uh... that's date setting for Christ's future return. Jesus said no one knows that day.

Bishop Ussher in the 17th century was actually the first one to propose 4004 B.C. as the day God formed the man Adam in His Garden. Ussher used the Biblical begets from Christ back to Adam, so the Gregorian calendar was not involved in that.

Per the same Bible chronology, 19th century Bible scholar E.W. Bullinger came up with the same 4004 B.C. dating for Adam. He also showed Jesus was actually born on 4 B.C. and died on 29 A.D. That would mean we are 1996 years from the date of Christ's crucifixion.

But we cannot go by such dating. Instead we are to heed the SIGNS Lord Jesus gave us leading up to the day of His coming, and be watching so as to not be deceived.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

I read from KJV so I'm not sure what you saying, but I gave you some key scriptures to understand how God looks at a day to man. I don't know what book you reading from.

The Epistle of Barnabas was written in the first century and read in all the churches and was one of the books they considered for inclusion in the canon, but scholars tried to put a date later than the first century, but then why was it on six lists of books that were to be considered? If they had included it there wouldn't be questions about keeping the letter of the law regarding the Sabbath instead of the spirit of that law which is abiding in Christ, and there wouldn't be so many abortions and Hilary Clinton trying to legalize the killing of infants.



Barnabas 19:5
Thou shalt not doubt whether a thing shall be or not be. Thou shalt
not take the name of the Lord in vain. Thou shalt love thy
neighbor more than thine own soul. Thou shalt not murder a child by
abortion, nor again shalt thou kill it when it is born. Thou shalt
not withhold thy hand from thy son or daughter, but from their youth
thou shalt teach them the fear of God.

 

[Jay Ross]

Uh... that's date setting for Christ's future return. Jesus said no one knows that day.

Bishop Ussher in the 17th century was actually the first one to propose 4004 B.C. as the day God formed the man Adam in His Garden. Ussher used the Biblical begets from Christ back to Adam, so the Gregorian calendar was not involved in that.

Per the same Bible chronology, 19th century Bible scholar E.W. Bullinger came up with the same 4004 B.C. dating for Adam. He also showed Jesus was actually born on 4 B.C. and died on 29 A.D. That would mean we are 1996 years from the date of Christ's crucifixion.

But we cannot go by such dating. Instead, we are to heed the SIGNS Lord Jesus gave us leading up to the day of His coming and be watching so as to not be deceived.

Ussher's chronology is a fabrication and his determination as to when Adam was created cannot be confirmed from the timeframes given in the scriptures. Ussher's premise was that there were four 1,000-year ages between the creation of Adam and the Birth of Christ and since the scholars of his era generally accepted that Christ was born in the year 4 BC on the Gregorian calendar, he constructed his chronology of the OT to fit within this constraint.

It is my view that Ussher's brother in-law, Lydiat's chronology was closer to understanding the OT chronology when by his calculations he determined that Adam was created in the year 4103 BC, based on his belief that Christ was born in the year 7 BC.

If a day of the Lord is actually 1,024 years in duration and not 1,000 years as is presumed in our bible translations, then when key elements of the timeline is considered, it must embrace this length oof an age.

Isaac was born in the year 2049 AA, at the beginning of the third age. Most people who calculate when Isaac was born ignore the one-year duration of the flood and the fact that we are told that Noah was 601 years old when the flood was over.

The other inconsistency in Ussher's chronology is that he used a 360-day prophetic year and ignored the fact that every few years a thirteenth month was added so that the Jewish Calander kept in sync with the solar Calander. There is a repetitive 19 year or so cycle in which the additional years are added.

People who are looking for when Christs' earthly rule will begin with Christ ruling from the face of the earth, miss the fact that Christ's rule will be a priestly rule from Heaven and as such His "permanent" return will not be until the very end of the seventh age.

So that the premise that Christ will return to the earth at the very beginning of the seventh age is flawed as it is based upon a wrong understanding of the duration of a Day of the Lord/age/generation.

Shalom

 

[amigo de christo]

Soon it will be the NEW . new heavens and the new earth . Home of the sheep . sounds lovely indeed .
Paradise of the saints . Let all that has breath both praise and thank the LORD .

 

[Marvelloustime]

Soon it will be the NEW . new heavens and the new earth . Home of the sheep . sounds lovely indeed .
Paradise of the saints . Let all that has breath both praise and thank the LORD .

@amigo de christo

 

[bro.tan]

The Epistle of Barnabas was written in the first century and read in all the churches and was one of the books they considered for inclusion in the canon, but scholars tried to put a date later than the first century, but then why was it on six lists of books that were to be considered? If they had included it there wouldn't be questions about keeping the letter of the law regarding the Sabbath instead of the spirit of that law which is abiding in Christ, and there wouldn't be so many abortions and Hilary Clinton trying to legalize the killing of infants.



Barnabas 19:5
Thou shalt not doubt whether a thing shall be or not be. Thou shalt
not take the name of the Lord in vain. Thou shalt love thy
neighbor more than thine own soul. Thou shalt not murder a child by
abortion, nor again shalt thou kill it when it is born. Thou shalt
not withhold thy hand from thy son or daughter, but from their youth
thou shalt teach them the fear of God.

Oh ok, never heard of it until now, I guess this is another lost book.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Oh ok, never heard of it until now, I guess this is another lost book.

The reason I believe it was not approved back then is the chapter I shared is a prophecy of Christ's return, but 6,000 years was almost 2,000 years in the future. Tichendorf in the 1700's discovered it in a monastery and copied it down because the monks wanted to burn it for fuel! This is the time for that book to be read, not back then. It shows that God is in control. Not only that, but its inclusion makes 28 NT books, a number divisible by 7! God's perfect number. The OT number of books is also divisible by 7 when counted as the Jews do, all the 12 minor prophets are counted as one equaling 28!

 

[Davy]

Ussher's chronology is a fabrication and his determination as to when Adam was created cannot be confirmed from the timeframes given in the scriptures.

You are entitled to your opinion, even though it comes from Jewish tradition and not from Christian authors like bishop Ussher and E.W. Bullinger,

 

[Jay Ross]

You are entitled to your opinion, even though it comes from Jewish tradition and not from Christian authors like bishop Ussher and E.W. Bullinger,

Bishop Ussher set a target for when Adam was created and then forced the scriptures to suit his false assumption that Adam was created in the years 4,004 BC whereas I am of the belief that Adam was created in the year 4,100 BC.

My understanding does not come from Jewish traditions. The year in which Adam was created by God ranges from 5,501 BC determined by J Africanus to 3,936 BC as determined by A Helwigius. I sat down with an open Bible and entered into a spreadsheet such chronological dates and prophetic time spans to create my own chronology of the scriptures from the creation of Adam until the GWTR judgement.

Davy, your put down speaks more about your understanding of the chronology of the scriptures than anything else.

What I have come to understand dovetails together without so much as an apparent error in my calculations.

I have put pen to paper and provided what I believe. Perhaps it is time for you to provide the same level of detail from your own research.

Shalom

 

[bro.tan]

The reason I believe it was not approved back then is the chapter I shared is a prophecy of Christ's return, but 6,000 years was almost 2,000 years in the future. Tichendorf in the 1700's discovered it in a monastery and copied it down because the monks wanted to burn it for fuel! This is the time for that book to be read, not back then. It shows that God is in control. Not only that, but its inclusion makes 28 NT books, a number divisible by 7! God's perfect number. The OT number of books is also divisible by 7 when counted as the Jews do, all the 12 minor prophets are counted as one equaling 28!

Oh ok

 

[Davy]

Bishop Ussher set a target for when Adam was created and then forced the scriptures to suit his false assumption that Adam was created in the years 4,004 BC whereas I am of the belief that Adam was created in the year 4,100 BC.

My understanding does not come from Jewish traditions. The year in which Adam was created by God ranges from 5,501 BC determined by J Africanus to 3,936 BC as determined by A Helwigius. I sat down with an open Bible and entered into a spreadsheet such chronological dates and prophetic time spans to create my own chronology of the scriptures from the creation of Adam until the GWTR judgement.

Davy, your put down speaks more about your understanding of the chronology of the scriptures than anything else.

What I have come to understand dovetails together without so much as an apparent error in my calculations.

I have put pen to paper and provided what I believe. Perhaps it is time for you to provide the same level of detail from your own research.

Shalom

Many secularists, evolutionist anti-creationists are critics of bishop James Ussher's chronology of 4004 B.C. for God creating Adam. Ussher considered many sources outside The Bible also to come to his dating.

James Ussher and His Chronology: Reasonable or Ridiculous? | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

 

[1stCenturyLady]

You are entitled to your opinion, even though it comes from Jewish tradition and not from Christian authors like bishop Ussher and E.W. Bullinger,

Why differentiate between Jewish and Christian? Christians believe what the Jews do. But I do not know how Jews come up with this year being 5785. Do you?

 

[Davy]

Why differentiate between Jewish and Christian? Christians believe what the Jews do. But I do not know how Jews come up with this year being 5785. Do you?

I got to remember that one, that "Christians believe what the Jews do"! No darling, that's not wholly accurate.

As a Protestant Christian and Gentile, I also have Jewish Christian friends too, mostly SDA. And they have some old Jewish traditions they have added to Christian theology which have NO part in The New Testament, nor The Gospel.

But not only they, but most Protestant denominations also have doctrinal additions in their theology that are not Biblical. The whole denominational thing today is just one big mess, which is why I am non-denominational, even though I was raised in a mainstream Protestant Church. For me, it's better to stay with what is actually written in God's Word, and refuse to play their men's doctrines game.

Can't you tell that's why I'm so loved on this forum, because I spoil the many doctrines of men which brethren come here pushing which they got from idolizing their preacher or their particular Church denomination?

 

[Jay Ross]

Many secularists, evolutionist anti-creationists are critics of bishop James Ussher's chronology of 4004 B.C. for God creating Adam. Ussher considered many sources outside The Bible also to come to his dating.

James Ussher and His Chronology: Reasonable or Ridiculous? | The Institute for Creation Research

www.icr.org

Davy Ussher may have used many sources outside the bible to come to his understanding and conclusions but that does not mean that he got anything right.

I have done my study of the biblical timeline from Adam until the final judgement. I believe that I am right because of my own research into the biblical chronical timeline.

Questions such as the year that Isaac was born?
Questions such as how long Jacob spent in Haran with Laban before he returned to his father Isaac need to be understood?

Questions as to how old Joseph was when Jacob went down to Egypt are important to the storyline of Israel?

Understanding of the time period that the Book of Judges covers is important. I believe that there are three story lines in the Book of Judges with the total time span for the Book of Judges only being 220 years long?

Davy, I am not quoting any other author except myself for what I post because I have studied and researched the scriptures to come to my conclusions.

I know that Ussher got the timespan of the Old Testament wrong and is out by around 96 years as to when Adam was created.

Dr Floyd Nolen Jones, who did his PHD on the Chronology of the Old Testament loosely based around Ussher's chronology, even got wrong when Isaac was born, because of a wrong New Testament conclusion as to what Stephen meant when he said that Abraham left Haran after His father had died. The question that needs to be answered is which father was Stephen was referencing. The Genesis account clearly states that Abraham was born when Terah was 70 years old as stated in genesis 11:26. Genesis 22:20-24 would seem to indicate that 60 years after Abraham left Haran to go down to the Land of Canaan, that Terah actually died. The last patriarch to die as recorded in the Book of Genesis is Noah who died when Abraham was around 59 years old.

Davy, you have no proof or reliable facts to disprove the timeline that I am presenting.

Shalom

 

[1stCenturyLady]

I got to remember that one, that "Christians believe what the Jews do"! No darling, that's not wholly accurate.

As a Protestant Christian and Gentile, I also have Jewish Christian friends too, mostly SDA. And they have some old Jewish traditions they have added to Christian theology which have NO part in The New Testament, nor The Gospel.

But not only they, but most Protestant denominations also have doctrinal additions in their theology that are not Biblical. The whole denominational thing today is just one big mess, which is why I am non-denominational, even though I was raised in a mainstream Protestant Church. For me, it's better to stay with what is actually written in God's Word, and refuse to play their men's doctrines game.

Can't you tell that's why I'm so loved on this forum, because I spoil the many doctrines of men which brethren come here pushing which they got from idolizing their preacher or their particular Church denomination?

Oh, good grief. I'm not talking theology! I'm talking how long ago Adam was created.

But, I agree that most churches, whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant believe humanistic doctrines like they never read a Bible before in their lives. Especially, the condescension they give to the power of Jesus to cleanse our sin nature of lawlessness. What does cleanse us of ALL UNRIGHTEOUS mean to them. John 15:3 says we are CLEAN. All that is left is the maturing of the fruit of the Spirit. Wa La holy and glorified before we die, not after as is taught.

If you don't believe me read 1 John 3 for the sin unto death called lawlessness. And 2 Peter 1:5-11 for the fruit of the Spirit. It is all done by Jesus as long as we abide in Him. That's all. Jesus is the only AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith. Notice 2 faiths in Romans 1:17. Well here they are. 1 John 3:4-9. Lawlessness is taken away as soon as we are cleansed, sanctified and justified, 1 Corinthians 6:11, and John 15:3. Jesus finishes the job by maturing us.

So Abide in Jesus. Read His word everyday! Spend time in thanksgiving, loving and praising Him. Simple. "My yoke is easy, and my burden is light." I wish the SDA's I know didn't kick me out of their church for telling them in Sabbath School every time I received a bona fide miracle, which is often.

 

[Davy]

Oh, good grief. I'm not talking theology! I'm talking how long ago Adam was created.

But, I agree that most churches, whether Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant believe humanistic doctrines like they never read a Bible before in their lives. Especially, the condescension they give to the power of Jesus to cleanse our sin nature of lawlessness. What does cleanse us of ALL UNRIGHTEOUS mean to them. John 15:3 says we are CLEAN. All that is left is the maturing of the fruit of the Spirit. Wa La holy and glorified before we die, not after as is taught.

You're treading dangerously with that above rant in red. When Jesus returns, His elect will then be suredly cleansed of ALL unrighteousness, which is because of the limitations of our flesh per God's design for this present world. As His people we can only ever be 'counted' perfect while in the flesh, because we all fall short of the glory of God, and we all have been concluded under sin so that His Salvation would be for those who believe. Only at the manifesting of the "sons of God" when Jesus returns will that change and we shall be released from it. So no, we are not wholly CLEAN just yet, not while in the flesh. Surely you can grasp that Lord Jesus ONLY... was actually PERFECT without sin while in the flesh, and thus CLEAN of all unrighteousness.

By that, you should easily realize that I am a REALIST. I believe what God's written Word says, and what I wrote in the above is what God's written Word actually teaches. (Rom.3; Rom.8; Gal.3)

 

[1stCenturyLady]

You're treading dangerously with that above rant in red. When Jesus returns, His elect will then be suredly cleansed of ALL unrighteousness, which is because of the limitations of our flesh per God's design for this present world. As His people we can only ever be 'counted' perfect while in the flesh, because we all fall short of the glory of God, and we all have been concluded under sin so that His Salvation would be for those who believe. Only at the manifesting of the "sons of God" when Jesus returns will that change and we shall be released from it. So no, we are not wholly CLEAN just yet, not while in the flesh. Surely you can grasp that Lord Jesus ONLY... was actually PERFECT without sin while in the flesh, and thus CLEAN of all unrighteousness.

Oh Davy NO!!! That is a lie of the devil. A false doctrine by men who could not witness God's cleansing power of their nature in themselves!

John 15:3 says you are clean. Not after you die. Don't you know then it will be too late!!! Here is the reality of after we die - Revl. 22:11 "11 He who is unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is filthy, let him be filthy still; he who is righteous, let him be righteous still; he who is holy, let him be holy still.”

1 John 3:7-9 "7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. (That's now!) 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God."

 

[Davy]

Oh Davy NO!!! That is a lie of the devil. A false doctrine by men who could not witness God's cleansing power of their nature in themselves!

That Lord Jesus ONLY was PERFECT IN THE FLESH WITHOUT SIN is a lie from the devil???

Your mind is not... in the right place, because what you are denying is that Jesus of Nazareth is not THE CHRIST, IMMANUEL, GOD WITH US, even while born in the flesh through woman's womb, yet COMPLETELY WITHOUT SIN.

Who do you make yourself out to be? Do YOU think you are The Christ, or maybe another Christ? Nah, YOU are NOT CHRIST, but a poor wretched soul still dwelling in an IMPERFECT FLESH BODY STILL SUBJECT TO SIN! You sin EVERYDAY still, but just REFUSE TO RECOGNIZE IT. None of us are free from the law of sin in our fleshy members until we are literally released... from the flesh, either at flesh death, or at Christ's future coming! We can only be COUNTED as without sin by being COVERED by Christ's Blood shed upon His cross. That still does not mean our flesh has stopped sinning, even as Apostle John showed in 1 John 1, and Apostle Paul in Romans 7.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

That Lord Jesus ONLY was PERFECT IN THE FLESH WITHOUT SIN is a lie from the devil???

Your mind is not... in the right place, because what you are denying is that Jesus of Nazareth is not THE CHRIST, IMMANUEL, GOD WITH US, even while born in the flesh through woman's womb, yet COMPLETELY WITHOUT SIN.

Who do you make yourself out to be? Do YOU think you are The Christ, or maybe another Christ? Nah, YOU are NOT CHRIST, but a poor wretched soul still dwelling in an IMPERFECT FLESH BODY STILL SUBJECT TO SIN! You sin EVERYDAY still, but just REFUSE TO RECOGNIZE IT. None of us are free from the law of sin in our fleshy members until we are literally released... from the flesh, either at flesh death, or at Christ's future coming! We can only be COUNTED as without sin by being COVERED by Christ's Blood shed upon His cross. That still does not mean our flesh has stopped sinning, even as Apostle John showed in 1 John 1, and Apostle Paul in Romans 7.

You are reading Romans 7 and 1 John 1 out of context. We are dead to the Law of Moses. The Jews still had desires to commit murder, thus they killed Jesus. But Jesus gave us the Holy Spirit to dwell inside of us if we repent. If we do not have the Spirit of Christ we do not belong to Him, and if we DO have His Spirit we cannot and do not commit these sins against the commandments of God.

Romans 8:29-30. We are conforming to the image of Christ, thus cannot commit sins against the Law of Moses because they have been written on our heart and conscience of the born again. If you obey this new conscience, you please God. 1 John 3:21-25.

They key question is have you been baptized with the Holy Spirit? Many cessationists haven't been, thus not saved. Once mature in Christ which can seem to take a lifetime, we will never stumble. 2 Peter 1:5-11. Then we are truly brethren of Christ and are holy as Christ is holy.

 

[Davy]

You are reading Romans 7 and 1 John 1 out of context.

No, I am not taking that out of context. You need to read what Paul actually said, instead of defaulting what your preaches says Paul said. Paul showed in Rom.7 that our 'flesh' is subject to the 'law of sin'. But our spirit is spiritual and desires to follow God's law.

Rom 7:18-25
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
KJV

Paul's final statement reveals that our spirit will always be at war with our flesh while alive in these flesh bodies.

It means even when we TRY... not to sin, we slip up unconsciously and commit sin, because of that war by that "law of sin" in our fleshy members, our flesh body. Our flesh is responsible for most of our desires and wants, and sin.

This is why... Apostle John in 1 John 1 showed us what to do when we find ourselves having slipped up in future sin. He told us to repent and ask Jesus forgiveness, and Jesus is Just to heal us. This is also what John was showing to do per the following 1 John 2:1 verse...

1 John 2:1
2 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
KJV

Now why would Apostle John be telling the Church to not sin if all their sins they could ever commit were already forgiven by Christ on the cross? and even that Jesus stands as our Advocate to The Father if we do... sin, with John pointing to future sin.

Further, we are ONLY dead to the law IF... and that's a BIG IF... we WALK BY THE SPIRIT. That is what Apostle Paul taught in Galatians 5. That means... if the believer instead walks by their flesh instead, THEY PUT THEMSELVES BACK UNDER THE LAW. Thus the law is not dead, for it was made for the sinner, and ungodly. And to walk by The Holy Spirit means not doing anything that is against God's law, which also is what Apostle Paul taught there in Galatians 5.