Earth millions of years Old

I didn't really follow?

She is saying that the Earth is no possible way to be 6,000 years old, (6 Days old to God) which is completely True. No dinosaurs as God explained to Job (Job 40:15-24) existed in any human history. Dinosaurs existed before anyone (even Him) became flesh. (which is our human body)

(thesuperjag;49277)
She is saying that the Earth is no possible way to be 6,000 years old, (6 Days old to God) which is completely True. No dinosaurs as God explained to Job (Job 40:15-24) existed in any human history. Dinosaurs existed before anyone (even Him) became flesh. (which is our human body)
That may be what she believes... but I'm pretty sure she wasn't saying that. All that looks to have been done was pasted an article snip.

(kriss;49283)
you are right it was a piece of an article interviewing the Astronmer of the vatican but I have always said the Bible says this if you understand 2 Peter he tells you there was three World ages one that was one that is and one to come This earth Age starts in Gen 1:3 Before that the hebrew tells you the earth became void There is no disagreement between scripture and science only bad teaching by men who did not get this till knowledge was increased.check out the link below for more info ............................................................Rightly-Dividing Geology and the Book of Genesis Beyond the "Gap Theory" of Christian Creationism"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."(Genesis 1:1 KJV) ? "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."(Genesis 1:2 KJV) Is there a time-gap between the first two verses of Genesis? On this website you will learn about a controversial, lesser known literal interpretation of the Genesis narrative that does not contradict the scientific evidence for an Old Earth. Commonly called the "Gap Theory" or Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation, it is based on the Scriptural fact that, in the second verse of Genesis, the Holy Bible simply and clearly states that the planet Earth was already here (but in a ruined state) before the creative process of the seven days even begins. Understanding this Biblical mystery begins with the precise wording of this New Testament cross-reference:"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men."(2 Pet 3:5-7 KJV) Contrary to popular interpretation, the above passage is not a reference to Noah's flood (see Introduction Pages for specifics). And the only other place in the Bible where the Earth was covered in waters is Genesis 1:2. The ramifications are obvious: The literal wording suggests that the "heavens and the earth, which are now" (made during the seven days) was not the first-time creation of all things, as is traditionally assumed. The Word of God appears to be telling the reader there was a previous populated world on the face of this old Earth before God formed the present world of modern Man. This invalidates the Doctrine of Young Earth Creationism.The Bible itself provides insight into a great mystery in Earth's natural history, at what is known as the Pleistocene - Holocene boundary. Science remains at a loss to definitively explain the Ice Age and the anomaly of the mysterious mega fauna extinctions across the face of the Earth about 12,000 to 10,000 Radio Carbon years ago. Geologic evidence from that period indicates extraordinary global massive volcanism, gigantic tidal waves, seismic activity on a vast scale, and extreme climate swings on the Earth over a geologically brief period of time. It is no coincidence that the Bible at Genesis 1:2 describes the Earth as flooded, desolate, and in darkness in the timeframe closely corresponding to these catastrophic events in the Earth's natural history. Clearly, these two mysteries are linked.Why the old "world that then was" ended, and why God made a new world and modern Man, requires a study into the ancient origins of Satan and the Angels. The Earth has an ancient natural history that can be deciphered from the geologic record, but it also has an equally important ancient spiritual history that can only be deciphered from Rightly-Dividing the Holy Bible. Knowledge of both is required to correctly reconcile Geology and the Book of Genesis. We pray you will find this material useful in your study of God's Holy Word.http://www.kjvbible.org/you can also read Denver's study on thishttp://www.christianityboard.com/earth-age...-study-t79.html
I am in complete agreement with you Dear sister Kriss.

(kriss;49287)
http://www.kjvbible.org/gap_theory.html2 Peter 3:5-7 is NOT a reference to Noah's flood. There are only two (2) places in the entire Bible where the Earth is flooded by water. One, of course, is at the time of Noah's flood (Genesis 7). The other is at Genesis 1:2 where it speaks about the condition of the Earth at the time just before God said, "Let there be light." Now, if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not a cross-reference to Noah's flood, then it MUST be a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2 (there is no other alternative - simple logic). And if 2 Peter 3:5-7 is a cross-reference to Genesis 1:2, then the Holy Spirit is calling your attention to something very significant that millions of 'Young Earth' Creationists are blindly overlooking. Specifically, that a glorious ancient world that God created in the distant past (Genesis 1:1), had long since been utterly destroyed, plunged into deep darkness, and overflowed by a raging flood of great waters on a universal scale at the time of Genesis 1:2. The seven-days of Genesis, which follow, chronicle God's methodology of restoring the heavens and Earth and repopulating the world with living creatures, including modern man. There is a time gap between the first two verses of the Bible. It is a time gap that is obscurely declared, but not greatly detailed in the book of Genesis. It is the very first 'mystery' found in the Bible. Knowing that there is a time gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, and WHY there is a time gap, will open more perfect understanding of what the Creation narrative is actually saying, and begins to cut a clear path through the confusion of conflicting theories and interpretations that have occupied the Creation/Science debate.More on that shortly but, for now, it is very important that we first show you the Biblical clues that tell us why 2 Peter 3:5-7 is not a reference to Noah's flood.Clue #1: Compare the phrase "the heavens and earth, which are now" to the phrase the "heavens were of old":What does that mean? Ask yourself this question: When Noah's flood happened did it change anything in the upper heavens? Would a flood on the Earth have any effect on the sun, moon, or stars? The obvious answer is NO. The heavens of Noah's days were the same heavens as in Adam's day; same sun, same moon, same stars. FACT: Noah's flood had no effect on the upper heavens. All of Noah's flood's effects were confined to the Earth's surface and atmosphere. And although the Bible speaks about the "windows of heaven" being opened and water coming down (Genesis 7:11), the context of that reference is the "first" heaven of the Earth's atmosphere. That is where rain comes from. (Keep in mind: The Bible says there are three (3) heavens. See 2 Corinthians 12:2). This explained in great detail later.Again, note the contrasting comparison between the phrases the "heavens were of old" (before the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7) and the "heavens and earth which are now" (after the waters of 2 Peter 3:5-7). If Noah's flood did not alter the upper heavens, then this verse must be speaking about an event other than Noah's flood. And Genesis 1:2 is our only other Biblical candidate.Clue #2: Notice also in the passage that the earth is said to be "standing out" of the water and "in" the water. In our English language these terms suggest that these particular waters were not confined to the surface of the planet. The Bible says that part of the planet was "standing out" from these waters (that is, the sphere of the planet was partially "overflowed") and the location of the bulk of the waters was external to the Earth itself. The Bible says the planet was "in the water" of this particular flood (think of a round fishing floater bobbing in a flowing stream). In other words, part of the Earth is protruding from the waters and not simply just covered by waters on the surface. The literal English wording of this passage does not describe a flood event confined to the Earth's surface. This passage describes a deluge that raged across the solar system, and beyond (our solar system and outer space are the "second" heaven of the three heavens).Try to draw this mental picture: Think of a dark and ruined solar system with water strewn throughout it like one big messy galactic spill. That is what Genesis 1:2 is speaking about. And imagine the planet Earth drifting awash in this roaring and rolling formless mess. Where would those waters have come from? Well, it is an established scientific observation that dying stars create and give off lots of water (You will find the references to that fact elsewhere in this study). Certainly there must have been lots and lots of stars in the heavens that were "of old" and, if the cosmos had gone dark and the stars died, then there would be excessive water everywhere throughout space. And if that was, indeed, the case, then all those extinguished stars would needed to be reignited to be seen in the present heavens. That is exactly what was done on the 4th day.But, before any reconstruction of the heavens and Earth could begin, God had to do something with all that water scattered across space (Genesis 1:2). That is why the Bible says the waters were divided (Genesis 1:6-7). It was the first order of business after the Lord God turned on the work lights (Genesis 1:3) and began to clear up the mess:"And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so."(Genesis 1:7 KJV)The bottom line interpretation of the Genesis narrative is this: Those seven days of Genesis are not a description of the original creation of all things (Genesis 1:1) but a Divine special regeneration of the cosmos from what was here before the present world of Man. In other words, there are two creation events in Genesis. The first is described in a one-sentence statement at Genesis 1:1 and the second was accomplished in 7 days and very detailed, beginning at Genesis 1:3. This is why the Bible at Genesis 2:4 says:"These are the generations [plural] of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,"(Genesis 2:4 KJV)Again, the Creation account contains the story of two creative events. Only the latter event, the seven days, is outlined in great detail. The first one requires study and searching out and, most importantly, requires FAITH in the infallibility of God's written Word. This Ruin-Reconstruction interpretation of Genesis (better known as the "Gap Theory") was the bread and butter Creation doctrine of the Fundamentalist movement in the early part of the 20th century. The interpretation has mainly been credited to the Scottish theologian, Thomas Chalmers, who began to preach it back in the early 19th century. However there is documented evidence that there were theologians who also held this view long before Chalmers' days. Contrary to Young Earth Creationist allegations, Chalmers did not invent the Gap Theory as a compromise of the Word of God to accommodate science. That gap has always been in the Scriptures since the day Moses penned the book of Genesis. However, only in post New Testament times, and only after man's knowledge about Earth's natural history increased greatly, has the Spirit opened people's eyes to its existence. And only by rightly-dividing, and gaining true knowledge through the Lord Jesus Christ, can the reader start to comprehend the doctrinal significance.For more on thishttp://www.kjvbible.org/gap_theory.html
Which reminds me that also Jeremiah 4:22-27 also fits the fact that there are three world ages and the planet is indeed millions of years old.

Oh boy, here we go again. I can't see where you can get this junk idea from. God doesn't need millions of years to create the earth. You're taking that verse, and stretching it waaaaaay to far.I'll believe in what my forefathers believed in, and what 2,000 years of Christian history believed in. Not some new "science" stuff from this generation.

(Wakka;49300)
Oh boy, here we go again. I can't see where you can get this junk idea from. God doesn't need millions of years to create the earth. You're taking that verse, and stretching it waaaaaay to far.I'll believe in what my forefathers believed in, and what 2,000 years of Christian history believed in. Not some new "science" stuff from this generation.
One word WakkaScriptures

(thesuperjag;49277)
She is saying that the Earth is no possible way to be 6,000 years old, (6 Days old to God) which is completely True. No dinosaurs as God explained to Job (Job 40:15-24) existed in any human history. Dinosaurs existed before anyone (even Him) became flesh. (which is our human body)
There have been fossils found with dinosaur and human footprints together. (in the same rock strata)

(eternalarcadia;49304)
(thesuperjag;49277)
She is saying that the Earth is no possible way to be 6,000 years old, (6 Days old to God) which is completely True. No dinosaurs as God explained to Job (Job 40:15-24) existed in any human history. Dinosaurs existed before anyone (even Him) became flesh. (which is our human body)
There have been fossils found with dinosaur and human footprints together. (in the same rock strata)Proof?

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/dino-fossils.htmhttp://www.rae.org/paluxy.htmlI'd say its more than 50% likely that they are human prints.

(thesuperjag;49302)
One word WakkaScriptures
I believe what the majority of the body of Christ believes. I'm not in my old little tangent.Scriptures do not support it, imo.

I understand the basics of the Gap theory, and I do not know which is more profitable to beleive (whichever is true I suppose). I do know this, that whether the Gap (before Adam and Eve) exists or not, we agree that God made man fully formed, that sin came into the world by one man, and by one man, sin has gone out.This is a very profitable belief. Edit: That is to say that both those who believe a Gap Theory and those who believe the earth is literally as old as the geneological dates give us can both see the atrocity of what is laid out in the article.

What was man commanded to "replenish" in Gen 1 ?28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. Donnie