Old Earth

[StanJ]

Here's some external scriptures to Genesis 1 that confirms YEC.

“For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” — Exodus 20:11

“It is a sign 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

We may not be Israelites, but we can claim this truth.

 

[JimParker]

If the world is old, then much of the bible is fictitious, and the prophets and Christ Himself maintained this fiction as truth. Therefore, scripture is filled with many lies, and cannot be trusted as a source of truth. So of if there is a God, it is not the one in or of the bible. If it is, then I suppose there is no real standard for truth according to Him, since we all have to decide for ourselves what parts of His word are true and what parts are not.

<<If the world is old, then much of the bible is fictitious>>

Nowhere in the Bible is there a SCIENTIFIC statement of the age of the world.

 

[KingJ]

So if the earth is old, humans aren't sinners and in need of God's grace? How does that work? :wacko:

Are you purposely missing his point?

He said.........[SIZE=12pt]''Adam and Eve did not fall from a state of existence in relation to the same, but rather came about over ions of time through some evolutionary process which changed some primordial soup in[/SIZE]''.

He is right. If mankind is old then the bible is a joke / recent fairytale dogma.

Lot's of theories on this topic, basically trying to reconcile the Bible with modern science. One of the most intriguing explanations I've read were in a book that was published 100 years ago by Clarence Larkin called "The Greatest Book on Dispensational Truth in the World". Despite it's long and somewhat brazen title, I thought the book was very well written and did a good job of explaining concepts using detailed drawing created by the author. On the subject of "old earth", Larkin explained that there was actually an earth before the creation. This "old earth" had animals, but no humans. Life was destroyed on it because of a cataclysmic event (the fall ?) and the earth was "formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep" (Gen 1:2), which explains how "the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters" (Gen 1:2). There had to be waters to move over.. Anyhow, as I said, an interesting explanation. Here is a link to one of his drawings from the book, although there is a better one for this particular subject that I can't find on the web:

http://www.raptureforums.com/ClarenceLarkin/images/5-generation.gif

I agree with this. Thanks for the link.

 

[River Jordan]

He is right. If mankind is old then the bible is a joke / recent fairytale dogma.

Then I guess I should stop being a Christian.

 

[Keeth]

Then I guess I should stop being a Christian.

Why are you a Christian?

 

[River Jordan]

I was being sarcastic. Sorry.

 

[Keeth]

I was being sarcastic. Sorry.

I know, no apology required. Seriously though, why are you a Christian?

 

[River Jordan]

Keeth,

I'm sorry, but I try and steer clear of talking too much about my faith in this forum. I get enough attacks just from discussions of other issues, and the few times I have opened up about my faith, it's gotten very nasty.

 

[DogLady19]

Keeth,

I'm sorry, but I try and steer clear of talking too much about my faith in this forum. I get enough attacks just from discussions of other issues, and the few times I have opened up about my faith, it's gotten very nasty.

How sad. And I think it's a very low thing to attack a person's faith just because you disagree with them...

 

[justaname]

Keeth,

I'm sorry, but I try and steer clear of talking too much about my faith in this forum. I get enough attacks just from discussions of other issues, and the few times I have opened up about my faith, it's gotten very nasty.

I attest that to the cruelty of humanity and not the manifestation of Christ in the believer. So many are quick to judge when we all need to pray for mercy. Honestly that breaks my heart.

 

[KingJ]

...

 

[River Jordan]

I attest that to the cruelty of humanity and not the manifestation of Christ in the believer. So many are quick to judge when we all need to pray for mercy. Honestly that breaks my heart.

I chalk it up to "it's the internet". Par for the course I guess....

 

[Keeth]

Keeth,

I'm sorry, but I try and steer clear of talking too much about my faith in this forum. I get enough attacks just from discussions of other issues, and the few times I have opened up about my faith, it's gotten very nasty.

What is faith, that is not shared? I have no intention of being nasty or attacking you. Just trying to understand why or how one beleives they need Jesus as their Savior, if the account of creation and the fall are not literal. If they asre not literal, then what really happened, and why are you a sinner that needs to be saved by Jesus Christ? Legitimate questions I beleive.

 

[KingJ]

I chalk it up to "it's the internet". Par for the course I guess....

I believe I would scrutinize you worse if I knew you personally. Your beliefs do not tie up with scripture. So I am puzzled if you and Justaname are suggesting we leave all to believe what they want and accept that all roads lead to Rome. Our opinion > scripture. How dare we correct someone from scripture. Lets just all hold hands and sing Kumbaya? Conflict is to be expected when we are set in our ways or have pride. Bottom line is that 99% of the regulars on a Christian site mean well.

Then I guess I should stop being a Christian.

or you could revisit your other belief.

 

[River Jordan]

What is faith, that is not shared?

I didn't say I never share my faith; I just said I've stopped discussing it here at this forum. Trust me, I have very good reasons.

Just trying to understand why or how one beleives they need Jesus as their Savior, if the account of creation and the fall are not literal. If they asre not literal, then what really happened, and why are you a sinner that needs to be saved by Jesus Christ? Legitimate questions I beleive.

Humans are obviously sinful and fall short of God's grace, no matter how old the earth is. I can't imagine arguing that if the earth isn't 6,000 years old, then we are not in need of saving.

I believe I would scrutinize you worse if I knew you personally. Your beliefs do not tie up with scripture. So I am puzzled if you and Justaname are suggesting we leave all to believe what they want and accept that all roads lead to Rome. Our opinion > scripture. How dare we correct someone from scripture. Lets just all hold hands and sing Kumbaya? Conflict is to be expected when we are set in our ways or have pride. Bottom line is that 99% of the regulars on a Christian site mean well.

So every Christian should subject themselves to KingJ's scrutiny. Then, those who aren't in line with what you've determined to be the proper beliefs can be told things like, "At my church you wouldn't be allowed to open your mouth" and "blah blah blah, you are a joke".

No thanks.

 

[KingJ]

So every Christian should subject themselves to KingJ's scrutiny. Then, those who aren't in line with what you've determined to be the proper beliefs can be told things like, "At my church you wouldn't be allowed to open your mouth" and "blah blah blah, you are a joke".

No thanks.

''Proper beliefs'', more like core beliefs. No, I don't expect you to accept correction from me. I am not an elder. I do expect you to be more open to what elders do share from scripture.

 

[River Jordan]

I do expect you to be more open to what elders do share from scripture.

Already done.

 

[Keeth]

Humans are obviously sinful and fall short of God's grace, no matter how old the earth is. I can't imagine arguing that if the earth isn't 6,000 years old, then we are not in need of saving.

Yes, it is obvious that something is wrong. Could you define sin though, why we are sinners in need of a Savior, and when sin began or why? Crucial issues, wouldn't you agree?

 

[River Jordan]

Yes, it is obvious that something is wrong.

Regardless of how old the earth is.

Could you define sin though, why we are sinners in need of a Savior, and when sin began or why?

Sin basically means that we have missed the mark in terms of God's standards. I don't know when it first began, and I believe it originated with our consciousness and free will. As soon as we became able to sin, we sinned.

 

[Keeth]

Regardless of how old the earth is.


Sin basically means that we have missed the mark in terms of God's standards. I don't know when it first began, and I believe it originated with our consciousness and free will. As soon as we became able to sin, we sinned.

How could we have known we were sinning? If morality in fact developed over time and we along with it, how could we be blamed for not immediately adhering to it? Sin is not imputed, where there is no understanding of the same. If concepts of right and wrong had to develope slowly over time along with intellegence and a conscience, how could any standard be held over those slowly developing the same. Why then also, would Jesus Christ need to die for those who were simply going through a slow developement of intellect and moral capacity, rather than blantantly disregarding the Creator and sustainer of all? These things make no sense in your scenario. Correct me if I am wrong, with some more detail and insight if you don't mind.