Man made at the beginning of creation-How old is the earth?

[Revmitchell]

But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ (Mark 10:6)


Here we have the words of Christ about the timing of the creation of Adam and Eve.

How do you believe this affects the view of how old the earth is?

 

[OldRegular]

But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ (Mark 10:6)


Here we have the words of Christ about the timing of the creation of Adam and Eve.

How do you believe this affects the view of how old the earth is?

I believe it means a Young Earth, Young Universe. Man appeared in history only a few thousand years ago. However, I believe that the Bishop's dating is faulty and the earth is older than 6000 years.

 

[Deacon]

You are carrying your preconceived philosophy into this passage and interpreting it accordingly.

The word "beginning" is an indefinite time; if it was a definite, a certain time, "the beginning", it would have been the first moment of the first day.

In Mark 10:6, 'beginning' speaks of the time when man and woman were first created.

Genesis 1 calls these first seven days, "the beginning".

Whether the days were ages long or 24-hour days makes no difference on the meaning of this passage, it was still "the beginning".

Rob

 

[Marooncat79]

You are carrying your preconceived philosophy into this passage and interpreting it accordingly.

The word "beginning" is an indefinite time; if it was a definite, a certain time, "the beginning", it would have been the first moment of the first day.

In Mark 10:6, 'beginning' speaks of the time when man and woman were first created.

Genesis 1 calls these first seven days, "the beginning".

Whether the days were ages long or 24-hour days makes no difference on the meaning of this passage, it was still "the beginning".

Rob

It makes all the difference in the world. Yom -means 24 hr period in the context of Genesis given the qualifiers of morning and evening, and 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc. This is meant to make clear the time frame of creation not obfuscate it.

You also totally destroy the significance of the Sabbath since on the "7th day God rested" which was a creation ordinance commanded to be obeyed by the Hebrews and extends to the New Covenant as well

 

[quantumfaith]

It makes all the difference in the world. Yom -means 24 hr period in the context of Genesis given the qualifiers of morning and evening, and 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc. This is meant to make clear the time frame of creation not obfuscate it.

You also totally destroy the significance of the Sabbath since on the "7th day God rested" which was a creation ordinance commanded to be obeyed by the Hebrews and extends to the New Covenant as well

There are many who disagree with you regarding the meaning of "yom" (See Hugh Ross).

It makes no difference.

 

[quantumfaith]

The exchange here in Mark 10 is dealing with Jesus' response to a question of divorce, perhaps a "gotcha" trap set by the Pharisees, much like the demise of John the Baptist. His response simply indicates that it was the intention of God from the beginning of humanity that marriage was to be a permanent relationship.

 

[Van]

The word (G746) translated as "beginning" refers to the very start of creation, i.e. Genesis 1:1. But from (or since or after) this very beginning, God made man. How long after, according to Genesis 1:27, on the sixth day or the creation week.

Now because the Bible lists every generation from Adam to Jesus, the Bible seems to say the very first man, made in the image of God, was created less than 7000 years ago.

YEC accept that since man was created during the creation week, less than 7000 years ago, every thing else was also created less than 7000 years ago. Any hitch in that view is explained away with "created with apparent age" like the wine a Cana.

Now the OEC say, not so fast, yom is sometimes used to refer to indefinite and very long periods of time. The YEC fire back with yom is never used as anything but a 24 hour day when numbered.

And so it goes....

 

[Getting it Right]

Suddenly it dawned on me ..... like a light bulb suddenly switched on!

"Before the beginning of space and time, God created."

Now......... let's all gather around the Hubble telescope.........

:smilewinkgrin:

 

[quantumfaith]

Suddenly it dawned on me ..... like a light bulb suddenly switched on!

"Before the beginning of space and time, God created."

Now......... let's all gather around the Hubble telescope.........

:smilewinkgrin:

What exactly is your point here?

 

[Marooncat79]

There are many who disagree with you regarding the meaning of "yom" (See Hugh Ross).

It makes no difference.

Hugh Ross is has no knowledge of Hebrew nor has he been theologically educated. He is only spouting off what he has been taught and is allowing his physics to dictate the rule of scripture and not the other way around

 

[quantumfaith]

Hugh Ross is has no knowledge of Hebrew nor has he been theologically educated. He is only spouting off what he has been taught and is allowing his physics to dictate the rule of scripture and not the other way around

I'm just guessing here.... but I bet his knowledge is more extensive than yours. To flip the coin, how much knowledge do you have of astronomy, physics and cosmology?

 

[Deacon]

But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ (Mark 10:6)

Here we have the words of Christ about the timing of the creation of Adam and Eve.

How do you believe this affects the view of how old the earth is?

Is the original intent of this passage meant to teach us about whether the earth is old or young?

If we could hear God's response after reading this post he'd either be chuckling or crying saying, "they missed the point!"

Rob

 

[Marooncat79]

I'm just guessing here.... but I bet his knowledge is more extensive than yours. To flip the coin, how much knowledge do you have of astronomy, physics and cosmology?

I doubt that about Hebrew-but maybe? Physics, yes (I think that he does have a PHD in Physics-maybe?) but this is not physics. class, it is about the eternal Word of God.

BTW, I did have several classes in physics (Physics 151 and 152 and Quantum here) as well.

**I forgot Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics. I did only have 1 class in astronomy

You cannot possibly hold to "Sola Scriptura" and be an Old Earth Creationist-it is impossible

I would encourage you to read

"The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott Huse for starters. It is a very good treatment of Evolution and he totally obliterates what you propose

 

[percho]

I doubt that about Hebrew-but maybe? Physics, yes (I think that he does have a PHD in Physics-maybe?) but this is not physics. class, it is about the eternal Word of God.

BTW, I did have several classes in physics (Physics 151 and 152 and Quantum here) as well.

**I forgot Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics. I did only have 1 class in astronomy

You cannot possibly hold to "Sola Scriptura" and be an Old Earth Creationist-it is impossible

I would encourage you to read

"The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott Huse for starters. It is a very good treatment of Evolution and he totally obliterates what you propose

Why would to be, "old earth," necessarily make one an evolutionist?

I am, "old earth," however I do not believe man evolved from anything created but was created in the image of God.

I believe the man created in the image of God was the means by which the God would send his Son to eradicate the works of the devil, Satan, who pre- existed and sinned prior to, the created man.

What is the result of sin? --- Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. James 1:15 For the wages of sin is death; Rom 6:23

The first man, Adam:
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 5:12 For since by man came death,/For as in Adam all die, from 1 Cor. 15:21,22

The sin of Adam brought death to all men.

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:8

Did the sin of the devil bring death to anything?
Was the sin of the devil before the sin of Adam?
Why was there darkness upon the face of the deep, on the earth?
Is darkness opposite of light, is God light and is the devil darkness?
Why is the darkness upon the face of the deep, on the earth after the creation, listed before the light?

What was dead?

 

[OldRegular]

You are carrying your preconceived philosophy into this passage and interpreting it accordingly.

The word "beginning" is an indefinite time; if it was a definite, a certain time, "the beginning", it would have been the first moment of the first day.

In Mark 10:6, 'beginning' speaks of the time when man and woman were first created.

Genesis 1 calls these first seven days, "the beginning".

Whether the days were ages long or 24-hour days makes no difference on the meaning of this passage, it was still "the beginning".

Rob

And what about your preconceived philosophy?:thumbs:

 

[OldRegular]

But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ (Mark 10:6)


Here we have the words of Christ about the timing of the creation of Adam and Eve.

How do you believe this affects the view of how old the earth is?

Some interesting reading here:

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9

 

[OldRegular]

I doubt that about Hebrew-but maybe? Physics, yes (I think that he does have a PHD in Physics-maybe?) but this is not physics. class, it is about the eternal Word of God.

BTW, I did have several classes in physics (Physics 151 and 152 and Quantum here) as well.

**I forgot Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics. I did only have 1 class in astronomy

You cannot possibly hold to "Sola Scriptura" and be an Old Earth Creationist-it is impossible

I would encourage you to read

"The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott Huse for starters. It is a very good treatment of Evolution and he totally obliterates what you propose

The Collapse of Evolution is a good read, also Man's Origin, Man's Destiny by A. E. Wilder Smith.

 

[quantumfaith]

Why would to be, "old earth," necessarily make one an evolutionist?

I am, "old earth," however I do not believe man evolved from anything created but was created in the image of God.

I believe the man created in the image of God was the means by which the God would send his Son to eradicate the works of the devil, Satan, who pre- existed and sinned prior to, the created man.

What is the result of sin? --- Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. James 1:15 For the wages of sin is death; Rom 6:23

The first man, Adam:
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 5:12 For since by man came death,/For as in Adam all die, from 1 Cor. 15:21,22

The sin of Adam brought death to all men.

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:8

Did the sin of the devil bring death to anything?
Was the sin of the devil before the sin of Adam?
Why was there darkness upon the face of the deep, on the earth?
Is darkness opposite of light, is God light and is the devil darkness?
Why is the darkness upon the face of the deep, on the earth after the creation, listed before the light?

What was dead?

I lean heavily toward evolutionary creationism, I don't see any dissonance relative to the "imago dei".

 

[quantumfaith]

I doubt that about Hebrew-but maybe? Physics, yes (I think that he does have a PHD in Physics-maybe?) but this is not physics. class, it is about the eternal Word of God.

BTW, I did have several classes in physics (Physics 151 and 152 and Quantum here) as well.

**I forgot Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics. I did only have 1 class in astronomy

You cannot possibly hold to "Sola Scriptura" and be an Old Earth Creationist-it is impossible

I would encourage you to read

"The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott Huse for starters. It is a very good treatment of Evolution and he totally obliterates what you propose

Thank you for the suggested read. I have read much from multiple sides of the issue....and yes I was once just as YEC as you. I guess I would need to know what you see as the definition of "sola scripture"..

Are you an engineer?

 

[OldRegular]

An interesting observation from an evolutionist:

The following eight quotes are from a recorded discussion which included some interesting comments from Colin Patterson, late senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History. The fact that Patterson was not aware that someone was recording his comments has been used as reason enough to dismiss what Patterson said since he certainly would not have said things like he did if he knew he was being recorded. Perhaps this is true, but even so, his comments are still quite interesting. Others are disturbed by the "underhanded" way in which the recording was obtained and the transcript published without Patterson's consent. However, since Patterson was speaking at a public event, the recording and publication of such an event is not illegal, underhanded, or immoral. Patterson did later respond to and clarify his statements. This very interesting letter is also included below. A copy of the original recording and/or a transcript of the event can be obtained through: http://www.arn.org/arnproducts/audios/c010.htm

"But it's true that for the last eighteen months or so, I've been kicking around non-evolutionary or even anti-evolutionary ideas."

"Now, one of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, well, let's call it non-evolutionary, was last year I had a sudden realization. For over twenty years I had thought that I was working on evolution in some way. One morning I woke up, and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years, and there was not one thing I knew about it. That was quite a shock, to learn that one can be so misled for so long."

"So either there is something wrong with me, or there was something wrong with evolutionary theory. Naturally I know there's nothing wrong with me. So for the last few weeks, I've tried putting a simple question to various people and groups of people. The question is this: Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing, any one thing that you think is true?"

"Well, I'm not interested in the controversy over teaching in high school, and if any militant creationists have come here looking for political ammunition, I hope they'll be disappointed."

"I shall take the text of my sermon from this book, Gillespie's Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation....He takes it for granted that a rationalist view of nature has replaced an irrational one, and of course, I myself took that view, up until about eighteen months ago. And then I woke up and I realized that all my life I had been duped into taking evolutionism as revealed truth in some way."

"Well, we're back to the question I've been putting to people, 'Is there one thing you can tell me about evolution?' And the absence of an answer seems to suggest that it is true, evolution does not convey any knowledge, or if so, I haven't yet heard it."

"Now I think many people in this room would acknowledge that during the last few years, if you had thought about it at all, you've experienced a shift from evolution as knowledge to evolution as faith. I know that's true of me, and I think it's true of a good many of you in here."

"So that's my first theme. That evolution and creationism seem to be showing remarkable parallels. They are increasingly hard to tell apart. And the second theme is that evolution not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge, apparent knowledge which is actually harmful to systematics."​

Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Palaeontologist; British Museaum of Natural History, London, Discussion at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, 5 November, 1981. Transcripts as well as a copy of the original tape can be obtained at: http://www.arn.org/arnproducts/audios/c010.htm
http://www.detectingdesign.com/quotesfromscientists.html

Then there is this:

"It was-and still is-very hard to arrive at this concept from inside biology. The trouble lay in an unremitting cultural struggle which had developed from 1860 onward between biologists on the one hand and the supporters of old beliefs on the other. The old believers said that rabbits had been created by God using methods too wonderful for us to comprehend. The new believers said that rabbits had been created from sludge, by methods too complex for us to calculate and by methods likely enough involving improbable happenings. Improbable happenings replaced miracles and sludge replaced God, with believers both old and new seeking to cover up their ignorance in clouds of words, but different words. It was over the words that passions raged, passions which continue to rumble on in the modern world, passions that one can read about with hilarious satisfaction in the columns of the weekly science magazine Nature and listen to in basso profundo pronouncements from learned scientific societies."

Hoyle, Fred [late mathematician, physicist and Professor of Astronomy, Cambridge University], "Mathematics of Evolution," [1987], Acorn Enterprises: Memphis TN, 1999, p.3.
http://www.detectingdesign.com/quotesfromscientists.html

And this:

"Discussions of evolution came to an end primarily because it was obvious that no progress was being made....When students of other sciences ask us what is now currently believed about the origin of species we have no clear answer to give. Faith has given place to agnosticism.... Biological science has returned to its rightful place, investigation of the structure and properties of the concrete and visible world. We cannot see how the differentiation into species came about. Variation of many kinds, often considerable, we daily witness, but no origin of species.... I have put before you very frankly the considerations which have made us agnostic as to the actual mode and processes of evolution. When such confessions are made the enemies of science see their chance.... Let us then proclaim in precise and unmistakable language that our faith in evolution is unshaken."

Bateson, William [late founder of the science of Genetics, first Professor of Genetics, Cambridge University, UK], "Evolutionary Faith and Modern Doubts." An address delivered to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 28 December, 1921, Science, vol. LV, p.55., in More L.T., "The Dogma of Evolution", Princeton University Press: Princeton NJ, 1925, p.28.
http://www.detectingdesign.com/quotesfromscientists.html