Featured Old earth or young earth?

Yes possibly but I'm not totally convinced.

However, there is another example of apparent age in the bible if it hasn't already been mentioned.

The wedding of Cana.

Jesus turned water to wine in a moment.

Wine implies seasonal growth, harvesting, pressing, aging and bottling, transportation.

A process of 2-3 years or more. So wine a few moments old not 2-3 years - everyone drank apparent age wine.

Then there is the feeding of the five thousand


HankD

 

FTW I agree, however for now I like the young earth position (until He tells us differently).

HankD

 

I mean, what looks old about the earth? A mountain? A river? A rock? What?

 

Well, I don't know

It's easy to tell young people from old people but this is the only earth I know of.
Nothing to make a comparison.

HankD

 

You have the freedom, the right and the responsibility to interpret the scriptures as you feel led by God and the Bible to do as do I. My view is probably impacted by by years of engineering work. The interesting thing is I can remember arguing for creation as a freshman at NC State with another engineering student who was an atheist. He had a theory that somehow matter and anti-mater separated to form the universe. My best question with these kinds of people is, "OK where did the "substance that was separated come from." Ultimately, this guy as well as Hawking, and the rest of the atheists with a scientific bent have to give up and say, "I don't know." I do know. The ultimate source of all things is the Lord God almighty. I look forward to understanding the ultimate truth when I meet Him face-to-face.

 

Neil deGrasse Tyson is one of the best-known astrophysicists in the world. He recently claimed that there is no evidence in our dangerous universe for a benevolent God. However, in his best-selling Astrophysics for People in a Hurry, he makes an admission that struck me. When asked "what happened before the beginning" of the cosmos, he answers: "Astrophysicists have no idea. Or, rather, our most creative ideas have little or no grounding in experimental science."

Dr. Jim Denison

 

APPARENT AGE ARGUMENT

With the apparent age argument the evidences of great age are to be disregarded.

Like in the Wizard of Oz we are told to ignore the evidences behind the curtain.

But there are numerous interlinking chains of evidence pointing to the immense age of the universe God created.
Let’s go back to the example of the wine that Jesus provided to the wedding guests in Cana.

If we compare the creation of the universe to the wine to we would find;

• the fields they were harvested from
• a report from the workers
• casing of the grapes cast aside
• evidence of storage
• a bill of receipt

But this wasn’t the case. Why? The miracle was performed to show the authority and nature of Jesus.

God could have created the universe with an apparent age

…but why would he go to such great lengths to create it with such an integrated multitude of evidences that give witnesses to such a great age.​

Deception? ...that is not the nature or a characteristic of God.

Rob

 

Total agreement - whatever the truth is - of course.

HankD

 

No deception IMO.

We are told by the same scientists that propound the immense age of the earth that what we see as solid matter in actually mostly space and the characteristic of "solid" is only apparent.
Did God deceive us only to find out differently with the advent of the electron theory?

If these scientists can believe a paradox, well then why not me?

Here is one "appearance" that does not depend upon a theory being right or wrong:
It is "apparent" that the sun circles around the earth, even the bible gives that as a truth.

Psalm 113:3 From the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same the LORD'S name is to be praised.

Well we know that the sun does not "rise" and "go down" except in "appearance"

Had God deceived us for those thousands of years (and even yet in the bible?) until Copernicus?

HankD

 

No we need to ignore the poor science behind it and not assume they are automatically correct.

Just because some of us perceive a particular age does not make it true.

 

It does tell us how old the Sun, moon, and all life on Earth is --- without 'dating the universe'

 

No. It does not.

 

The animals in the sea were "eating vegetation" on day 5, animals and man eating vegetation on land - "on day 6"

"SIX days you shall labor...for in SIX days the LORD MADE.."

I never claim that. I don't think the Bible does either.

 

Gen. 2:4 This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,
5 before any plant of the field was in the earth and before any herb of the field had grown. For the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to till the ground;
6 but a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
8 The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed. 9 And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food.

 

Genesis 2:1-4 is the end of the 7 days.

Interesting that Genesis 2:5 onward gives no time frame at all. It merely adds details to the already given time-boxed chronological sequence.

"Six days you shall labor... for in Six days the Lord made..." Exodus 20:8-11

"less guess work -- more Bible" I always say

 

Many factors are in play here. Time and distance (away from gravity wells) dilates. Space itself is upwelling and expanding at an incredible rate. What is 7,000 - 10,000 years here may be much longer in distant space.

Barry Setterfield and Trevor Norman published a paper on the decay of c. (slowing down of the speed of light) that also adds some interesting insights and ideas not generally brought into the debate.

 

Moses would have seen events from the Earth frame of reference and probably did not see the creation of the entire universe since on day 4 the exact number of lights made - was "two".

 

Still asking what looks old about the earth. Is it a mountain? A river? What? And who told you they were old?

 

If a river has dug a deep channel and you "assume" there was no river at one time then you measure the rate it digs the channel deeper and "assume" the rate it washes sediment away has been constant then "pretend" that "God lied to you" when all your "assumptions" result in an age older than what the Bible gives for life on earth.

Tiny man - vs Big God.

If a man stands x-feet tall and you measure the time it takes for an infant to reach manhood then you can "assume" that Adam was at least 18 years old on day 1. And that "God lied" about when He created Adam.

Tiny man - vs Big God.