Old Earth vs. Young Earth Creationism

[TCassidy]

If you claim it was written prove it.

I already did. What part of תולדות don't you understand?

 

[church mouse guy]

Nothing is assumed. Things are deduced. When Scripture mentions the writings of Adam, we can deduce that Adam wrote. Of course, there is no physical evidence because natural processes would have decayed anything left from Noah's flood 4500 years ago. And any evidence not onboard the Ark would have been destroyed by the catastrophic worldwide flood, don't you agree?

 

[dad1]

I already did. What part of תולדות don't you understand?

Which part of the book of anything Moses wrote or talked about was not IN the time of Adam but from the time of Adam? There were writings in Moses day. Can you show where any book existed to be on earth and read by Adam. It is a book from God through Moses about the former things. It is not sayings written books existed in the garden or any such thing.

/for the win.

 

[church mouse guy]

You are shifting the goal posts. Adam was not some sort of primitive savage but created perfect in the Garden of Eden. That means his brain was good and that Adam was able to read and write, which we deduce from Genesis 5:1. Since Adam was the first man, there would not have been any books on earth, but there were books in Heaven. If you don't want to believe that Adam was capable, you are entitled to your belief, but I still do not agree with you that Moses was dependent upon a God-hating Egypt for anything.

 

[TCassidy]

Can you show where any book existed to be on earth and read by Adam.

You mean other than God said so? What other evidence do you need? If you won't believe what God said why should I expect you to believe what I say?

 

[dad1]

You are shifting the goal posts. Adam was not some sort of primitive savage but created perfect in the Garden of Eden. That means his brain was good and that Adam was able to read and write, which we deduce from Genesis 5:1. Since Adam was the first man, there would not have been any books on earth, but there were books in Heaven. If you don't want to believe that Adam was capable, you are entitled to your belief, but I still do not agree with you that Moses was dependent upon a God-hating Egypt for anything.

You assume there was a need to write at that time.

 

[dad1]

You mean other than God said so? What other evidence do you need? If you won't believe what God said why should I expect you to believe what Is say?

I mean God said there was a book of records to Moses, not to Adam. We know there was writing in Moses day. Don't pretend your baseless opinion has anything to do with what God said.

 

[TCassidy]

I mean God said there was a book of records to Moses, not to Adam. We know there was writing in Moses day. Don't pretend your baseless opinion has anything to do with what God said.

So God saying it is not enough?

Genesis 2:4 This is the history of the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Yahweh God made the earth and the heavens.

Genesis 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, he made him in God’s likeness.

Genesis 6:9 This is the history of the generations of Noah: Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time. Noah walked with God.

Genesis 10:1 Now this is the history of the generations of the sons of Noah and of Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Sons were born to them after the flood.

Genesis 11:10 This is the history of the generations of Shem: Shem was one hundred years old when he became the father of Arpachshad two years after the flood.

Genesis 11:27 Now this is the history of the generations of Terah. Terah became the father of Abram,

 

[dad1]

So God saying it is not enough?

Don't blame Him for your opinions.

Genesis 2:4 This is the history of the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Yahweh God made the earth and the heavens.

This was written some 2000 or whatever years after Adam was created. Your attempted point is mooted. Routed. Overturned, Refuted, The issue at hand was whether there was writing in the time of the first chapters of Genesis.

The answer is...you do not know. Period.

 

[AwesomeMachine]

I still can't figure out why any of this is important. Even if the Genesis account of creation is not literally the case, Christian morality is still binding upon mankind. God calls us to be faithful, which is different than being 'senseless'.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

This was written some 2000 or whatever years after Adam was created.

That is an unwarranted and not Biblically supported assumption on your part.
TC (and others) are attempting to show you that the BIBLICAL evidence itself is that each of those "Toledoths"...(these are the generations of statements) are of themselves testimony that they are accounts written about and likely BY the subjects themselves...
That is to say, "these are the generations of Noah"
Is a Biblical statement on the lines of.... "this is the book of Noah" or "the account of/by Noah" or something of the sort.

The evidence is within the text itself. It is engagement with the text itself, seeking to understand what "these are the generations of" means etc. which drives the theory you are dismissing.
You don't have to believe it, and can assume all you like that God simply dictated the book of Genesis word for word to Moses in a mysterious paranormal event, and maybe that's what happened, but there is no Scriptural warrant for that assumption, and no textual evidence for it.

There IS Biblical and textual warrant for the belief that the "Toledoths" are intra-textual statements about the nature of what the reader is encountering that scholars have plausibly demonstrated (if not proven inescapably) are statements about who the author of the account is and what they will speak of, and when the author of the proceeding account changes within the text.

Believe what you want, but don't convince yourself that it's in any way text-driven or Biblical.

I am not of the opinion that the argument TC (and others) are making is 100% non-disprovable and above all criticism. But it's an excellent theory well defended by the best of Biblical and Theological scholarship. You would do well to consider it and research it for yourself and educate yourself on why it is believed.

 

[TCassidy]

The issue at hand was whether there was writing in the time of the first chapters of Genesis.

Genesis is the first book of the bible. I would have thought you knew that.

 

[dad1]

I still can't figure out why any of this is important. Even if the Genesis account of creation is not literally the case, Christian morality is still binding upon mankind. God calls us to be faithful, which is different than being 'senseless'.

It is important for Jesus to have actually created the universe as the bible says.

 

[dad1]

Genesis is the first book of the bible. I would have thought you knew that.

Not written by Adam though. It was written post flood. We do know there were books in heaven, even before earth was created. We do not know that man needed to write in the early days, back when all the world had one language.

We do not know. So don't try to come off as saying God said so.

 

[church mouse guy]

Not written by Adam though. It was written post flood. We do know there were books in heaven, even before earth was created. We do not know that man needed to write in the early days, back when all the world had one language.

We do not know. So don't try to come off as saying God said so.

No one ever suggested that Adam wrote Genesis so that is a straw man. Everyone agrees that Moses wrote Genesis. Creationists such as Ken Ham have said that Adam could read and write because Genesis 5:1 mentions a book of Adam, as you know since we have posted it at least half a dozen times. Apparently, that book was passed down to Noah and then to Abraham and then to Moses because it is unlikely that the complicated genealogy could be remembered orally. That is the current thinking of some Young Earth Creationists who believe in 6 literal 24-hour days six thousand years ago.

 

[dad1]

That is an unwarranted and not Biblically supported assumption on your part.
TC (and others) are attempting to show you that the BIBLICAL evidence itself is that each of those "Toledoths"...(these are the generations of statements) are of themselves testimony that they are accounts written about and likely BY the subjects themselves...
That is to say, "these are the generations of Noah"
Is a Biblical statement on the lines of.... "this is the book of Noah" or "the account of/by Noah" or something of the sort.

Says who? It talks about a record of the generations. Only God could have those. How would Adam start writing about sons born after he died? It is the generations OF Adam, not from and BY Adam. You have the unwarranted and not Biblically supported assumption apparently.
/QUOTE]
The evidence is within the text itself. It is engagement with the text itself, seeking to understand what "these are the generations of" means etc. which drives the theory you are dismissing.
You don't have to believe it, and can assume all you like that God simply dictated the book of Genesis word for word to Moses in a mysterious paranormal event, and maybe that's what happened, but there is no Scriptural warrant for that assumption, and no textual evidence for it.[/quote] You can give credit to some mystery man writer if you like. Jesus confirmed Scripture was FROM God though and also that Moses was right. What you can't do is pretend the bible says that.

There IS Biblical and textual warrant for the belief that the "Toledoths" are intra-textual statements about the nature of what the reader is encountering that scholars have plausibly demonstrated (if not proven inescapably) are statements about who the author of the account is and what they will speak of, and when the author of the proceeding account changes within the text.

Nope. Not a speck of evidence, and the overrated guesswork of hotty tots does not amount to a hill of beans.

Believe what you want, but don't convince yourself that it's in any way text-driven or Biblical.

What is biblical is that there are no books mentioned or writing of any sort at all pre flood! Bottom line, we do not know.

I am not of the opinion that the argument TC (and others) are making is 100% non-disprovable and above all criticism. But it's an excellent theory well defended by the best of Biblical and Theological scholarship. You would do well to consider it and research it for yourself and educate yourself on why it is believed.

For those that need something other than a very smart and capable God that had the records in heaven and gave them to a man to write down, I suppose they can grasp at straws of imagination all they like!

 

[dad1]

No one ever suggested that Adam wrote Genesis so that is a straw man. Everyone agrees that Moses wrote Genesis. Creationists such as Ken Ham have said that Adam could read and write because Genesis 5:1 mentions a book of Adam, as you know since we have posted it at least half a dozen times. Apparently, that book was passed down to Noah and then to Abraham and then to Moses because it is unlikely that the complicated genealogy could be remembered orally. That is the current thinking of some Young Earth Creationists who believe in 6 literal 24-hour days six thousand years ago.

Genesis was written post flood. So citing a record of generation in no way means there was some book written before this.

 

[church mouse guy]

Genesis was written post flood. So citing a record of generation in no way means there was some book written before this.

No one ever said that Genesis was written by anyone other than Moses so there you have another straw man. You don't agree with Ken Ham and Young Earth Creationists. Okay. End of discussion. You are left with your Egyptian theory. Case closed.

 

[dad1]

No one ever suggested that Adam wrote Genesis so that is a straw man. Everyone agrees that Moses wrote Genesis. Creationists such as Ken Ham have said that Adam could read and write because Genesis 5:1 mentions a book of Adam, as you know since we have posted it at least half a dozen times. Apparently, that book was passed down to Noah and then to Abraham and then to Moses because it is unlikely that the complicated genealogy could be remembered orally. That is the current thinking of some Young Earth Creationists who believe in 6 literal 24-hour days six thousand years ago.

No. Nothing was passed on that way that the bible says. We just know that God gave Moses the record post flood.
The book of Adam was not Adam's book, but was a book about the generations of Adam that was given to us in Moses day. God has books in heaven and a great memory, so the sons Adam were no problem at all.

Who says Moses got that record from man?? That is an assumption. Certainly not known.

 

[dad1]

No one ever said that Genesis was written by anyone other than Moses so there you have another straw man. You don't agree with Ken Ham and Young Earth Creationists. Okay. End of discussion. You are left with your Egyptian theory. Case closed.

No. I am left with we don't know, despite your theories! I have no problem with a real God being the Author of the bible, and giving Moses the book of Genesis.