1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Exact Young Earth Age?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by dorsk188, Aug 10, 2005.

  1. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,653
    they had a solar 365 day year, with leap years... just like we do today. (though they broke it up into twelve 30 day months and a variable 13th month of 6 or 5 days depending on leap years)
    just going on what ruler lived when and for how long is at least as accurate as the beiblical begats.

    However the Hebrew clalendar, the one the bible would have used is a bit different. It varies from 353 days to 355 days long...
    according to thier calandar wich sarts with the day of creation, it was 3760 October 7 on the Julian proleptic calendar.
    *info thanks to: calendars and thier histories: http://astro.nmsu.edu/~lhuber/leaphist.html

    so, the bible says that the year is at most 355 days long....
    Maybe we should fix our clandars?

    wa:do
     
  2. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    Anything that disagrees with the Bible. For example: if a scientist would say that the Earth was flat, it would be bogus, as the Bible says it is round - (Isaiah 40:22).

    That is so true! Thus Someone with power over entropy had to preserve it - (Psalm 12:7).

    Care to debate that?
     
  3. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    Actually just the opposite. When I make remarks that God authored science, and I hold God in such high esteem that I place my eternal destiny in the hands of His Son; logically then, what am I saying about science? If A=B, and B=C, then A=C, does it not?
     
  4. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    36,766
    Ratings:
    +10,106
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Since you boast of being impervious to reason, let me note the following for others who may not share that peculiar bigotry ...
    The phrase of Isaiah 40:22, "the circle of the earth" is very controversial. There are five main views of this phrase. The first interpretation says that the word "circle" means "sphere" indicating that the earth is a sphere. This view seems most unlikely since we have all ready seen that the Hebrew word gh means "circle," and it seems very remote that it means "sphere" because of the context, and there is a better Hebrew word for "sphere," rwd. In Isaiah 22:18 the word rwd is translated "ball." If the LXX translators understood gh as "sphere," they would have used the Greek word sfairoeides. Plugging the meaning of "sphere" into every passage that gh occurs will result in awkward interpretations.

    The second interpretation is that the earth is a round flat disk. Although the ancient world thought the earth was round and flat, this phrase seems to refer to the shape the vaulted heavens above the earth from which the inhabitants look like grasshoppers.

    The third view, which is set forth by Seybold, is that "circle" refers to the ring of the ocean that surrounds the earth. This is mainly based on the supposed meaning of the word guros used in the LXX for gwj.

    The fourth interpretation is that "circle" refers to the vault like sky over the earth. This seems to be partly right as well as the next view where "circle" refers to the horizon. It may be best to combine theses two views so that "circle" refers to the circle of the horizon that arches up over the earth. From the top of this dome God looks down to see the inhabitants on earth as small as grasshoppers. In the later part of this same verse (Isa.40:22) the heavens are described like a curtain and a tent. There seems to be a descriptive parallelism of the heavens in this poetic verse.

    Stadelmann (1970, 42) states that gwj refers to the horizon which was the boundary between earth and heaven, and indicates how the heavenly dome was linked with the earth. In Job 26:10 gwj is the boundary between light and darkness. It is the circular line that separates the light of heaven from the darkness under the ocean and earth. In the ancient world the horizon prevented the earth from being flooded by primeval waters by holding the sky and the earth firmly together (Ibid, 43). In Job 22:14 it seems that the gwj is more than the horizon, and includes the vault of heaven as well. This seems to be the case in Isaiah 40:22 as well. Therefore, gwj is the part for the whole of heaven in certain passages in Job and Isaiah. This would be called "Synecdoche of the Part" by Bullinger (1968, 640, see also 892).

    In Isaiah 66:1 it says, "Thus saith the LORD, the heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool." The imagery of Isaiah 66 and 40 shows clearly that gwj means the vaulted heavens.

    Delitzsch translates Isaiah 40:22 as follows: "He who is enthroned above the vault of the earth, and its inhabitants resemble grasshoppers; who has spread out the heavens like gauze, and stretched them out like a tent-roof to dwell in" (Keil and Delitzch 1976, 7:152).

    In Isaiah 40:22 the verb b?y means, "to sit or dwell." This same verb and preposition lu is used in other OT passages. In Exodus 11:5 it says, "Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne" (also Ex. 12:29). Second Chronicles 18:18 says, "I saw the Lord sitting upon his throne" Psalm 2:4 says, He that sitteth in the heavens" Psalm 123:1 says, "O thou that dwellest in the heavens." Isaiah 6:1 says, "I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne." It seems clear that the Lord sits, or dwells on his throne in Heaven, and not on the circular earth or river encircling the earth. The verb b?y "to sit" plus the preposition lu means, "to sit on" not "to sit over or above."

    It seems that the "circle of the sea" is where the sky and sea meet at the horizon; the "circle of the earth" is where the sky and earth meet at the horizon and arching above; and the "circle of heaven" begins where the horizon is and arching above. The "foundations of heaven" are where the sky meets the earth at the horizon.

    - see Circle of the Earth
     
  5. Ceridwen018

    Ceridwen018 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,768
    Ratings:
    +399
    Do you also deny the fact that the Earth spins on its axis as it travels around the sun? Do you deny the idea of a heliocentric universe in favor of the obviously incorrect geocentric one? The idea of a heliocentric universe is contradictory to the Bible.

    1 Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.”​

    Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...”​

    Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...”​

    Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.”​

    Isaiah 45:18: “...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast...”​
    The Bible is true because the Bible says that it's true? Do you see the circular reasoning and do you understand why its unsatisfactory?

    Sure. There is no way you can debate a topic that deals with the Bible if you readily admit that you deny everything which goes against it, even if that means flying in the face of reason.
     
  6. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,653
    perhaps we need anew thread about bible inerrancy and science?

    right now we should be talking the age of the earth... creation dates ;)

    wa:do
     
  7. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    The Bible doesn't explain the astronomical relationship of the Earth to the Sun, so how can it be contradictory? Those verses you gave as evidence are severely misquoted.

    The Bible not only says it's true, it proves it by predicting events before they occur with 100% accuracy. I'd say that gives the Bible the authority to make such a claim.
     
  8. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    I agree!
     
  9. joeboonda

    joeboonda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    2,780
    Ratings:
    +200
    The Bible contains many scientific truths, I have listed them before. But I just gonna throw this in for the Christians out there.

    I Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings and OPPOSITIONS OF SCIENCE FALSELY SO CALLED. Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
     
  10. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    36,766
    Ratings:
    +10,106
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Translating gnosis as science is underwhelming. ( Did you know that 1 Timothy is believed to be pseudepigraphic? )
     
  11. Ceridwen018

    Ceridwen018 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,768
    Ratings:
    +399
  12. Ulver

    Ulver Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    765
    Ratings:
    +77
    You can say the same about Nostradamus. Yet still people today think he's a crack-pot. Why? Because any prohecy can be said to of come true with a little bit of a twist of the interpetation of said prophecy.
     
  13. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,653
    so do we have any extra biblical evidence of a young earth?

    wa:do
     
  14. Jayhawker Soule

    Jayhawker Soule <yawn> ignore </yawn>
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2004
    Messages:
    36,766
    Ratings:
    +10,106
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Sure. Since one would think that the species would overcome superstition in a reasonable period of time, one could argue that the existence of such things as Young Earth Creationism implies an extremely brief period of intellectual development. ;)
     
  15. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    That I don't know. I'm sure there's a website or author somewhere that says there is.
     
  16. Ceridwen018

    Ceridwen018 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,768
    Ratings:
    +399
    Sigh. Your belief is backed by nothing, that much I think we've clearly established.
     
  17. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    Well, Ceridwen, how does this website help in show extra-Biblical support for a flood? Ryan, has already shot it all down, based on two paragraphs in it. What say YOU?

    http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-5.htm

    Note: I'm not asking what you think how accurate it is? I'm just asking if you think this was written by a secular writer, about a Biblical phenomenon?
     
  18. ch'ang

    ch'ang artist in training

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    425
    Ratings:
    +43
    I really think this debate (and I use that term loosely) should be left for dead and forgotten as soon as possible. AV has already stated that he believes the bible is above all reason and scientific knowledge but then claims that he wants to debate the subject. Since the bible is beyond everything else because it says so to him there is no debate there is the absolute truth of the bible and all the other falsities of the world, so no matter what argument or evidence you present, even if it is 100% true and can be observed by any ordinary person will be false in his mind. There is nothing that you can say or do that will change his unwavering faith in the bible so it really is pointless to try and change his beliefs.

    Now I don't mind Christians that take the bible on faith what you have is beyond faith it is complete and utter certainty and it confounds me how any intelligent person could be certain about anything let alone something there is no proof for, ahh well it is beyond me but I meet people that seem to pull it off all the time. Like my favorite philosopher/writer/historical figure put it "Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd."-Voltaire
     
  19. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    Thanks Ch'ang. I probably should get out of this AVphobe pool and swim in the AVphile one for awhile. In other words, find a same-faith thread or something.
     
  20. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,653
    well it most certenly wasn't written by a secular writer...

    the majority of it is basic scientific misunderstanding and misrepresentation...

    when I have time I'll go through and point out the errors... unfortunatly I don't have that much time tonight.:cool:

    wa:do
     
Loading...