Old Earth vs Young Earth Debate

[Subduction Zone]

Exactly. Most do not believe Genesis is a myth.

It is probably the other way around. Don't judge the whole world's Christians by what you see in the U.S..

And it is of course more proper to say that most know that Genesis is a book of myths.

 

[gnostic]

I think it helps to understand that "flying creatures" aren't just birds. Think of other creatures that fly. Insects for example. It's a pretty general description, not intended as anything but an outline of what order living things came in.

Again, you are deliberately misreading and misrepresenting the verses, 20, 21 & 22.

If those 3 verses mentioned more ambiguous wording, like “flying creatures” or “winged creatures”, I might have agreed with your interpretations that it could include insects.

But they are not. Instead, the verses are very explicit in saying “birds” (1:20 & 22) that fly in the sky and “winged birds” (1:21).

Birds are not insects or vice versa.

This is some reasons why I don’t trust your words, your interpretations, your opinions.

You have a bad habits, of twisting verses out-of-context. All the time, I say you have been intellectually dishonest, because you do try to change meanings whenever it suit you.

No, Deeje. If anyone has been misinterpreting the biblical verses, it is you.

Ok, let get down to basics, and looked at the 3 verses.

From the translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest serving Hebrew source:

20 And God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.” 21 And God created the great sea monsters, and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed, after their kind, and every [winged] bird after its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful, and multiply, [and fill] the waters in the seas, and the birds shall multiply on the earth.”

Look, birds...but no insects. And it indicated the birds were created at the same time as sea creatures.

Do you want to try again?

How about the translation from the Greek source, the Septuagint (from the New English Translation of the Septuagint, or NETS)?

20 And God said “Let the waters bring forth creeping things among the living creatures and birds flying on the earth against the firmament of the sky.” And it became so. 21 And God made the great sea monsters and every creature among the creeping animals, which the waters brought forth according their kinds, and every winged birds according to kind. And God saw that they were good. And God blessed them, saying “increase, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on earth.”

Birds, but no insects, and again, including birds with marine life.

Not satisfied that I would used these translations?

Ok, let me use your translation, the Young’s Literal Translation, the official JW bible:

20 And God saith, `Let the waters teem with the teeming living creature, and fowl let fly on the earth on the face of the expanse of the heavens.'

21 And God prepareth the great monsters, and every living creature that is creeping, which the waters have teemed with, after their kind, and every fowl with wing, after its kind, and God seeth that [it is] good.

22 And God blesseth them, saying, `Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and the fowl let multiply in the earth:'

Fowl is bird, not flying insect. Even your translation, don’t agree with you. Fowl is the same word used in the King James Version, and if I understand correctly, it is a translation that JW had originally used.

If anyone is changing the context to the bible verses, it is you, Deeje.

 

[Deeje]

Again, you are deliberately misreading and misrepresenting the verses, 20, 21 & 22.

If those 3 verses mentioned more ambiguous wording, like “flying creatures” or “winged creatures”, I might have agreed with your interpretations that it could include insects.

But they are not. Instead, the verses are very explicit in saying “birds” (1:20 & 22) that fly in the sky and “winged birds” (1:21).

Birds are not insects or vice versa.

This is some reasons why I don’t trust your words, your interpretations, your opinions.

Have you researched the word "`owph" in Strongs by any chance?

You have a bad habits, of twisting verses out-of-context. All the time, I say you have been intellectually dishonest, because you do try to change meanings whenever it suit you.

Oh dear gnostic, here you go again.....why do you keep doing this to yourself?

What does Strongs say about this word translated "bird" (H5775) in many Bibles?

Let me show you.....

"`owph" means :

1. flying creatures, fowl, insects, birds
   1. fowl, birds
   2. winged insects."

Let me show you how else this word is translated in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.....

"Leviticus 11:20-21..."‘All the H5775 insects that walk on all fours are detestable to you. ‘Yet these you may eat among all the H5775 insects which walk on all fours:"

11:23..."But all other H5775 insects which are four-footed are detestable to you."

Deuteronomy 14:19...“And all the life with wings H5775 are unclean to you; they shall not be eaten."

This word included both insects and birds.....OK? Not a JW source.

Genesis 1:1 (NASB)

Seriously mate, I have no faith in your ability to research anything. You have been shown numerous times that I do not post what I cannot back up. You however continue to make a fool of yourself by challenging what can easily be researched online. Do you not know how to access Strongs Concordance? It never fails to give us the right answers...even shows up erroneous translations of the Bible.

No, Deeje. If anyone has been misinterpreting the biblical verses, it is you.....

If anyone is changing the context to the bible verses, it is you, Deeje.

I feel that you need to apologise for presenting false information about the Bible and myself.....

 

[Native]

Given that the Earth was created BEFORE the stars, according to Genesis 1:14-19, are also wrong.

I think Genesis is right here but the later historical interpretation of the term "Earth" should instead be understood as the term "soil" and then it all fits together as a creation out of the "heavenly waters/rivers" (cosmic clouds) from where the first firm matter was formed.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Ooooh, sounds impressive.....but the 'scientific method' is an invention of flawed humans.

Absolutely.

Did we have an answer to my previous question yet Jay? How do I misinterpret Genesis?

What's rather funny here )if not instructive) is that you've managed to "misinterpret" my statement. Actually, what I said is:

I believe that you mistranslate Genesis 1:1.

Do you understand the difference between translate and interpret?

Never mind. If you're truly interested, see the opening verses of Genesis as rendered by the NJPS or Friedman or Alter or Fox. You can use Sefaria to access the first online.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

@Jayhawker Soule I thought I might just highlight some things in your quote from Wiki that you may have overlooked.

"The most recent understanding of the evolution of insects is based on studies of the following branches of science: molecular biology, insect morphology, paleontology, insect taxonomy, evolution, embryology, bioinformatics and scientific computing. It is estimated that the class of insects originated on Earth about 480 million years ago, in the Ordovician, at about the same time terrestrial plants appeared.[1] Insects evolved from a group of crustaceans.[2]The first insects were land bound, but about 400 million years ago in the Devonian period one lineage of insects evolved flight, the first animals to do so.[1] The oldest definitive insect fossil, Rhyniognatha hirsti, is estimated to be 407 to 396 million years old. Global climate conditions changed several times during the history of Earth, and along with it the diversity of insects. The Pterygotes(winged insects) underwent a major radiation in the Carboniferous (356 to 299 million years ago) while the Endopterygota (insects that go through different life stages with metamorphosis) underwent another major radiation in the Permian(299 to 252 million years ago)."

Do you see the opening words? "The most recent understanding" What does that tell you....?

Then it tells us that it is "estimated" that some insects "originated"? What does that mean? That insects began to live? At what point did lower lifeforms become insects?

Because it also says that at the same time, "plants appeared". "Appeared? How do plants "appear" unless they are created?

Clearly there are some explanations written that fly in the face of what they actually believe.

What is clear here is that the sentence

Insects evolved from a group of crustaceans.[2]The first insects were land bound, but about 400 million years ago in the Devonian period one lineage of insects evolved flight, the first animals to do so.​

conflicts with Genesis 1. Do you acknowledge this?

 

[exchemist]

Exactly. Most do not believe Genesis is a myth.

None of the major denominations of Western Christianity takes the Genesis story literally.

 

[jhwatts]

None of the major denominations of Western Christianity takes the Genesis story literally.

Are you sure? That seems like a awful bold statement.

 

[Audie]

Have you researched the word "`owph" in Strongs by any chance?



Oh dear gnostic, here you go again.....why do you keep doing this to yourself?

What does Strongs say about this word translated "bird" (H5775) in many Bibles?

Let me show you.....

"`owph" means :

1. flying creatures, fowl, insects, birds
   1. fowl, birds
   2. winged insects."

Let me show you how else this word is translated in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.....

"Leviticus 11:20-21..."‘All the H5775 insects that walk on all fours are detestable to you. ‘Yet these you may eat among all the H5775 insects which walk on all fours:"

11:23..."But all other H5775 insects which are four-footed are detestable to you."

Deuteronomy 14:19...“And all the life with wings H5775 are unclean to you; they shall not be eaten."

This word included both insects and birds.....OK? Not a JW source.

Genesis 1:1 (NASB)

Seriously mate, I have no faith in your ability to research anything. You have been shown numerous times that I do not post what I cannot back up. You however continue to make a fool of yourself by challenging what can easily be researched online. Do you not know how to access Strongs Concordance? It never fails to give us the right answers...even shows up erroneous translations of the Bible.



I feel that you need to apologise for presenting false information about the Bible and myself.....

The extreme difficulty in forgiving yourself may
well be part of what makes it so unlikely that
will ever understand what you have been doing.

 

[gnostic]

Have you researched the word "`owph" in Strongs by any chance?

What does Strongs say about this word translated "bird" (H5775) in many Bibles?

Let me show you.....

"`owph" means :

1. flying creatures, fowl, insects, birds
   1. fowl, birds
   2. winged insects."

Let me show you how else this word is translated in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.....

"Leviticus 11:20-21..."‘All the H5775 insects that walk on all fours are detestable to you. ‘Yet these you may eat among all the H5775 insects which walk on all fours:"

11:23..."But all other H5775 insects which are four-footed are detestable to you."

Deuteronomy 14:19...“And all the life with wings H5775 are unclean to you; they shall not be eaten."

This word included both insects and birds.....OK? Not a JW source.

Genesis 1:1 (NASB)

Seriously mate, I have no faith in your ability to research anything. You have been shown numerous times that I do not post what I cannot back up. You however continue to make a fool of yourself by challenging what can easily be researched online. Do you not know how to access Strongs Concordance? It never fails to give us the right answers...even shows up erroneous translations of the Bible.

So you really cannot think for yourself, that you have to rely on Strongs Concordance?

You are demonstrating very poor biblical scholarship.

You are attempting to equate verses from Deuteronomy and Leviticus with Genesis 1.

Subject-wise, they are unrelated, since Genesis 1 is talking about creation, while both Deuteronomy and Leviticus 11 are both concern specifically about what are “unclean” to eat.

Seriously, I don’t really care what Leviticus and Deuteronomy have to say, since it isn’t really relevant to this thread. In what order birds and land animals were created, had nothing to do with dietary restrictions.

When you dealing with texts, everything had to do as much with contexts as they are with word usages, and Genesis 1:20-2 speak nothing about insects.

So basically you are deliberately using different words from different books (Leviticus and Deuteronomy) and equating with that of Genesis.

You seriously don’t know how weak your argument is.

How about refocusing your attention back to Genesis and actually see what it say in the verses 1:20-22?

I gave 3 separate English translations in my last reply, but all you did was make pathetic excuses, and recommend Strong Concordance and quote 2 different books which had absolutely no relation to Genesis 1.

The Hebrew word Aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) is "bird" or "fowl" in 1:20-22; it certainly doesn't mean insects..

With 1:21, Cl-a֤of Cnf֙ (כָּל־ע֤וֹף כָּנָף֙) is translated "every birds with wings" or “every winged birds”; with Cnf (כָּנָף֙) being "wing".

[QUOTE="The Westminister Leningrad Codex (Masoretic Text)]וַיִּבְרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֔ים אֶת־הַתַּנִּינִ֖ם הַגְּדֹלִ֑ים וְאֵ֣ת כָּל־נֶ֣פֶשׁ הַֽחַיָּ֣ה׀ הָֽרֹמֶ֡שֶׂת אֲשֶׁר֩ שָׁרְצ֨וּ הַמַּ֜יִם לְמִֽינֵהֶ֗ם וְאֵ֨ת כָּל־ע֤וֹף כָּנָף֙ לְמִינֵ֔הוּ וַיַּ֥רְא אֱלֹהִ֖ים כִּי־טֽוֹב׃[/QUOTE]

The above Codex is just one of several transcription of the Masoretic Text, that was used as source for many English translations, including the KJV. And the Codex was also used as source for New American Standard Bible (NASB), which is another bible you used in the last post.

And speaking of NASB, they also translated aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) as bird.

But my point remain valid from my earlier posts, all biologists indicate that the evidences that land animals predated the birds, and not the way the Genesis 1:20-25 had ordered their creation.

 

[Audie]

So you really cannot think for yourself, that you have to rely on Strongs Concordance?

You are demonstrating very poor biblical scholarship.

You are attempting to equate verses from Deuteronomy and Leviticus with Genesis 1.

Subject-wise, they are unrelated, since Genesis 1 is talking about creation, while both Deuteronomy and Leviticus 11 are both concern specifically about what are “unclean” to eat.

When you dealing with texts, everything had to do as much with contexts as they are with word usages, and Genesis 1:20-2 speak nothing about insects.

So basically you are deliberately using different words from different books (Leviticus and Deuteronomy) and equating with that of Genesis.

You seriously don’t know how weak your argument is.

How about refocusing your attention back to Genesis and actually see what it say in the verses 1:20-22?

I gave 3 separate English translations in my last reply, but all you did was make pathetic excuses, and recommend Strong Concordance and quote 2 different books which had absolutely no relation to Genesis 1.

The Hebrew word Aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) is "bird" or "fowl" in 1:20-22; it certainly doesn't mean insects..

With 1:21, Cl-a֤of Cnf֙ (כָּל־ע֤וֹף כָּנָף֙) is translated "every birds with wings" or “every winged birds”; with Cnf being "wing".

So you really cannot think for yourself, that you have to rely on Strongs Concordance?

You are demonstrating very poor biblical scholarship.

You are attempting to equate verses from Deuteronomy and Leviticus with Genesis 1.

Subject-wise, they are unrelated, since Genesis 1 is talking about creation, while both Deuteronomy and Leviticus 11 are both concern specifically about what are “unclean” to eat.

When you dealing with texts, everything had to do as much with contexts as they are with word usages, and Genesis 1:20-2 speak nothing about insects.

So basically you are deliberately using different words from different books (Leviticus and Deuteronomy) and equating with that of Genesis.

You seriously don’t know how weak your argument is.

How about refocusing your attention back to Genesis and actually see what it say in the verses 1:20-22?

I gave 3 separate English translations in my last reply, but all you did was make pathetic excuses, and recommend Strong Concordance and quote 2 different books which had absolutely no relation to Genesis 1.

The Hebrew word Aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) is "bird" or "fowl" in 1:20-22; it certainly doesn't mean insects..

With 1:21, Cl-a֤of Cnf֙ (כָּל־ע֤וֹף כָּנָף֙) is translated "every birds with wings" or “every winged birds”; with Cnf being "wing".

[QUOTE="The Westminister Leningrad Codex (Masoretic Text)]וַיִּבְרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֔ים אֶת־הַתַּנִּינִ֖ם הַגְּדֹלִ֑ים וְאֵ֣ת כָּל־נֶ֣פֶשׁ הַֽחַיָּ֣ה׀ הָֽרֹמֶ֡שֶׂת אֲשֶׁר֩ שָׁרְצ֨וּ הַמַּ֜יִם לְמִֽינֵהֶ֗ם וְאֵ֨ת כָּל־ע֤וֹף כָּנָף֙ לְמִינֵ֔הוּ וַיַּ֥רְא אֱלֹהִ֖ים כִּי־טֽוֹב׃

The above Codex is just one of several transcription of the Masoretic Text, that was used as source for many English translations, including the KJV. And the Codex was also used as source for New American Standard Bible (NASB), which is another bible you used in the last post.

And speaking of NASB, they also translated aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) as bird.

But my point remain valid from my earlier posts, all biologists indicate that the evidences that land animals predated the birds, and not the way the Genesis 1:20-25 had ordered their creation.

Whether cannot or will not or dare not,
thinking, for self or otherwise, is a unitarian
thing, not a JW.

I expect "dare not" is number one.

 

[whirlingmerc]

I would like to see how many of our users here believe in which theory (old earth or young earth) and why.

What are the core issues in the debate between old earth and young earth?

Do you believe the earth was created in 7 days? Give your argument for or against.

Frankly, the idea that young earth creationists believe all the dinosaur bones were 'planted there' is really poor journalism on team 'Hardball' Not true and not even close. Never heard of even one.

Similarly claims of Dawkins that creationists particularly young earth fiat creation are insane or wicked says more about a fallen human heart in need of redemption

Adjacent psalms that tell a story

 

[whirlingmerc]

I would like to see how many of our users here believe in which theory (old earth or young earth) and why.

What are the core issues in the debate between old earth and young earth?

Do you believe the earth was created in 7 days? Give your argument for or against.

The title of the youtube at the start is misleading since many scientists and Christian leaders do not take an old earth position. It's misrepresenting their views. Most liberals perhaps? Most atheists perhaps?

Adjacent psalms that tell a story

 

[gnostic]

Whether cannot or will not or dare not,
thinking, for self or otherwise, is a unitarian
thing, not a JW.

I expect "dare not" is number one.

Deeje is trying to push a large square into a small round-shaped hole, deluding herself thinking it will fit.

We should be arguing over what in Genesis 1, but she is trying redirect to verses in other books.

She can’t equate one with the others, because they unrelated, not only to my point, but unrelated to this thread.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Regarding what Gen 1:1 means, it is clear not only from Gen 1 but also Noah pre flood that man was given plants to eat, not involving death in the world.... death came through sin.. no sin initially so no death

For another thing I think it's a misunderstanding that Gen 1:1 to 1:2 supports gaps of millions or billions of years The Hebrew is more like the earth was 'tophu v'bofu', a phra like "helter skelter" formess and void

in Exodus when the Jews were in a formless and void dessert and God makes a nation from nothing there as well The emphasis on God making out of nothing, whether light in darkness, a world from nothing, children from Abraham, Jews form Egypt

For another it is clear not only from Gen 1 but also Noah pre flood that man was given plants to eat, not involving death in the world.... death came through sin.. no sin initially so no death

 

[Audie]

Deeje is trying to push a large square into a small round-shaped hole, deluding herself thinking it will fit.

We should be arguing over what in Genesis 1, but she is trying redirect to verses in other books.

She can’t equate one with the others, because they unrelated, not only to my point, but unrelated to this thread.

You are not -surely- going to say plants and
bacteria are not alive?

 

[whirlingmerc]

So you really cannot think for yourself, that you have to rely on Strongs Concordance?

You are demonstrating very poor biblical scholarship.

You are attempting to equate verses from Deuteronomy and Leviticus with Genesis 1.

Subject-wise, they are unrelated, since Genesis 1 is talking about creation, while both Deuteronomy and Leviticus 11 are both concern specifically about what are “unclean” to eat.

Seriously, I don’t really care what Leviticus and Deuteronomy have to say, since it isn’t really relevant to this thread. In what order birds and land animals were created, had nothing to do with dietary restrictions.

When you dealing with texts, everything had to do as much with contexts as they are with word usages, and Genesis 1:20-2 speak nothing about insects.

So basically you are deliberately using different words from different books (Leviticus and Deuteronomy) and equating with that of Genesis.

You seriously don’t know how weak your argument is.

How about refocusing your attention back to Genesis and actually see what it say in the verses 1:20-22?

I gave 3 separate English translations in my last reply, but all you did was make pathetic excuses, and recommend Strong Concordance and quote 2 different books which had absolutely no relation to Genesis 1.

The Hebrew word Aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) is "bird" or "fowl" in 1:20-22; it certainly doesn't mean insects..

With 1:21, Cl-a֤of Cnf֙ (כָּל־ע֤וֹף כָּנָף֙) is translated "every birds with wings" or “every winged birds”; with Cnf (כָּנָף֙) being "wing".

[QUOTE="The Westminister Leningrad Codex (Masoretic Text)]וַיִּבְרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֔ים אֶת־הַתַּנִּינִ֖ם הַגְּדֹלִ֑ים וְאֵ֣ת כָּל־נֶ֣פֶשׁ הַֽחַיָּ֣ה׀ הָֽרֹמֶ֡שֶׂת אֲשֶׁר֩ שָׁרְצ֨וּ הַמַּ֜יִם לְמִֽינֵהֶ֗ם וְאֵ֨ת כָּל־ע֤וֹף כָּנָף֙ לְמִינֵ֔הוּ וַיַּ֥רְא אֱלֹהִ֖ים כִּי־טֽוֹב׃

The above Codex is just one of several transcription of the Masoretic Text, that was used as source for many English translations, including the KJV. And the Codex was also used as source for New American Standard Bible (NASB), which is another bible you used in the last post.

And speaking of NASB, they also translated aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) as bird.

But my point remain valid from my earlier posts, all biologists indicate that the evidences that land animals predated the birds, and not the way the Genesis 1:20-25 had ordered their creation.[/QUOTE]

I think we can agree that the order in Genesis is not the order that evolutionists believe

regarding insects... they may be Biblically in a different category than birds or land animals since they do not have the breath of life in the same sense as they breath through skin. Animals like jellyfish as well... no brains.. might be considered more like plants

 

[whirlingmerc]

You are not -surely- going to say plants and
bacteria are not alive?

They are alive but not in the category of 'breath of life' in the same way
similarly jelly fish and come sea creatures with no breath might be more like a plant category biblically than a modern animal category

 

[Audie]

The above Codex is just one of several transcription of the Masoretic Text, that was used as source for many English translations, including the KJV. And the Codex was also used as source for New American Standard Bible (NASB), which is another bible you used in the last post.

And speaking of NASB, they also translated aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) as bird.

But my point remain valid from my earlier posts, all biologists indicate that the evidences that land animals predated the birds, and not the way the Genesis 1:20-25 had ordered their creation.

I think we can agree that the order in Genesis is not the order that evolutionists believe

regarding insects... they may be Biblically in a different category than birds or land animals since they do not have the breath of life in the same sense as they breath through skin. Animals like jellyfish as well... no brains.. might be considered more like plants[/QUOTE]

The above Codex is just one of several transcription of the Masoretic Text, that was used as source for many English translations, including the KJV. And the Codex was also used as source for New American Standard Bible (NASB), which is another bible you used in the last post.

And speaking of NASB, they also translated aof֙ (וְעוֹף֙) as bird.

But my point remain valid from my earlier posts, all biologists indicate that the evidences that land animals predated the birds, and not the way the Genesis 1:20-25 had ordered their creation.

I think we can agree that the order in Genesis is not the order that evolutionists believe

regarding insects... they may be Biblically in a different category than birds or land animals since they do not have the breath of life in the same sense as they breath through skin. Animals like jellyfish as well... no brains.. might be considered more like plants[/QUOTE]

By one with no knoweledge of biology, all
manner of things might be considered.

Whales were thought to be fish, maybe some
still did not catch up.

Insects do not breathe through their skins.

The lingless salamanders, among others, do.

The "breath of life" distinction cannot br connected
to reality.

 

[whirlingmerc]

OK,,, insects breath through many little tubes through their body not mouth.... semantical

Whales might be biblically in category of fish, not using the modern mammal categories not a problem No reason the biblical categories must match modern taxonomies

but in any case God made the way creatures breathe to be marvelous
Gasp! A Breathing Puzzle