Were the days of creation long periods of time? As you prepare for the upcoming debate with Bill Nye and Ken Ham (debatelive.org/), watch the following video:
Too simplistic: Daniel indicates "god's time", "angel's time", and "man's time". The length of a day depends on the planet on which one resides, doesn't it? God's time is one day=1000 years : 4 And the Lord said unto me, by the Urim and Thummim, that Kolob was after the manner of the Lord, according to its times and seasons in the revolutions thereof; that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. This is the reckoning of the Lord's time, according to the reckoning of Kolob. Pearl of Great Price, Abraham, Chapter 3, Abr 3:4, the above being consistent with the following scripture: 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. (2 Pet 3:8) If any man writes to you, or preaches to you, doctrines contrary to the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or the book of Doctrine and Covenants, set him down as an imposter. You need not write to us to know what you are to do with such men; you have the authority with you.-Try them by the principles contained in the acknowledged word of God; if they preach, or teach, or practice contrary to that, disfellowship them; cut them off from among you as useless and dangerous branches, and if they are belonging to any of the quorums in the church, report them to the president of the quorum to which they belong, and if you cannot find that out, if they are members of an official standing, belonging to Nauvoo, report them to us. (To the Elders Abroad, Times and Seasons, vol. 5 (January 1844-January 1, 1845), No. 7. Nauvoo, Illinois, April 1, 1844. Whole No. 91, p.491) blogtalkradio.com/artbulla artbulla.com/zion.html
Art Bulla Art, if you read that scripture (2 Peter 3:8,9) in context, and completely, it reads as you have shown above: "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us,fn not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." So, the point is that God (the God of the Bible that is) is outside of time; He is eternal, and some were trying to say God's word wasn't true because He hadn't returned yet to judge mankind, and so Peter is saying we need to live sober and righteous lives, as if Jesus were to return tomorrow, but realize He has His own timing and may not return during our lifetime. Also, if you take that to mean 1 day=1,000 years, then we would also have a 7,000 year week. Exodus 20:10, 11. Sounds like you are referring to non-Biblical sources, which is a main point of the video; authority-man's or God's? So, where is the planet Kolob? Are you saying there is life there? What proof do you have of that?
To add to what Jordan said... the word "Yom" when being used with a number it is like day 1 ... its a one 24 hour day.....pastor john MacArthur goes into great detail about the genesis account of creation ...
Beginning doesn't have a strictly defined end so you could say just as easily that adam and eve weren't created in the beginning but just on the 6th day
If Genesis 1 was meant to be a long period of time then the Hebrew word for years could have been used. The plain exegetical reading of Creation is a standard 7 day week. "Billions" of years is not a Scientific statement. Real Science deals with the observable and testable world. Creation was an act of God.
How old earth is is not just a matter of observation but also of calculation. And it is not a coincidence that many different dating methods lead to similar conclusions. Btw...age IS testable.
DerGuteHut/* How old earth is is not just a matter of observation */ The age of the Earth has absolutely nothing to do with observation. What man was there to observe the creation of the Universe? You can only observe what you see. /* but also of calculation. */ I thought we were talking about Science, not Mathematics. You can use mathematics from thin air to try to invent a fiction like I see in Star Trek. Mathematics was ever used to demonstrate why Flight was impossible AFTER the first flight by the Wright Brothers. Mathematics can prove nothing. You can't prove Julius Caesar existed with Mathematics. /* Btw...age IS testable */ By the way the age IS NOT testable. You cannot go back in time too test and retest a hypothesis. Especially for a one off unique event never to be repeated.
Surfxeo Yes it has to do with observation. For example...we observe that things decay on a specific rate. So we can observe what are the traces of aging...by which we can make claims and prediction about aging. Or we can see that it needs a year to form one layer of ice... Plus we can observe processes that go an in the universe and compare that to our own history. And btw...math is also science...in fact it is one of the basics of science. Physics, chemistry, astronomy, static...all of them are based on math. And No...with math you can disprove fictional concepts. Math shows that it needs more than a Delorian to break threw time...and it shows that the amount of energy needed to move the Enterprise would be gigantic. (But if we had that energy, and materials that can withstand the speed...no problem) But Star Trek isn't based on math...is it. It is based on storytelling...the same thing that created other books. Here is a more important question...without calculation...how can you disprove science fiction? Math is the most solid way to proof things...because it is 99.99% objective. Unlike morals that differ over time and are different in different cultures Math has absolutes. Civilizations fought about the right god, they have different languages, different fashion styles etc. etc. but math is the same everywhere. (People might use different systems of counting like 12 or 10 system...but that change any formula or calculation. What influences math is the data it can work with. First of all..flight wasn't declared impossible just because of calculations...but because many many people tried it and failed. And even if somebody calculated flight was impossible...he was right. Flight IS impossible if you don't have the right materials. What you calculate depends on the available data. Wrong data lead to wrong calculations. But to assume that the earth is 6000 years old, EVERY single data we have must be wrong. Here a few examples of how great math can be: A mathematician in Alexandria ( Eratosthenes) who lived about 200 BC calculated the size of the earth. He don't even knew all the continents and his instruments to measure his basic data have been very flawed, plus he wasn't aware of all physical laws to take in consideration, but his result was 41 750 km. The result of modern scientists (working with satelites) is 40 075. Wow. Epicure and Democrit (who btw were one of the first philosophers who didn't thought natural events are caused by gods) foretold that the world is made of little particles who are in a constant flow which leads to all the phenomena we see. He (or maybe one of his successors) had a name for that particles. Atoms. Milleniums later scientist found this particles...and their behavior explains almost all phenomena we are able to explain. THAT is an accurate prediction. And it is not done because Atoms read Epicure and try to act in way to fulfill his prophecies and no ruler has power or legitimation because this prediction has been right. Unlike religious claims who are way more often a matter of politics or personal power. That doesn't means science can't be misused...but again wrong science or science mixed with ideology or science ripped of a conscience. I wonder why nobody thinks the ancient greeks had a divine inspiration but believe people who claimed that plants and light existed prior to the sun and the stars (which is pretty illogical)...and birds prior to mammals. (which was shown to be wrong in the fossil record) and that all life existed the way it looks today and who wasn't even aware that the earth, its kinds and its clime constantly changes...wrote a book that explains it all. Math also helps us to navigate satellites savely threw our solar system and last but not least run the computer you are working with right know. AND...we shouldn't forget that thats not what the bible is about. It is a book about, morals, laws, history, poesy and of course the relationship between god and humans. Just look at it that way...why should tell god the people how the world originated if he was able to foresee that they'll find out anyway...and that doing that they will make many useful inventions. And even if god wanted to tell the ancient israelites about the complicated nature of evolution....how could he explain it to nomads who have no idea how DNA works? And more important...how do those nomads benefit form the knowledge about evolution? Genesis is a very early answer to the question why we are here...but early answers are usually not the best ones....at least not in science. Isn't it great the knowledge improves?
Why is Ken that mean? I totally agree...day means literal days. And yes.. thats probably what the authors ment. But that is a record of what people believed...not of what actually happened. (And btw...how does Ken know that Genesis was personally written by god on stone-tablets...can that claim even been found in the bible?) One important reason why "days" was interpreted as "ages" was that we found out that it took ages to form the earth and that Genesis isn't accurate. Neither about the order nor about the timescale and probably not even about how things happened. But if Genesis is interpreted as a very metaphorical part of the bible, christians don't have to bother about its inaccuracies. People can keep their believes without denying science. Ruining that compromise isn't very nice to his fellow christians.
People say that because of radiometric dating and the RU-vid video Check This Out: Radiometric Dating by Answers in Genesis tells how Radiometric dating is unreliable. (Along with other books and studies). There are also The Fossil Record RU-vid video and other videos by Answers in Genesis that explain how Genesis is accurate.
Noah B. Radiometric isn't the only method plus scientist are aware of the sources of errors described in the AiG videos. Thats why radiometric dating isn't used the way AiG try to tell us. And ALL dating methods that allow to date back longer than 6000 years show that the world is way older. (Btw they don't show different numbers which should be the case if every dating method was flawed) All we see and learned about climatic or geological processes shows that it takes time. It also shows that the world is constantly chancing what...btw isn't happening in Genesis. There are even artwork older than 6000 years. Not to talk about claims like: all animals have been designed as vegetarians...which would make all animal hunting and cloaking methods pointless. Or the claim that there has been water and flora before there has been stars. This isn't even debatable in astronomy. And more important...the fact that there IS a fossil record shows that Genesis is not accurate. It shows a history of life which mio of years without a most of the lifeforms of today. According to Genesis every lifeform we know today was "created" in a week and should be there since the very start. That means we should find cows in cambrium, pythons in perm, humans in Jura...and so on. Videos by AiG are not scientifically backed up, they are made by people who WANT there stuff to be true, not by researchers who want to find out about truth no matter what it is.
DerGuteHut What do you mean 'isn't used the way AiG try to tell us' (who us)? Everything is pretty clear there! 'Time' & 'mutations' is a sacred caw of evolution ;-). Geological processes over the time are not in contradiction with the Bible at all! How are you so sure about 'animal hunting' habits and 'cloaking' back then? ;-) Have you observed it? ;-) Still in astronomy there are many debatable things and many things are very vague (example: 'horizon problem'). The 'fact that there is a fossil record' shows exactly the opposite - Genesis is 100% accurate ant true, because it shows the consequences of the Global Flood (Noah's Flood) + we have oil and gas we use thanks to the flood sediments covering the corpses of many living creatures (left out of the ark). Your next claim is not accurate as you're playing with the words 'every lifeform' - it's not in according with Genesis at all! Bible does not say that! There are variations of 'forms' after Creation so to say, but better to call them a 'created kind'. There are changes within the 'kind' and it's not an evolution. Jura, cambrium, perm and so on are just an invention ('made up') of well-paid 'historical' scientists and not scientific fact ('backed up').
Nikolai Gunichev Geological processes aren't in contradiction...but they explain the existence of mountains, rivers, continents without the use of supernatural. Aaand they show that processes that formed the earth are probably slowly. And about the Animal Hunting habits....for example turtles, scorpions or sharks are pretty old. Their "tools" are clearly made for a world of hunters and hunted...as well as every other feature animals had. And even if your claim is: "Well they didn't looked that way at the start" than this major change is still not mentioned in Genesis. The only altered species I know of are snakes. Btw...if god tried to punish them...why he gave them features that made them so successful. The story would make more sense with Pandabears (who do have some impracticle features). The Fossil record is a timeline. An aftermath of a flood is pretty chaotic. It may sort animals by heavyness but not by evolutionary steps. And yes we have gas and oil...both need pretty long to form..aaand many many many generations of animals...more that would fit in 6000 years. Plus...oil and gas isn't found in layers that are 6000 years or younger. That would mean we find the world of early sumerians turned into oil...which is not the case. And no...if you change a kind enough than (by definition) it turns into another kind which can't breed with other parts of the kind...this is even happening with dogs.But tell me...what happens in your opinion if an animal changes over time? And what is the magic border? And why should god do that?
@@noahb.7725so you would trust, ken ham iver millions of scientists? Their radiometric dating, and fossil vids, are bs, and complete with the, trust me bro element
Btw how do you know a day was as long as it is today you could argue that the first 3 days weren't technically days since a day is marked by sunrise and sunset but god created the sun on the 4th day
Where in Gen.1 does God create darkness or night? He doesn't, God said " Let there be Light", darkness and night are assumed, this gives you the context of the whole chapter, Not Literal. "day" is predicated on the meaning of darkness and light (evening and morning) not the other way around. Darkness / Light = day . Not Darkness + light = day, as is assumed. Darkness and light, evening and morning, in context mean nothing into something = day, adding a number does not change the meaning, it adds a dimension, making it relevant to our experience ,but in no way does it mean to say how God created the Universe accept to say he spoke it into existence. Ken Ham has asked the question " if there was death before sin, what does the death of Jesus mean " I ask, If there was no death before sin, how does a sinless man die ? The Bible calls the Gospel a mystery and the creation of the Universe the same.
