Thread: 7,000 years is God's timescale to restore the earth.

1. Originally Posted by Roberto
I have no problem thinking that science shows dating the earth is 4,4 billions years old, its problably what they get if God made it that old when he created it, as you have to believe the chicken came first, not the egg. If Adam was created not as a seed, but as a fullgrown man, you would see him as maybe 17-30 years old. Likewise may the earth be as old as 4,4 billions of years from the dating methods.

But this is something kind of weird, the bibele teaches that from Adam till now, is some 6000 years. And that one day is like 1000 years it also says.

So take 360days * 6000 years * 1000 years(for each day) You get 2,16 billion
And with the 6 days before Adam as 1000 years, then you yet another 6000 years to do the same formula.
6000*360*1000= 2,16 billion
Add those you get 4,32 billion years, almost as old as the scientific data shows.

But don't take this scientifically. Its just basic fun math of the bible.
One little problem: The universe is 13.7 Billion years old. It's only the earth that is about 4.5 billion years old. So the numbers don't add up like you suggest.

The source of this error is pretty obvious. It was caused by believing the first verse of the Bible, which says that the earth was created "in the beginning." That's not true! The earth formed about 8.8 billion years after the "beginning."

Just goes to show, yet again, that the Bible is not a science book.

2. Senior Member
Join Date
Jul 2009
Posts
756
Originally Posted by BibleScribe
Hi David,

In short, Qumran assures us that we can be reasonably confident that the Daniel text on which our English translations are based is one of integrity.[/COLOR][/INDENT]

With Best Regards,
BibleScribe
The discussion here concerning the Mazoretic or Septuigent texts centers on the resulting different lenth and dates of historical timelines and not so much one particular book or another. This has nothing to do with the book of Daniel or the visons/prophecies of his chapters. I think the dating differences occur pre-flood and shortly after; but I don't have a comparative chart of those differences. Perhaps someone can post one when they find one.

The link that was referred to noted that there are no major theological differences between the Sept and the Mazoretic.

3. Originally Posted by RAM
One little problem: The universe is 13.7 Billion years old. It's only the earth that is about 4.5 billion years old. So the numbers don't add up like you suggest.

The source of this error is pretty obvious. It was caused by believing the first verse of the Bible, which says that the earth was created "in the beginning." That's not true! The earth formed about 8.8 billion years after the "beginning."

Just goes to show, yet again, that the Bible is not a science book.
Why can't it? The first verse in the bible can be a rolling sentence, like "The ball rolled, and it rolled, and rolled." For each roll, the ball has rolled further. It dosent say " In the beginning created God the earth and the heaven".
And as you know God in the bible had a plan to send his Son to be crucified for us, the "vavalephtav" comes after "the heavens" but before "the earth". But the "alephtav" is before "the heaven" showing that heaven dont need Jesus "nailed".
To me that looks like a rolling sentece, and the day and night was'nt formed before the earth began to spin in a full body, So the first verse dosent count as a first day and night, that didnt happen before God began to form the earth.

And if you believe nothing is faster than light, go ahead with believing the unbelievers tales.
I believe that God that created light, is faster than light. My Skydaddy

4. Originally Posted by Roberto
Why can't it? The first verse in the bible can be a rolling sentence, like "The ball rolled, and it rolled, and rolled." For each roll, the ball has rolled further. It dosent say " In the beginning created God the earth and the heaven".
So you are suggesting that the first verse should be understood as follows?

In the beginning (13.7 billion years ago) God created the heavens and then 9.2 billion years later he created the earth.

That doesn't work because Genesis says that the sun, moon, and stars were created on the 4th day after the earth.

Genesis simply makes no sense at all if it is interpreted according to real science and facts.

Remember, there is no solid dome "firmament" separating the waters which are "above" from those which are below.

Any attempt to interpret Genesis according to modern science is doomed to failure because it was written by people who were utterly ignorant of modern science.

Originally Posted by Roberto
And as you know God in the bible had a plan to send his Son to be crucified for us, the "vavalephtav" comes after "the heavens" but before "the earth". But the "alephtav" is before "the heaven" showing that heaven dont need Jesus "nailed".
But Scripture says that Jesus is the lamb that was "nailed" before the foundation of the earth. And it says that the things in heaven had to be cleansed by his blood (Hebrews 9).
Hebrews 9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
And besides that, we can't go making up doctrines from incidental grammatical points like a vav prefixed to the sign of the direct object (aleph tav). If we do that, there is no limit to the wild variety of doctrines we could invent and Scripture would lose all meaning.

Originally Posted by Roberto
And if you believe nothing is faster than light, go ahead with believing the unbelievers tales.
I believe that God that created light, is faster than light. My Skydaddy
God is not a physical thing. The idea that no physical thing moves faster than light has nothing to do with being an "unbeliever."

Great chatting!

Richard

5. Originally Posted by RAM
So you are suggesting that the first verse should be understood as follows?

In the beginning (13.7 billion years ago) God created the heavens and then 9.2 billion years later he created the earth.

That doesn't work because Genesis says that the sun, moon, and stars were created on the 4th day after the earth.

Genesis simply makes no sense at all if it is interpreted according to real science and facts.

Remember, there is no solid dome "firmament" separating the waters which are "above" from those which are below.

Any attempt to interpret Genesis according to modern science is doomed to failure because it was written by people who were utterly ignorant of modern science.

But Scripture says that Jesus is the lamb that was "nailed" before the foundation of the earth. And it says that the things in heaven had to be cleansed by his blood (Hebrews 9).
Hebrews 9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
And besides that, we can't go making up doctrines from incidental grammatical points like a vav prefixed to the sign of the direct object (aleph tav). If we do that, there is no limit to the wild variety of doctrines we could invent and Scripture would lose all meaning.

God is not a physical thing. The idea that no physical thing moves faster than light has nothing to do with being an "unbeliever."

Great chatting!

Richard
If you mean that God can't create faster than the speed of light, then it's a problem. We know too little of the universe to be bombastic about our formulas here on earth. And as i have read, that the creating on the fourth day, is another word, that means "forming". What do we know about the birth of a star and as we see it now?
The real creating is in the first verse, and creating animal-life and us humans. The rest is formed. Chapter two tells us the he formed us, but the creating part is when he breathed life in us, in his likeness.

The bible has a very strange explanation of the watering system and climate before the flood and after the flood, and if that is enough explaination for God to give us, so the unbeliever that just don't want to believe, can have something to hold on to.
But God as the first scientist of all, can explain it for everyone in the afterlife, to people that have rejected His Son, and are under their own self-righteouss trial with God.
It's like God mocking scientists that have mocked God.

Every miracle in the bible, gives a little hint of how he did it, but the rest is God-magic never for us to understand on earth, and that is what an unbeliever just can't approve. They go their own way of explaining and most of them leaves God out, there simply is no room for God, because they can't explain God.

We are cleansed by His blood and will be seated in heaven with Jesus and God for eternal, heaven itself is not an unclean place. I believe in the seperation of good an evil for eternal, when that will be, i believe is an end of the ages.
The symbolism for that is heaven and hell.

I believe God is not physical, but the spirit can have a shape of a physical thing and it can maybe even shift shapes, there is no end of our imagination of everything, but i think we see bits and pieces of heaven and how that is everyday. And in the end we see the whole picture. But we are to take those bits and pieces of heaven and live it.
And another hope and belief i have is the new heaven and new earth that no man has ever imagined, no use of imagining that, but its a hope to be there, for then you are with God.

The vavalephtav before "the earth" is very cool, because right after, comes vers 2 of "and the earth", but it only has the binding vav.
And the 7 words of the first verse being the sum of T73.
Connecting the 8. word, the sum becomes T77
Its like everything there looks like no work of a mans imagination of downwriting something fantasy of the beginning, those mathemathics almost shows like it's the hand of God that wrote this, you know this, i've seen most of this on your website, and on Vernon Jenkins site.
Further you find it in the chapter of Noah, Gen 8,14.
I just have not understood your belief about we live in the mind of God, and patterns is put everywhere, because you know the bible is full of mathematichal patterns, and should not be compared with the muslim quran of 19 i think, and as popular that is for the quran chapter 19 tells about Jesus, hey, maybe God is trying again to tell Jesus is the One.

I like you, and i bet God likes you more, but i don't like your way of trying to convict people to legalize drugs as an way of better life to people, the belief in Jesus is my drug, that has stopped me more and more of taking drugs.
Jesus will free us from prison, not legalizing drugs.
Last edited by Roberto; 02-26-2012 at 12:35 PM.

6. Senior Member
Join Date
Oct 2008
Posts
161
Richard,

A while back I read somewhere on the internet a guy explaining the "waters below the firmament" as the water on earth and in our atmosphere, and "the waters above the firmament" as the water in "outer space". Below is a quote from the following web page -

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...a-nearby-star/

"The thing is, we kinda knew this already: there’s a lot of water in our solar system. It’s not just Earth: moons in the outer solar system (like Europa and Enceladus) are almost entirely made of water, and it’s prevalent in the comet-like iceballs in the outer solar system called Kuiper Belt Objects, too."

So there is a lot of water "out there". I can see your criticism of the idea of people interpreting the 'raquia' in Genesis being a "hammered out metal dome" as being justified, but at the same time I find it interesting that the inner solar system is relatively "dry" and the outer solar system is where most of the water is. Maybe the "hammer" that "pounded out" the raquia wasn't a literal hammer, but an intermittent "force" pushing the water out?

7. Member
Join Date
Feb 2012
Posts
95
Originally Posted by Silence
Richard,

... there’s a lot of water in our solar system. ...

Hi All,

I would agree, with "Silence", given the ~coincidence~ that the northern hemisphere ice cap ~4K years ago; the Martian "canals" also ~4K years ago; the resurfacing of Venus ~4K years ago; the band of iridium which is a non-naturally occurring element which appeared ~4k years ago; and the "flood" which is "dated" ~4K years ago.

Is it possible that an ice meteor shower careened through our solar system ~4K years ago? Apparently so.

BibleScribe

8. Originally Posted by BibleScribe
Hi All,

I would agree, with "Silence", given the ~coincidence~ that the northern hemisphere ice cap ~4K years ago; the Martian "canals" also ~4K years ago; the resurfacing of Venus ~4K years ago; the band of iridium which is a non-naturally occurring element which appeared ~4k years ago; and the "flood" which is "dated" ~4K years ago.

Is it possible that an ice meteor shower careened through our solar system ~4K years ago? Apparently so.

BibleScribe
Where did you get those numbers? Sources would be helpful.

But they don't really help with the flood story, since there was no world-wide mass extinction of land animals ~4k years ago. The flood story therefore cannot be true.

9. Member
Join Date
Feb 2012
Posts
95
Originally Posted by RAM
... there was no world-wide mass extinction of land animals ~4k years ago. The flood story therefore cannot be true.
Hey RAM, (Richard),

Seven pairs of the animals were preserved. LOL

-- I will try to find those references. However, you should be aware that TBN hosted some physician who collected and preserved ancient carved "grave stones" which showed men riding on triceratops and brontasaurus. They also depicted men with spears trying to kill these "war horses", for which a new ancient forensics pathology science was put to the test evaluating the veracity of the images which showed the vulnerable belly region in front of the rear legs. Apparently science validated the integrity of those depictions.

BibleScribe

10. Junior Member
Join Date
Feb 2012
Posts
4

Hi everybody it's Aaron again

The Bible clearly instructs us that
darkness was over the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
This took place before
God said, Let there be light:
So, is it too much to suppose that God did something before He established the principles and bounds of space-time ? I think he shaped 7 more dimensions than just the three that are fully unfurled.

Being space-time people how can we begin to understand this "movement" God made upon the face of the waters ? It's reasonable to suppose that the first few verses of the Bible are prophetic utterances, if you imagine they are timeless and they permeate all of creation. It's like God planted a seed in nothingness and this seed is the foundation upon which all things can be established.

One must first believe in a thing before one can see the truth it includes.

Here's the thing. As we better understand the nature of prophecy we better perceive the seed. Do you see? The scriptures are like a faith substrate, with endless utility. What you get from it in terms of enlightenment, fulfillment, and nourishment depends on what you input.

The Bible wheel give us a huge clue as to how this is done.

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may edit your posts
•