Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

[QUOTE=mfblume;1486237]Where does it say that life is always created? You implying that from its "usage" in a few places, and as Esaias has already stated it is not always used as created from nothing.

Do you believe that we are eternal? Eternity as I understand it is has no beginning nor end.

There is a lot that I do not know and I am speaking my own ideas that are based upon scritptures that come to me. IMHO

Are you not basing that from usage?


I interpret life as being given rather than created. Creation is just the finished product.

https://goo.gl/images/L0Ynpk


I prefer to say our life is from God's Spirit.

It is the breath of life that God breathed. The word breath/n šâmâ is also used in places as Spirit. I should say that is the Spirit of God that came into man to give him life. The Spirit of God is where our life comes and that Spirit of God is eternal (no, begining no end).

The Biblical usage indicates that it does not.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

This may be a dumb question, but how do the rabbi's know it? If it is a dead language that ceased to used how do people know it? The English translated Bible is the safest thing I have to go by. If the Hebrew word is used interchangeably throughout our Bible either the word is interchangeable or our Bible translation is wrong. I will take the KJV over a non believing Jewish Rabbi.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

If you have Netflix, there's a new documentary on there called, "Is Genesis History," and goes into the questions of how old the earth is, how long creation took and if the flood was real or global vs regional.

Haven't watched the whole thing, only about 15 minutes of it this morning.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

bump

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

As for asking a local rabbi, since that is an appeal to authority (not always a bad thing), I'd like to know who this rabbi is, his credentials in translation, etc. I'd like to know if he is qualified to overturn and correct all previous scholars' translations.

I'd like to also know if he is chabad or not, if he is chasidic or not, etc. And I'd like to see what sources he draws on for whatever he says.

And further, I'd like to know if he believes he is bound to tell the truth concerning Torah to a gentile.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Reference material to look at later

http://custance.org/Library/Volume6/.../Chapter2.html


About the Author

Arthur C. Custance was born and educated in England and moved to Canada in 1928. In his second year at the University of Toronto he was converted to faith in Christ. The experience so changed his thinking that he switched courses, obtaining an honours M.A. in Hebrew and Greek. In his 13 years of formal education, he explored many facets of knowledge and was particularly interested in anthropology and origins. He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Ottawa in 1959 while serving as head of the Human Engineering Laboratories of the Defence Research Board in Ottawa (Canada) and was engaged in research work for 15 years. During that time he also wrote and published The Doorway Papers, and in retirement in 1970, he wrote 6 major books. His writings are characterized by a rare combination of scholarly thoroughness and biblical orthodoxy.


http://creation.com/from-the-beginning-of-the-creation

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Re: usage vs definition.

"How does a word get into a Merriam-Webster dictionary?

This is one of the questions Merriam-Webster editors are most often asked.
The answer is simple: usage.
Tracking Word Usage

To decide which words to include in the dictionary and to determine what they mean, Merriam-Webster editors study the language as it's used. They carefully monitor which words people use most often and how they use them."

https://www.merriam-webster.com/help...nto-dictionary

"Our dictionaries today

Using world-class technology, our dictionary programmes constantly monitor the use of language so that our experts can identify and record the changes taking place. The result is dictionaries which give a window on to how language is used today."

https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/o...g-dictionaries

Thus, the definitions of words in a dictionary (including Strong's, Thayer's, Liddell's, Or Brown's, etc) are determined by how the words are USED.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

http://www.torahphilosophy.com/2008/...d-genesis.html

"Traditionally, many Jews have understood the creation story in the first few chapters of Genesis to imply that the universe was created about six thousand years ago and before that nothing material existed. I have the impression that most ultra-Orthodox people would still agree with this.

There is however a problem with this interpretation.

In the 18th century, scientists began studying fossils more intensively. In 1841 three primary layers were identified by geologist John Phillips. One layer, the Paleozoic, consists primarily of extinct shellfish such as trilobites and plants such as ferns. The Mesozoic includes huge extinct reptiles, the dinosaurs. The Cenozoic includes an abundance of mammals, many huge and now extinct such as the mammoths, and flowering plants. All paleontologists since 1841 have confirmed the existence of these primary layers.

This seems to present a problem for Judaism, since Genesis seems to teach that there was one creation event and all life that has ever existed was created at that time. Any fossil layers should include modern day life as well as any species that may have become extinct since creation, however this is not the case.

Rabbi Yisrael Lipschitz, the rabbi of Danzig, Germany gave a speech in April, 1842 (published as Derush Ohr HaChayyim, found in the back pages of the Tiferes Yisrael Mishnayot Nezikin volume 1) resolving the fossil question. Midrash Rabbah Breishis 3:7 and 9:2 states that many other worlds were created and destroyed previously to this one. The commentaries on the midrash explain that the earlier worlds were gradually improved upon and refined. Furthermore, Midrash Rabbah Breishis 1:5 states that this world is like a king's palace which was built on a landfill - a garbage dump of some sort. The Talmud Chagigah 13b states that 974 generations of people existed before creation."

Seriously? Talmud?

"The Bible's first thirty four verses are absolutely literal, however they are not describing historical events which happened one time only. Rather, they are describing a cycle of creative events which continues constantly and which did, at certain points in history, millions or billions of years ago, bring these aspects of the universe into physical form for the first time. The first plants may have appeared 500 million years ago - but they appeared on Tuesday and this week they also received renewed energies on Tuesday. The same applies to each other day of the six days of creation. This is what Genesis 1 teaches us. (This also explains why there are "two creation stories" in Genesis. There aren't. Genesis 1 is not merely history.)"

Seriously? I think there's a reason we are warned to not give heed to Jewish fables.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

I would say the world is about 2 weeks older than when this question was first asked here at the forum :)

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

hush :heeheehee

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

http://custance.org/Library/Volume6/.../Chapter2.html

When we look to the most ancient Hebrews themselves, who
were well exercised in and conversant with the peculiarities of their native tongue, we find that in this particular instance they all interpreted it by the disjunctive particle but, and none of them by the copulative and. Thus it was rendered by the first interpreters of the text, the Jews of Alexandria, nearly three hundred years before the Christian era:


In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth; but . . . earth. . .

..........In the same sense it was understood by the learned Jew, Josephus, who thus paraphrased the passage:


In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth; but, the latter not coming into view.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

http://custance.org/Library/Volume6/.../Chapter2.html

..In the second verse the usual Hebrew construction to express continuous development would have been, as Hebraists are aware, the imperfect with Waw Conversive, i.e., (wat-tehi ha-a-rets) which would be correctly translated "and the earth was," etc. The fact, however, is that the narrative goes out of the usual to say (weha-a-rets ha-yethah), the Waw being separated from its verb, the usual way of expressing in Hebrew the pluperfect. When we turn to the third chapter of Genesis, verse 3, we find the same peculiarity in the narrative. The "Serpent" used as the embodiment of the power of evil is spoken of thus: (Wehan-naghash ha-yah). "Now the Serpent had become," etc., not "was" as in our translation.
..........We now have this:

IN A FORMER STATE GOD PERFECTED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH; BUT THE EARTH HAD BECOME. . .

"Without form and void. . . ."

..........We come therefore to a consideration of the words, "without form and void" ( -- tohu wa-bohu). From the outset we can say unequivocally that both words, whether occurring together or singly, are used throughout Scripture in connection with something under God's judgment. Tohu is used of something which has been laid waste (Isaiah 24:10; 34:11; Jeremiah 4:23) or has become desert (Deuteronomy 32:10) or of anything which is the object of false "worship" and therefore displeasing to God, as in Isaiah 41:29, etc. With the Hebrew preposition (lamedh) it becomes an adverb, (Isaiah 49:4) and means "wastefully" or "in vain." In Isaiah 45:18 it is possibly an adverbial accusative of the noun, although the form is identical with the noun itself. We shall have occasion subsequently to examine this particular passage more carefully. Gesenius and Tregelles in their respective lexicons both define the meaning of the noun as "waste-ness; specifically that which is wasted or laid waste."

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

‘Was’ [Hebrew hayetah] in Genesis 1:2 is translated ‘became’ by gappists, giving the reading, ‘And the earth became [or had become] without form and void.’ Gap theorist A.C. Custance devotes nearly 80% of his book Without Form and Void, including 13 Appendices, to advocating this translation, especially with the pluperfect, ‘had become’.

However, recognized grammarians, lexicographers, and linguists have almost uniformly rejected the translations ‘became’ and ‘had become’.11 It is a basic exegetical fallacy to claim that because Strong’s Concordance lists ‘became’ as one of the meanings of haya, it is legitimate to translate it this way in the particular context of Genesis 1:2. It is simply grammatically impossible when the verb haya is combined with a waw disjunctive—in the rest of the Old Testament, Waw + a noun + haya (qal perfect, 3rd person) is always translated, ‘was’ or ‘came’, but never ‘became’.

http://creation.mobi/from-the-beginning-of-the-creation

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Amen, I thoroughly enjoy this discussion.

Also your input as well. :)

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Is the answer to this question obvious or something?

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Why then should we not go to rabbis or others who speak Hebrew to get the answer?


All these claims about what the Hebrew says or does not say, and yet it seems I'm the only one wanting to deal with lexicons and definitions?

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

A dead language is not a language no one knows any more. It means it is dead in that it is not changing and evolving because it is not actually in use any more except by scholars who study it and its texts. It can be learned with the assurance the words won't change meaning.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

It's all moot without actual Hebrew definitions.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

:highfive

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Who do you think we should ask who knows Hebrew, then?

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Notice these verses, and realize that the Hebrew word for WITHOUT FORM is the same Hebrew word for VAIN.

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
(Isaiah 45:18 KJV)

That's the same thing as saying...

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not without form, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
(Isaiah 45:18 KJV)

Then we read :

"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
(Genesis 1:2 KJV)

If earth was not without form when it was created in verse 1 (according to Isaiah), why does verse 2 says it was without form?

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

I haven't found ANYONE holding to a "gap" theory interpretation of verse 2 prior to the 1800s. No Jews appear to have understood their own language to be suggesting a gap until the Rabbi I quoted in a previous post.

I have a hard time believing a bunch of people reacting to the claims of atheistic fools falsely called scientists have discovered the meaning of a Hebrew text when NOBODY PRIOR had any such ideas????

I mean, if it was just so obvious because the Hebrew means what it means, then why didn't ANYBODY besides a 19th century rabbi and Thomas Chalmers (1830) understand it, including all the Jews, all the Christian scholars skilled in Hebrew, the translators, etc?

In fact, this point seems an almost insurmountable objection to the whole theory, the more I think about it.

As for appealing to lexicons and dictionaries, I have no problem with them at all. But the "exegetical fallacy" is a real danger. It has been a near universal standard of hermeneutics that "usage determines meaning". In fact, that is how all lexicons (dictionaries) derive and identify definitions: by usage. Etymology alone does not solely determine meaning, otherwise the SPCA would be lobbying to ban hotdogs.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

The earth was created by God to be inhabited by creatures and by man. In Genesis God created the heavens and earth, and in six days He had creatures, and man, living in it.

Isaiah is correctly translated as "not in vain" which means "not without a purpose". The word tohu does NOT mean "formless" in EVERY CASE, it is translated over a dozen different ways. And in the verse in question, "vain" is correct.

The verse is saying God did not create the earth for no reason, He did it to be inhabited. And the Creation (summarized in Gen 2:4) culminated in being populated by plants, animals, and mankind. Gen 2:4 identifies ALL previous actions from v1 to His blessing the seventh day as part of the Creation. Jesus confirmed this when a referencing the 6th day creation of Mankind as happening at "the beginning". Gap theory claims man was created millions and billions of years AFTER the beginning. Therefore, it's looking more and more like a failed attempt to fit the Bible into the pontifications of atheistic fools who claim to be "expert scientists" with their billions and billions and billions of years, uniformitarian dogma, and evolutionary fantasies.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Everything's been done here except get an actual Hebrew speaking person to share what the words mean.

I have no concern over trying to fit science with the bible. I am solely here for truth. If truth fits current science, or if it doesn't, the point is truth is truth and I want to know it.

We may not be against dictionaries, but a lot of claims are being made here by folks who do not know the language, and there's not enough reference to actual definitions.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Custance (the author above) has an MA in Hebrew, but he also has a vested interest as a scientist, so, I'm leery of his interpretation. From what I understand he wrote the first Academic paper on the subject, so he is a primary reference, and one that The Anti Gap proponents target with rebuttals.

Scripture and science should be compatible unless there is a error in scientific method or biblical interpretation.

The other issue is that words have various meanings so that you can look at Strong's and pick the meaning you like best, so just looking at words by themselves when you are looking through the filter of your world view isn't helpful.

Even though Hebrew is a dead language, if the discourse over Hebrew words has continued, can't the meaning of the words still be subject to change?

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Amen.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Here is something I observed on this thread.

Some believe the earth APPEARS ancient, but actually is not because God made it MATURE just as God made Adam a man and not an infant. This view is somewhat acknowledging science and admitting science is correct in the estimation that the current matter comprising the earth is ANCIENT. These people would never have known the earth APPEARED ancient if it had not been for science making that claim and providing the evidence of its method of dating. So, the young earth people who claim God made the earth LOOK OLD ALONE, when it actually is not old, are influenced by science as much as it is alleged that gap adherents are solely trying to fit theology with science.

If young earth people were not trying to fit theology in with science they would not accept the claims of science to make them respond and say God made the earth APPEAR old.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Why is there so many different lexicons? I don't think that the Hebrew language is changing at present, but instead that it has changed during its writing. No doubt the law, the history, the prophets are written when Hebrew wasn't a dead language. Therefore the meaning of a word in Genesis could possible have slightly changed in usage from Genesis to Malachi. The OT was not written in one setting but was written over hundreds of years, and Hebrew was not dead then. I would think that it would be possible that Abraham's speech could have sounded to Isaiah, like old English does to modern English speaking Americans.

There are a lot of variables to consider in all of this. I typically use a strong's concordance because that is what I was introduced to when I began studying the Bible. It seems to me that the Strong's illustrates the usage of a word rather than a definition. A definition of something is definitive and that means that it is absolute and doesn't change function. If we took every Hebrew word and by a single definition tried to translate the entire OT we would probably have a mess.

I like to do word searches for extra clarity in the English translated scriptures. When people take the Hebrew and Greek words and use them to change our English Bible they are destroying the platform on which they stand. This is why I am somewhat KJV only. Although the Hebrew language is dead, the lexicons or definitions are not always the same. The word of God is not changing, but the interpretations that man has of it is. How many times must we rewrite the English Bible. Instead of becoming more accurate it seems we are becoming more unstable in the faith once delivered to us.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

What if it's a divine myth? What if it is more about God being creator, creating things in stages, creating from the earth itself, and Adam and Eve being symbols of mankind? We also see the atonement in their fall (what would be our fall) in that God slaughtered an animal, made coats of skins, and clothed them.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Tons of people who actually know the language HAVE shared what the words mean, as seen in the results of their translations of the Hebrew into English. Not one single english Bible translation that I know of translates the Hebrew the way you have proposed it should be translated. Why? Don't they know hebrew?

Not enough reference to "actual definition"? Here we go:

H8414

תֹּהוּ
tôhû
to'-hoo
From an unused root meaning to lie waste; a desolation (of surface), that is, desert; figuratively a worthless thing; adverbially in vain: - confusion, empty place, without form, nothing, (thing of) nought, vain, vanity, waste, wilderness.
Total KJV occurrences: 20

The word has numerous significations. Exegetical fallacy is the error of simply taking one definition (that one prefers) and sticking it where they think it fits best without regard for the context. For example, when saying the passage in Isaiah must mean "without form", or the passage in Genesis must mean "in vain", in order to get a match. When the truth is, context often requires the same word in one language to be understood different ways in English.

Isaiah 44:9 KJV They that make a graven image are all of them vanity; and their delectable things shall not profit; and they are their own witnesses; they see not, nor know; that they may be ashamed.

The word "vanity" here is tohu. Are those who make graven images without form and void? Are they empty places?Wastes? Wildernesses? Or are they VAIN?

Isaiah 45:19 KJV I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain: I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.

Here is the very next verse after the "gap text" in Isaiah, and the word tohu appears again. In this verse, is God saying "I did not say seek me in without form"? Or "I did not say seek me in the wilderness"? Or is God saying "I did not say seek me in VAIN"?

So this PROVES YET AGAIN that "usage determines meaning". It shows that a term can have a range of meanings, and not all meanings apply in each and every occurrence of the term. Thus, Isaiah has been translated correctly, as follows in everyone's Bible:

Isaiah 45:18 KJV For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

God did not create the heavens and the earth IN VAIN, He did for a PURPOSE: that it might be inhabited. And in Genesis we see exactly that: God creating the heavens and the earth, and filling the earth with plants, animals, and man. When in Genesis is says "and the earth was without form and void" it simply means it had not yet been formed and filled. God created the basic raw material of the earth, and it was at that point unformed and empty. He immediately began to form it (separating the waters, causing the waters to gather together, causing the dry land to appear, etc) and to fill it (whales, herbs, animals, man, etc).

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

You are correct, many "young earth" believers are just as befooled by the modern religion of "science" as the "old earth" believers are.

Me? I don't buy any of it. I never said "the earth looks old". Who says the earth looks old? Oh, that's right... atheists. Hmmm....

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Please notice that I provided a quotation and a link that rebuts Custance's position directly and grammatically.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

And, one more time, for the record, I am NOT saying "there is no gap in Genesis", I am simply saying the arguments in favour of a gap are rather thin and wanting, in my opinion. I'd like to see something a bit more solid.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Amen.

You both did a great job. I thank you for all the information that was presented in this thread. You are both are excellent examples of two men holding a good discussion. Amanah did a great job as well. :thumbsup

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

People on this thread said the earth looks old.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Tonight I feel old.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

:highfive

Brother Blume does a good job, and definitely gives us all something to think about.

Amanah, too.

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

I would like to add that I agree with you that use of a word determines which of the various definitions we are to realize. But even that can be obscured by a predertemined thought we may not even realize we're reading into the passage.

What are your thoughts about Jeremiah 4 and their reference to Genesis?

Jere 4:23-26 Jeremiah seems to describes a pre-Adamite destruction.

Jere 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.

Is it Pre-Adamite (before Adam) because we read it occurred when the earth was "void and without form". That fits Gen 1:2.

WHEN were mountains trembling?
WHEN was there no man?
WHEN was the fruitfulness place a wilderness?

ANSWER: When the earth was void and without form (Jeremiah 4:23).

This chapter was speaking about Israel's sin and Jerusalem's judgment. But their sin seems to remind God of something far more ancient that was similar and also required judgment -- rebellion. When considering their judgment and sin, He was reminded of the time the earth was void and without form.

And it is interesting that these passages in Jeremiah are very similar to what we read about Lucifer. I know Lucifer was a Babylonian king, but it's like we're reading about more than him...

Isai 14:16-17 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

JEREMIAH
4:23 ...the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void;
ISAIAH
14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer,

JEREMIAH
4:24 ...the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly
ISAIAH
14:16 ...made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms

JEREMIAH
4:26 ...the fruitful place was a wilderness,
ISAIAH
14:17 ...made the world as a wilderness,

JEREMIAH
4:26 ...all the cities thereof were broken down
ISAIAH
14:17 ...and destroyed the cities thereof

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

I can see a strong argument for the tree of life being not a literal tree with literal fruit, because the same essential understanding is what is seen in new birth with the Life Jesus came to give us. So, is it a picture of God wanting His Spirit in man, and the enemy thwarting it to see man filled with the force of sin through disobedience to drive man to damnation like the devil is doomed?

Re: How old do you think the universe is?
 

Research material for Brother Blume

http://separationtruth.com/resources/GAP-SECTION+4.pdf