quote:

So your contention here is nonsense; the earth cannot be just a ‘bit’ younger then God (if you insist on describing it I terms of time) because no matter how old the earth had been around or when it began, it would always be infinitely younger than God, as much as such a notion can even make sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

Ya know, I think we need a reboot here to remind everyone how this thread started.

Theo-book stated:

quote:

I like to think of God as considering his "aloneness" as lacking purpose, and almost instantaneously, saying "Let there be light." Earth and all that is soon followed in the process as revealed in the Genesis account.

That would make the earth just an infinitessimal bit younger than God himself. It matters not how old the earth is, nor yet how old God is, so long as he considers us still his children, and still sends his rain and blessings and gives us hope.

So, for God to be ‘young’ (or almost as young as the earth) He would have to have begun at a certain point and then existed for a certain amount of time relative to the amount of time the earth existed.

If God ‘always was’ as orthodox Christianity holds, then He could never be ‘young’. Indeed, He could never be ‘old’. Those terms are meaningless when one speaks of infinities, because every point one considers is no closer to the ‘beginning’ (which doesn’t exist) or the ‘end’ (which also doesn’t exist when considering infinity) so while we might talk about the universe beginning, it’s beginning would mean nothing in terms of how long God had existed, which is always infinite.

So your contention here is nonsense; the earth cannot be just a ‘bit’ younger then God (if you insist on describing it I terms of time) because no matter how old the earth had been around or when it began, it would always be infinitely younger than God, as much as such a notion can even make sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lpt

theo_book wrote, "No, I like to think of God as considering his 'aloneness' as lacking purpose."

Yikes! You understand that's heresy, right? God has never been "alone," has never "lacked purpose." He has always existed in community, the Trinity always interacting and enjoying the fullness of love. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit never got bored of their company.

God has never had a "man-shaped hole in his heart that only we can fill." He created us so that we might enjoy His glory, not so that He's have some people to hang out with.

theo_book, please reconsider your presumptions here. They can lead you down a very strange, very unbiblical road....

quote:

I am leaving the debate with you, guys. Why? Because you have made up a quote and attributed it to me. It is a straw-man argument and has nothing to do with me.

You will not find "So, for God to be ‘young’ (or almost as young as the earth) He would have to have begun at a certain point and then existed for a certain amount of time relative to the amount of time the earth existed" in any of my posts.

And as far as "God can never be old," THAT is nonsense, my friend, for Daniel, by inspiration, said "I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and THE ANCIENT OF DAYS did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire." [Dan 7:9]

Again, God is described as "ancient" as regards time itself; "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him." [Dan 7:13]

Yet a third time Daniel the prophet, by inspiration, describes God by use of an Aramaic word {attiyq (Aramaic) {at-teek'} meaning ancient, advanced, aged, old.

"Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom." [Dan 7:22]

So please! quit trying to force your own perceptions upon the scriptures.

As to infinity having no end, you simply do not understand infinity. It does not indicate endlessness at all. It means "not counted."

Consider: The value of Pi has been calculated to be 3.14 to infinity.
It has also been calculated to be 3.141598 to infinity.
WHATEVER value you calculate for the value of Pi, every additional digit in the calculation, continues to infinity; so that 3.141 to infinity will never reach 3.142, and 3.1415 to infinity will never reach 3.1416. There are an infinite number of limitations to the application of "infinity." AND, there is no scripture that tells you "God is infinite."

The first application of the word "infinite" is used by Eliphaz the Temanite as he accuses Job of "infinite" iniquity. This would make Job's iniquity as old as God by your standard.
Job 22:5 Is not thy wickedness great? and thine iniquities infinite?

Another use of "infinite" found in scripture, is applied to the ancient city of Egypt, Thebes, under the name of "No." It was said that Ethiopia and Egypt were the strength of No, and it was "infinite." Now, do you really believe Egypt and Ethiopia had infinite strength? "Art thou better than populous No, that was situate among the rivers, that had the waters round about it, whose rampart was the sea, and her wall was from the sea?
9 Ethiopia and Egypt were her strength, and it was infinite; Put and Lubim were thy helpers.
10 Yet was she carried away, she went into captivity: her young children also were dashed in pieces at the top of all the streets: and they cast lots for her honourable men, and all her great men were bound in chains.
[Nahum 3:8-10]

The ONLY application of the word "infinite" that is applied to God (Outside of commentaries) is a reference to God's "wisdom" being "infinite." NOWHERE does scripture say God is infinite. "Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite." [Psa 147:5]

So please, do not pretend to know something about the "infiniteness" of God. It is not scriptural. And it could be limiting him between an infinite number of values like the value of Pi.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

So then by your logic the earth could have been sitting there cooling and forming for an undetermined period prior to light being created?

I will admit, EverLearning, that verse 2 is the most puzzling one in Genesis 1 for me. It seems to me that the most reasonable explanation is that the Hebrew word erets is used to designate matter or substance, not the planet earth itself. Indeed, planetary earth could not have already been formed before the creation of light since God's account specifically states that erets was formless, empty, and dark - that's not describing any planet I'm familiar with. So, I think that erets in this verse refers to some sort of proto-substance that God was nuturing to create reality by placing it in time and space. I'm certainly open for other suggestions - YEC oriented, of course!

quote:


I am not sure how you can say you were misquoted; the quote perfectly matches what was in the first post which you made.

And I am not going to banter about the definition of 'infinite' with you, simply ask, do you agree God's existence has neither a beginning or ending?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
I am not sure how you can say you were misquoted; the quote perfectly matches what was in the first post which you made

quote:

That would make the earth just an infinitessimal bit younger than God himself. It matters not how old the earth is, nor yet how old God is, so long as he considers us still his children, and still sends his rain and blessings and gives us hope.

So, for God to be ‘young’ (or almost as young as the earth) He would have to have begun at a certain point and then existed for a certain amount of time relative to the amount of time the earth existed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book

quote:


I am not sure how you can say you were misquoted; the quote perfectly matches what was in the first post which you made.

And I am not going to banter about the definition of 'infinite' with you, simply ask, do you agree God's existence has neither a beginning or ending?

Do you understand the significance of a "quote?" I didn't think so.

You say God is not old. I show where Daniel says he is. You don't want to "banter" with me.

I show your use of "infinite" is misapplied. No rebuttal, just "You don't want to "banter" with me."

I have never indicated in any way that God has a beginning or an end, yet you request of me to clarify whether God has a beginning or an end. WHY?

The question was "does TIME" have a beginning or an end? Questions about The longevity of God has nothing to do with questions about the longevity of time.

You really need to focus, and learn how to deal with issues that are raised.

quote:

"Perfect match?" So what you are saying is it matters not what I say, YOUR CONCLUSION about what it means is more correctly what I said, than what I said?

quote:

Do you understand the significance of a "quote?" I didn't think so.

You say God is not old. I show where Daniel says he is. You don't want to "banter" with me.

I show your use of "infinite" is misapplied. No rebuttal, just "You don't want to "banter" with me."

I have never indicated in any way that God has a beginning or an end, yet you request of me to clarify whether God has a beginning or an end. WHY?

The question was "does TIME" have a beginning or an end? Questions about The longevity of God has nothing to do with questions about the longevity of time.

You really need to focus, and learn how to deal with issues that are raised.

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book

quote:

ORIGINAL: lpt

theo_book wrote, "No, I like to think of God as considering his 'aloneness' as lacking purpose."

Yikes! You understand that's heresy, right? God has never been "alone," has never "lacked purpose." He has always existed in community, the Trinity always interacting and enjoying the fullness of love. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit never got bored of their company.

God has never had a "man-shaped hole in his heart that only we can fill." He created us so that we might enjoy His glory, not so that He's have some people to hang out with.

theo_book, please reconsider your presumptions here. They can lead you down a very strange, very unbiblical road....

Do you really think God in all his loving being is going to be content with just loving "self?" No, my friend, God HAS TO HAVE an object on which to spend his love, and his mercy, and his loving-kindness. He CANNOT spend an eternity basking in perfection with no outlet for his mercy.

Can you picture God the father with no children? Jesus with no task to perform? The Holy spirit with none to inspire except those who are already full?

Perhaps YOU need to re-evaluate what you call "heresy."

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book

quote:

Questions about The longevity of God has nothing to do with questions about the longevity of time.

ROFL! You argued before that God was within time. Now you say that time has nothing to do with God's longevity. Do you not see the stark contradiction in that?

I said no such thing. "I said the LONGEVITY OF God has nothing to do with questions about the longevity of Time." That is not a contradiction with God being within time. And God is bound by commandments and rules about time because it part of his covenant relationship with his creature, man. That does not in any way imply time is more powerful than God, it simply states that God has submitted himself to some aspect of time in some relationships of his choosing.

quote:

Which is it? Was everything created 6000ish years ago or not? Since you claim that time began with light then everything could have been forming prior to light meaning that those evil geologists might not be so wrong afterall with their dating and that is even if we accept the YEC interpretation of the Bible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: drmark

quote:

Which is it? Was everything created 6000ish years ago or not? Since you claim that time began with light then everything could have been forming prior to light meaning that those evil geologists might not be so wrong afterall with their dating and that is even if we accept the YEC interpretation of the Bible.

Sorry, Everlearning, but your attempts to discredit YEC chronology based on my brief, limited, and incomplete comment on Genesis 1:2 are not working. Obviously, God was NOT "forming everything prior to light" since the text specifically states that erets was formless and void! I merely offered one possible explanation of God involving some supernatural proto-substance which He divinely made into matter existing in space through time when He created light. Of course, neither Moses or I could understand the nature of such an ethereal entity since it existed outside the as-yet-to-be created universe. So, just like God's existence, verse two has nothing to do with a 6000 year-old creation.

quote:

So, just like God's existence, verse two has nothing to do with a 6000 year-old creation.

quote:

My point is that matter existed (erets) prior to light and according to you time didn't exist till light so we have no idea how old matter is so now YEC has a problem in that dating of materials and the universe could infact be correct since the matter was around for ? long.

quote:

That's it just push it to the side since it causes problems.

quote:

ORIGINAL: theo_book

Not me. I'm already accused of heresy for suggesting God is old. Even though Daniel calls him "ancient of days" using a word that MEANS "very old."

I do notice though a propensity toward shouting "heresy" when someone does not want to deal with the issue raised prior to the utterance itself.

It is simply a mob-reaction that basically says, "since we have lost our argument, we must gather and attack in numbers," with an embarrassment or an unnamed unspecific charge of some kind."

The cry of "heresy" without naming the heresy is an empty insult, whose purpose it to get away from the fact issues are ignored, and arguments are not aknowledged.

One says "God is not old." I show where Daniel calls God "the ancient of days." no aknowledgment. No "Wow! I never considered that!" No "I didn't know that!" Nothing. Just a cry of "heresy" with no degree of specificity.

No, my friend, I cannot reach the board with any degree of fair practice, so I depart.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WesSavedByGrace
Heh, heh. Since people are disagreeing with you and calling you on your contradictions, you use a psychological label to dismiss them. Good call! You will definitely make friends that way.

quote:

Tell you what my friend, I will list the points I have established in scripture if you will list the points I have contradicted.

Then we can make a second list; I will list the arguments I have shown correct, if you will show the arguments my opponents have shown correct.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Tell you what my friend, I will list the points I have established in scripture if you will list the points I have contradicted.

Then we can make a second list; I will list the arguments I have shown correct, if you will show the arguments my opponents have shown correct.

How about if you just answer the question, do you agree that God’s existence has neither a beginning or an end?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Tell you what my friend, I will list the points I have established in scripture if you will list the points I have contradicted.

Then we can make a second list; I will list the arguments I have shown correct, if you will show the arguments my opponents have shown correct.

How about if you just answer the question, do you agree that God’s existence has neither a beginning or an end?

quote:

Already asked and answered. How about if YOU just answer the question; Is God referred to as old in scriptures? You said God is not old. Have you learned anything?

quote:

Time keeps on spinning, spinning, spinning into the future...