bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Need Account Help?  Email bibletruths.forum@gmail.com   

Forgotten password reminders does not work. Contact the email above and state what you want your password changed to. (it must be at least 8 characters)

Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!  (Read 8111 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lilitalienboi16

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1870
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #40 on: March 03, 2015, 01:33:59 AM »

Thank you Loc for your assistance.   Yes, it is it is the singular yom that is used in Genesis 1 and it is the singular yom that we are discussing.

I did not say that Genesis 2:4 refers back to Genesis 1:1.  I gave that as a possibility, and giving some pointers as to why it was possible.

There were some good finds by Alex, I am not unhappy to admit that.  It is possible that "the 'day' of", followed by an expression, may be longer than 12 hours.  In English there is an expression "saving up for a rainy day".  Such expressions however do not alter the meaning of the word 'day' when the word 'day' is used on its own.

Perhaps Alex will be able to prove his hypothesis.  That will be ok with me.


In regard to the post by John, "evening to evening" is a qualifying expression.


Putting the science part aside, in which I was very forward, I have asked specific and easy to understand questions in regard to specific aspects of Ray's teaching in regard to the day-age hypothesis, showing clearly why I could not see those aspects as taught as being truthfully accurate.  Those questions in their entirety or in the main have not been answered nor has any genuine attempt been made to answer or to address those questions.  Instead I have been viciously accused, unmercifully judged, and harshly sentenced by a member of this forum.


Oatmeal

Oatmeal don't play the Martyr. You accused me of despising the Words of Jesus because I did not agree with you. Do you know the accusations you threw at a brother in Christ?

I repent on my part for not having understood the intricacies of the hebrew language and in ignorance having tried to discuss the matter with you. That being said, I am no language expert. I learned something new today and for that I am grateful so thank you for driving this discussion deeper. Now I don't think you did a very good job of explaining where you were coming from when trying to dissect yom and its usage but you did make your point that you did not like how ray interpreted the word Yom. I got that part from it and so I did my best with what I understood and the tools I had.

Now that I have a better understanding of it I have returned to the matter once more and I am even more convinced, if that's possible, that yom, as it exists in absolute singularness, does not mean twelve hours. It CAN mean twelve hours but it doesn't hold that meaning as its definition. Its clear that it is a period of time that begins and ends though.

Sticking with just Genesis, Adam did not die in the day he ate of the tree, he died at the age of 900+. That alone should cause you to question your notion that day means only twelve hours.

You state: "he 'day' of", followed by an expression, may be longer than 12 hours."

How does adding the word "of" give the word "day" a GREATER meaning than it held previously? When does being OF something make it GREATER than that something? It might be all of that something but surely it does not become greater than the thing it is OF? So how can we go from twelve hours to now in regards to adam eating the fruit, or any of the other examples where we find this construct, to hundreds of years longer all because we added the "he --- of" as you phrased it?

In Christ,
Alex
Logged
1 Cor 1:10 "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."

Joel

  • Global Moderator
  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 800
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #41 on: March 03, 2015, 04:16:04 AM »

The way I see it, a day can be 12 hours, 24 hours, one thousand years, or a more extended period of time.
The important thing is that God is referring in every instance I know about, to an event that has taken place, or is about to take place.
The event is to be the main point of focus.

Joel
Logged

Oatmeal

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 80
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #42 on: March 03, 2015, 04:01:25 PM »

Hi Alex

Just to make it clear, in my previous post it wasn't you I was accusing of viciously accusing me, etc.

In your accusation that I accused you of despising the words of Jesus, I plead guilty.  I phrased the accusations in two questions, thinking that questions could not be an accusation.  On reflection, they were.  I should have instead phrased a question: "How do the words of Jesus in John 11:9 fit in with the day-age hypothesis?"  I therefore humbly apologise.  Let me say the words: "I'm sorry.  Please forgive me".

This apology applies to all that took offence.

I will get back to you further.


Oatmeal
Logged
From Micah 7:9:  By the grace and call of Yahweh I will bear the trials of the narrow way, because I have no love, until He fully shows me my sin and I am judged by Him.  He will bring me forth to the light, and I shall see His righteousness.

Oatmeal

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 80
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #43 on: March 04, 2015, 01:16:50 AM »

At least at this point in time I will not be contributing further to this thread.  It is definitely not worth the work just to be right.

Oatmeal
Logged
From Micah 7:9:  By the grace and call of Yahweh I will bear the trials of the narrow way, because I have no love, until He fully shows me my sin and I am judged by Him.  He will bring me forth to the light, and I shall see His righteousness.

lilitalienboi16

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1870
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #44 on: March 04, 2015, 02:15:10 AM »

Hi Oatmeal,

No hard feelings.

We will get there! All in God's time.

God bless,
Alex
Logged
1 Cor 1:10 "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."

Dave in Tenn

  • Administrator
  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4147
    • FaceBook David Sanderson
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #45 on: March 04, 2015, 08:24:20 PM »

Hi

I very recently viewed the video Noah's Flood Was Not Global on the bible-truths.com Youtube site and note that near the end of the video Ray said or inferred that it was during the 6 days of Creation, not during the flood of Noah's time, that seashells ended up at the top of what is now Mt Everest.

Was it during the 6 days of Creation that the worldwide fossil record also was formed?

Yes, at least that part of it which was formed during the 6 scriptural yoms. 

Quote
By what process?  Was it by animals etc being covered by volcanic debris?  Can sedimentary rock come from a volcano (most fossils are found in sedimentary rock)? 

By the same processes that create sediment even today.  The rest of your "questions" are straw-men.

Quote
In bringing order out of chaos, was the Creation itself temporarily the cause of chaos in that millions of animals died catastrophically by the Creation process itself?

Things moved from EVENING (chaos) and MORNING (order) in each of the six scriptural yoms.

Quote
How could it be that seashells were in/on what was possibly the first bit of land to come out of the sea when it is chronologically mentioned in Genesis that the appearing of the dry (land), the naming of the dry, and the bringing forth of plant life on the dry, occurred before the bringing forth of sea life?

Because "evening" and "morning" are processes, not events.  And for the same reason that God took the fourth yom to name the greater and lesser lights He had already created on Yom one.  Not, therefore, strictly chronological. 

Quote
In the video (starting from 24.28) Ray explains in detail how in the commandments' "6 days shall thou labour, but in the seventh day no work shall be done" (refer to Exodus 20:8-11) the definition of day in the fourth commandment was not 24 hours: that mankind as a general rule worked during the day and always rested at night - they did not labour for 24 hours per day; and consequently the claim that a day in Genesis One is 24 hours is not a claim based on factuality.  Why does not the same basis of argument speak against the claim that a day in Genesis 1 is a vast eon of time, as the definition of day in the fourth commandment, as well as not being 24 hours, was also not a vast eon of time, and not only did mankind not work for 24 hours per day, mankind did not work for a vast eon of time per day either, and consequently the claim that a day in Genesis 1 is a vast eon of time is not a claim based on factuality?  Can there be two definitions/meanings of the word "day" in the same portion of Scripture, Exodus 20:8-11?  Ray asks, in the video Define The Days (02:38), and in reference to Genesis 1:5: "Did God change his mind as to what the definition of a day was, halfway through a verse?"  Answering that question in regard to Genesis 1:5, and a similar question may be asked of Exodus 20:8-11, Ray at first is saying "No", and then he says "Yes", of course not saying that God changed His mind, but that there can be two definitions/meanings of the word "day" in one verse, and in one portion of Scripture.

Others have waded into this and all I can add is that "yom" is a word which carries various shades of meaning depending on how it is used in a sentence, just as 'day' in English is not strictly defined.

Merriam Webster:

Full Definition of DAY

1
a :  the time of light between one night and the next
b :  daylight 1
c :  daytime
2
:  the period of rotation of a planet (as earth) or a moon on its axis
3
:  the mean solar day of 24 hours beginning at mean midnight
4
:  a specified day or date
5
:  a specified time or period :  age <in grandfather's day> —often used in plural <the old days> <the days of sailing ships>
6
:  the conflict or contention of the day <played hard and won the day>
7
:  the time established by usage or law for work, school, or business
— day after day
:  for an indefinite or seemingly endless number of days.

Quote
From 26:28 in the NFWNG video to 33.54 Ray states a proof from Genesis 1:14 and a proof from Genesis 2:1 that prove that "days" (in Genesis 1) means "years".  His logic does not make sense to me, so would someone please explain to me the rationality of what he said?

I might could, if he had said that.  Maybe he did, but that is not the way I remember it.  He said that the word 'yom' did not necessarily mean a 12 or 24 hour day, but could mean a long time.  He did not say that it had a strict definition of "years".

Quote
If I built a watch, which when completed I was going to use for seasons, and for days, and years, the watch would be fully completed as soon as I finished constructing it, even though I was yet to use it for seasons, and for days, and years.  Is Ray saying that these luminaries were used for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years until the end of the sixth day (or to the end of the fourth day?) (signs for who?), and in regard to the second proof, in his quoting from Genesis 2:1 to say that these signs, seasons, days, and years were finished, being inclusive in in God's finished work, are there going to be no more signs from these luminaries?

What on earth makes you think Ray said we aren't living in a created world now?  That God said, "Let them be for signs, etc." is no more difficult to understand than that plants and animals are still "being fruitful and multiplying".  The very words used in the Scripture in Genesis 1 translated 'create' or 'formed' imply an initial act that continues.  We've lost this in English, to a large extent, but it might be best rendered "is creating' or "let us be making".  So perhaps you should consider building a watch rather than having already built one.

Quote
Part way through the above section, from 27:16.5 in the video, Ray expounds on the "and it was so" of Genesis.  Ray says that that phrase, those words, those Hebrew letters, and even the little "pointies", are identical to that same phrase you find in other places in the Bible, and that he can show us others places where it takes even longer periods of time than the 4 generations mentioned in 2 Kings 15:12.  This is where the software in my E-Sword falls down, obviously.  Not counting the six times the phase appears in Genesis 1 (first day x 0, second day x 1, third day x 2, fourth day x 1, fifth day x 0, sixth day x 2 = 6), the software can only find one other example of the identical phrase, and that is the one that Ray mentions from 2 Kings 15:12.  I do notice that the "And so it came to pass" of 2 Kings 15:12 was written at the time that the event that it speaks of is fulfilled, not at any time before its fulfilment.  Should the occurrences of this phrase in Genesis be treated any differently?  Was each "and so it came to pass" phrase in Genesis fulfilled in the day in which it is declared, and at the time that it is spoken?

The final "and so it came to pass" of Genesis 1 appears in Genesis 1:30:

Genesis 1:29-30 KJV
And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.  And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

Were mankind and the animals able to eat from that point on?

Was the final "and so it came to pass" ("and it was so" - KJV) in regard to diet/food fulfilled a million years later, or even as much as 2 days later, or immediately after, or had it been fulfilled at (immediately before) that time (as in 2 Kings 15:12)?  If it was fulfilled at (immediately before) that time, and as per exactly the same usage of the phrase in 2 Kings 15:12, whence comes the argument that the other "and so it came to pass"es mean a long time later, or any time later?

Also, if the fowls and the beasts and the creepy-crawlies were created millions of years earlier, were they happily waiting around for millions of years until the ordaining of their food supply in Genesis 1:30, or were those birds and beasts etc created in that same 12-hour day and during the previous 12-hour day?

Why does each day of Creation get a one only single evening and a one only single morning?  What is the specific answer to that question?

Again, what is the definition of a day in Genesis 1:5?

See above.

Quote
These are just questions.  Is it OK to ask questions directly related to a teaching on the bible-truths YouTube site?  And that are suitable for explaining the difficulties one is having with the teaching?

Yes, I suppose it usually is.  However, elsewhere in this thread when you were advised to check out the full conference to get answers to your questions, you poo-poo'ed the idea.  All I can tell you is that none of us are qualified to 're-teach' what Ray taught...and even if we were, isn't it better to go directly to the source of the one who's teachings you are questioning?  Since Ray isn't here, that must be the material on the website, not the forum.

Quote
I have previously tended to think that because of the worldwide fossil record the Flood was worldwide (parts of the Earth being uplifted at that time, and other parts dropping (as a result of all the fountains of the great deep being broken), explaining where the floodwaters went).

As Ray says, and as I can see, Psalm 104:9 puts a big NO on the Floodwaters covering the whole Earth.  Does this definitely mean however that the "waters of Noah" (Isaiah 54:9), and the rending of all the springs of the vast submerged chaos (from Genesis 7:11 CLV), etc, did not have a cataclysmic worldwide effect?  For how long was Noah on the Ark?

In saying that science agrees with the Kabbalah, Ray is in agreement, at least in the area that he talks about in the video, with the teachings of the Kabbalah, and in the video he does give them respect in regard to their knowledge.  Is it therefore ok to study the Kabbalah?  Going the other way, is it possible instead that mainstream cosmological science (and evolution science from its inception), instead of being strictly based on observational, experimental and reason based science is now founded on a philosophical premise, and from that unscientific origin and root comes its agreement with the Kabbalah?

Oatmeal

Nothing you've said assuming a world-wide flood is not also true of a regional flood.  I don't know what to make of your other questions.  You don't need anybody's permission to study anything you want.  When you have a website, you can share your findings.  Lastly, if you think 'mainstream science' does not base their theories on observation, experiment and reason, you're building a straw-man argument in very many cases.  The only exception to that is theoretical physics based entirely on mathematics, imo.  In that field, 'experiment and observation' are exceedingly difficult, if not axiomatically impossible.  However, what the 'math' has predicted has in large measure BEEN observed in experiment when such experiments were feasible.  Not that it matters to most folks.

All I'll add is "watch-read" the Nashville '08 conference.  It is not necessary for you to agree with any of it, but if your questions are genuinely sincere, that is the ONLY source I can send you to.  We'll see.       
« Last Edit: March 04, 2015, 08:40:34 PM by Dave in Tenn »
Logged
Heb 10:32  But you must continue to remember those earlier days, how after you were enlightened you endured a hard and painful struggle.

cjwood

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2095
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #46 on: March 04, 2015, 10:20:28 PM »

The way I see it, a day can be 12 hours, 24 hours, one thousand years, or a more extended period of time.
The important thing is that God is referring in every instance I know about, to an event that has taken place, or is about to take place.
The event is to be the main point of focus.

Joel


yayyyy joel.  i read through these posts and got lost in all the words.  joel's post hit the nail on the head. 

claudia
Logged

lilitalienboi16

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1870
Re: This looks SO awesome! I want to see it!
« Reply #47 on: March 05, 2015, 01:51:19 AM »

The way I see it, a day can be 12 hours, 24 hours, one thousand years, or a more extended period of time.
The important thing is that God is referring in every instance I know about, to an event that has taken place, or is about to take place.
The event is to be the main point of focus.

Joel


yayyyy joel.  i read through these posts and got lost in all the words.  joel's post hit the nail on the head. 

claudia

You didn't miss much Claudia.

In the end, Ray was absolutely right in understanding yom as a variable period of time which begins and ends.

I do believe what Joel said is very important too.

God bless,
Alex
Logged
1 Cor 1:10 "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.082 seconds with 27 queries.