lets assume for the sake of arguement that the bible did not infer that the earth is 6,000 yrs old. But is man 6,000 yrs old? The answer is still a big NO

toneyb:

So why are people using the limited understanding of ancient writers to describe events that will happen in the future? What exactly are you trying to say? You are just trying too hard to pass a moot point across.

It does, they wrote down what they thought and they happened to be WRONG. What exactly are you trying to say?

The writers of the bible did not know anything like meteorites, If they did they would have written about them, The writers of the koran wrote that meteorites are spears that allah use to destroy the jinns that go up into paradise to evasedrop. They wrote down what they felts about the cosmos and they were very wrong period.

You forget that they were truly sincere in what they were writing and thought they were right. When they talk about stars falling into the earth they truly meant what they were saying, to them stars were tiny light bulbs hanging in the firmament, that fight along side humans in wars as written in some parts of the bible. If you read the book of daniel you will see where daniel had a vision and in that vision he saw a goat whose horn rose right up into the sky, The horn of the goat pushed one of the stars hanging in the sky and the star came falling into the sky and upon reaching the ground the goat stepped on the star. This cleary shows you what they thought the stars were. They very clearly had NO idea of what they stars were if they did they would have written about it.

The sodom and gomorrah story might be one of the many mythical stories that can be found in the bible. So we are to accept the writing of ancient writers who were clearly wrong about events and natural occurance on what basis?

They thought that the stars were small light bulbs hanging in the sky which were created only to give light to the earth and to mark the seasons, to them the stars can fight along side humans in wars and fall into the earth some day.They were wrong. Accept it and stop apologizing for things that do not make any sense at all.

The problem is that they ancient writers do not even know that there are planets, when their god was inspiring them to write about how he created the earth he did not even bother to tell them that he created planets because their god did not even know that planets existed. So the point you are trying to make is completely moot.

I don't know what more i can do or say to stress the applicability of language, metaphor and visual images.

I think you have got it wrong though: nobody is saying they were right: they wrote according to their understanding, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Would modern astronomical and cosmological writings become trash if in future it is dicovered that the universe is an optical illusion?

Think.

Deep Sight:

I don't know what more i can do or say to stress the applicability of language, metaphor and visual images.

I think you have got it wrong though: nobody is saying they were right: they wrote according to their understanding, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Would modern astronomical and cosmological writings become trash if in future it is dicovered that the universe is an optical illusion?

Think.

I read through your arguments with wirinet and toneyb and I do not exactly know what you are trying to say. Modern astronomical and cosmological writings will become trash if the universe is later found to be an optical illusion.

In truth, one thing I say often is that human beings are the ones limited by languages and forms of expression. God is not limited. So when God communicates with man, he speaks with him in a way that man can understand. God does not speak Urdu, Hausa or Spanish, he speaks to the heart and the heart translates into understanding. Besides, the knowledge of mankind is progressive, and if it is all revealed to him at once, he may not be able to handle it. e.g. some ritual practices declared in Leviticus may have seemed irksome at the time, but maybe if they knew of micro-organisms and epidemiology they would observe the routines with more knowledge.

As such, when a prophet sees a manifestation of something that is hitherto unknown to him, he will write it or say it in the best known way to him. It does not mean what he saw was wrong, it only means the human expression at that time was too weak to convey the message.

Thus unlike some hasty ones here, I will not say that John was wrong in the Revelations, or Daniel did not know what he was saying.

Without going into too much eschatology, I will outline my reasons below. Those two prophetic books contain symbolic and literal expressions and it takes careful wisdom to divide and discern.

In John's case in Revelations, can one infer that the author so-believes that the stars are smaller than the earth? Inasmuch as John may have thought so, it is not evident here. Saying a star fell unto earth does not imply that the star is smaller. The Greek word used is pipto πίπτω, πέτω
piptō petō (pip'-to, pet'-o) which means to fail, to light upon, to collide with. The same way an aeroplane in the sky can fall upon a small isolated hut, assume an explosion and destroy itself and the puny hut. The Bible says

Rev 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.

The question then is "How does a fig cast her untimely figs?". Untimely figs indicates that the figs are still meant to be connected to the fig tree, obeying the laws of nature the same way the stars are in the galaxy obeying the force of nature. Until a greater force bends the rules and forces things to go out of sync (by Newton's first law). Here, that greater force is wind and in the case of ths stars it could be any cosmogonical entity or factor now known/unknown to man. Since we do not yet know all such entities in our galaxy and beyond, can we convincingly assume that it cannot happen? In science, I believe "it cannot happen" is a self-defeating statement that has been uttered throughout the ages and yet proven erroneous after a while.

In Daniel's case, the reference to stars was entirely symbolic, and in John's case I believe it was literal. In Daniel, the goat was Alexander the Great and the exalted horn was Antiochus Epiphanes. I was going to start explaining with historical books, etymology of the Hebrew words etc. when I just discovered that the Amplified Bible has simplified the understanding of the passage.

Dan 8:1 IN THE third year of the reign of King Belshazzar a vision appeared to me, Daniel, after the one that appeared to me at the first.
Dan 8:2 And I saw in the vision and it seemed that I was at Shushan the palace or fortress [in Susa, the capital of Persia], which is in the province of Elam, and I saw in the vision and I was by the river of Ulai.
Dan 8:3 And I lifted up my eyes and saw, and behold, there stood before the river a [single] ram which had two horns [representing two kings of Medo-Persia: Darius the Mede, then Cyrus]; and the two horns were high, but one [Persia] was higher than the other, and the higher one came up last.
Dan 8:4 I looked and saw the ram [Medo-Persia] pushing and charging westward and northward and southward; no beast could stand before him, neither could anyone rescue from his power, but he did according to his [own] will and pleasure and magnified himself. [Dan. 8:20.]
Dan 8:5 As I was considering, behold, a he-goat [the king of Greece] came from the west across the face of the whole earth without touching the ground, and the goat had a conspicuous and remarkable horn between his eyes [symbolizing Alexander the Great]. [Dan. 8:21.]
Dan 8:6 And he came to the ram that had the two horns which I had seen standing on the bank of the river and ran at him in the heat of his power.
Dan 8:7 [In my vision] I saw him come close to the ram [Medo-Persia], and he was moved with anger against him and he [Alexander the Great] struck the ram and broke his two horns; and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but the goat threw him to the ground and trampled on him. And there was no one who could rescue the ram from his power.
Dan 8:8 And the he-goat [Alexander the Great] magnified himself exceedingly, and when he was [young and] strong, the great horn [he] was [suddenly] broken; and instead of [him] there came up four notable horns [to whom the kingdom was divided, one] toward [each of] the four winds of the heavens.
Dan 8:9 Out of littleness and small beginnings one of them came forth [Antiochus Epiphanes], a horn whose [impious presumption and pride] grew exceedingly great toward the south and toward the east and toward the ornament [the precious, blessed land of Israel]. [Dan. 8:23.]
Dan 8:10 And [in my vision this horn] grew great, even against the host of heaven [God's true people, the saints], and some of the host and of the stars [priests] it cast down to the ground and trampled on them,
Dan 8:11 Yes, [this horn] magnified itself, even [matching itself] against the Prince of the host [of heaven]; and from Him the continual [burnt offering] was taken away and the place of [God's] sanctuary was cast down and profaned.
Dan 8:12 And the host [the chosen people] was given [to the wicked horn] together with the continual burnt offering because of the transgression [of God's people--their abounding irreverence, ungodliness, an lack of piety]. And righteousness and truth were cast down to the ground, and it [the wicked horn] accomplished this [by divine permission] and prospered.

So unlike what you think, toneyb, Daniel's story was figurative and was not meant to teach "abnormal cell growth in the horns of ungulates, and the celestial physics of astronomy".

mavenbox:

In truth, one thing I say often is that human beings are the ones limited by languages and forms of expression. God is not limited. So when God communicates with man, he speaks with him in a way that man can understand. God does not speak Urdu, Hausa or Spanish, he speaks to the heart and the heart translates into understanding. Besides, the knowledge of mankind is progressive, and if it is all revealed to him at once, he may not be able to handle it. e.g. some ritual practices declared in Leviticus may have seemed irksome at the time, but maybe if they knew of micro-organisms and epidemiology they would observe the routines with more knowledge.

As such, when a prophet sees a manifestation of something that is hitherto unknown to him, he will write it or say it in the best known way to him. It does not mean what he saw was wrong, it only means the human expression at that time was too weak to convey the message.

Thus unlike some hasty ones here, I will not say that John was wrong in the Revelations, or Daniel did not know what he was saying.

Without going into too much eschatology, I will outline my reasons below. Those two prophetic books contain symbolic and literal expressions and it takes careful wisdom to divide and discern.

In John's case in Revelations, can one infer that the author so-believes that the stars are smaller than the earth? Inasmuch as John may have thought so, it is not evident here. Saying a star fell unto earth does not imply that the star is smaller. The Greek word used is pipto πίπτω, πέτω
piptō petō (pip'-to, pet'-o) which means to fail, to light upon, to collide with. The same way an aeroplane in the sky can fall upon a small isolated hut, assume an explosion and destroy itself and the puny hut. The Bible says

The question then is "How does a fig cast her untimely figs?". Untimely figs indicates that the figs are still meant to be connected to the fig tree, obeying the laws of nature the same way the stars are in the galaxy obeying the force of nature. Until a greater force bends the rules and forces things to go out of sync (by Newton's first law). Here, that greater force is wind and in the case of ths stars it could be any cosmogonical entity or factor now known/unknown to man. Since we do not yet know all such entities in our galaxy and beyond, can we convincingly assume that it cannot happen? In science, I believe "it cannot happen" is a self-defeating statement that has been uttered throughout the ages and yet proven erroneous after a while.

In Daniel's case, the reference to stars was entirely symbolic, and in John's case I believe it was literal. In Daniel, the goat was Alexander the Great and the exalted horn was Antiochus Epiphanes. I was going to start explaining with historical books, etymology of the Hebrew words etc. when I just discovered that the Amplified Bible has simplified the understanding of the passage.

So unlike what you think, toneyb, Daniel's story was figurative and was not meant to teach "abnormal cell growth in the horns of ungulates, and the celestial physics of astronomy".

Yeah yeah yeah, conjectures conjectures and conjectures, this is the reason why I rarely post these days. Oya tell me that God pulled your ear or is it your heart and whispered these things to you. Abegi!!!! JO!
Those dudes who wrote the bible did not know anything about what the next two hundred years will look like. Mscheeeeeewwwwwwww!
*gets out of thread*

@ chrisbenogor can u watch videos online?

@Chrisbenogor:

mavenbox:

In truth, one thing I say often is that human beings are the ones limited by languages and forms of expression. God is not limited. So when God communicates with man, he speaks with him in a way that man can understand. God does not speak Urdu, Hausa or Spanish, he speaks to the heart and the heart translates into understanding. Besides, the knowledge of mankind is progressive, and if it is all revealed to him at once, he may not be able to handle it. e.g. some ritual practices declared in Leviticus may have seemed irksome at the time, but maybe if they knew of micro-organisms and epidemiology they would observe the routines with more knowledge.

Let me just explain something to you. . .You seem to be a very nice person so I will just state my case. . . .You don't have to reply.  You talked about god talking into the hearts of people right? The tittle of the thread is Questions To All The YEC In The House. Is the same god that is talking to the hearts of the YEC about the age and making them to sincerely believe that the earth and the universe are 6000 years old based on what is written in the bible the same god also talking into the hearts of the Old earth creationist who believe that the earth is millions or even billion of years old based on what they believe is also written inside the bible? Why would such a god be sending very different messages to different people and making them to understand or interperet things differently?. . . .Why the lack of agreement?

Mazaje, i think this from Mavenbox summarizes what i was trying to say:

As such, when a prophet sees a manifestation of something that is hitherto unknown to him, he will write it or say it in the best known way to him. It does not mean what he saw was wrong, it only means the human expression at that time was too weak to convey the message.

For heaven's sake, if an ancient writer saw a UFO, he would describe it as a spinning ball of fire.

How in hell does that make him a liar or ignorant? He only describes what he sees according to the language of the day. period.

mazaje:

I read through your arguments with wirinet and toneyb and I do not exactly know what you are trying to say. Modern astronomical and cosmological writings will become trash if the universe is later found to be an optical illusion.

The point is this; even if its an optical illusion, then all the current writings will serve to -

  1. Show what kind of illusory effect it had on observers

  2. Show what the illusion looked like to onlookers at the time

  3. Record the daily perceptions of those living within the illusion and importantly -

  4. State in the language of the time what that illusion appeared to be -

All of which have definite historical and cultural value and none of which will mean that the current writings are lies, even if they disclosed a limited understanding.

Deep Sight:

Mazaje, i think this from Mavenbox summarizes what i was trying to say:

For heaven's sake, if an ancient writer saw a UFO, he would describe it as a spinning ball of fire.

How in hell does that make him a liar or ignorant? He only describes what he sees according to the language of the day. period.

The fact that an ancient writer does not know what a UFO is says that he is ignorant and saying that a UFO is a ball of fire when it is not a ball of fire says that he is not telling the truth. You are a lawyer and I know you know how to agrue kinds of things and logic better than me. . . .But we are not agruing as if we are in a court room. . . let the evidence speak for them selves. . . . hope you get what I am trying to say. . .

The point is this; even if its an optical illusion, then all the current writings will serve to -

  1. Show what kind of illusory effect it had on observers

  2. Show what the illusion looked like to onlookers at the time

  3. Record the daily perceptions of those living within the illusion and importantly -

  4. State in the language of the time what that illusion appeared to be -

All of which have definite historical and cultural value and none of which will mean that the current writings are lies, even if they disclosed a limited understanding.

Why are you saying this? Evil spirits were once thought to be responsible for diseases? Lightening was once thought to be the wrath of god, the rainbow was once thought to be the necklace of a goddess and some of these thoughts were written down and once believed. How are they not lies?

kolaxy:

Thanks Olaadegbu.

You are welcome, anytime.  Good job on your post on the calculation on the age of the earth.  I will like to support that with a few points to ponder.

Believing in a younger age of the earth (about 6,000 years) is a corollary of trusting the Bible.  First, we start with the first five days of creation, then Adam was made on the sixth day, then adding ages given in the genealogies from Adam to Abraham we get about 2,000 years.  Both secular historians and Christians place Abraham at about 2,000 BC, so "the beginning" would be about 6,000 years ago.  So the earth is about 6,000 years old, which is old, but much younger than the billions of years that are commonly touted here.

Here is the summary of the total Time

[list]
[li]First 5 days of creation 5 days =  5 days[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Adam on Day 6 to Abraham ~2000 years =  Still ~2000 years[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Abraham to Christ ~2000 years =  ~4000 years[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Christ until today ~2000 years =  ~6000 years[/li]
[/list]

Believing in an approximately 6,000-year-old earth sets a proper foundation for believing Jesus Christ because you are letting God speak through His Word, without taking ideas to the Bible.  In the same way, by trusting the Bible first, we realise that sin and death are intrusions into the world that go back to Genesis 3 which is the foundation for the gospel.  Jesus came to save us from sin and death.

If you give up this foundation of starting with the Bible and you insert evolutionary/millions-of-years ideas for the past history of the world over the Bible’s teachings in Genesis, it is inconsistent to believe the rest of the Bible, particularly the gospel.  And this is what folks are doing on this thread.

OLAADEGBU:


Believing in an approximately 6,000-year-old earth sets a proper foundation for believing Jesus Christ because you are letting God speak through His Word, without taking ideas to the Bible.  In the same way, by trusting the Bible first, we realise that sin and death are intrusions into the world that go back to Genesis 3 which is the foundation for the gospel.  Jesus came to save us from sin and death.

Even though I am not a Christian I think you clearly do not know what you are talking about. Where in the bible does it say that believing that the universe or the earth is 6000 years old sets a proper foundation for beliving in Jesus? Are you saying that those that do not subscribe to your opinions with regards to the 6000 years ridiculous hypothesis lack a proper foundation for believing in Jesus?

I really think that you need to go and take over from Kent Hovind and run his organization now that he is in prison. . . .

mazaje:

The fact that an ancient writer does not know what a UFO is says that he is ignorant and saying that a UFO is a ball of fire when it is not a ball of fire says that he is not telling the truth.

I am sure you are conversant with the saying that perception is cognitive reality.

Thus when you see a UFO today, it is your reality that it is an unidentified flying object.

You are right in that perception.

If a child sees it, it may appear to him simply as an aeroplane.

The child is also right in that perception.

If the prophet Elijah saw one, it is very real for him, and his reality, that it is a spinning ball of fire.

Have you stopped to ponder the fact that the prophet is actually perfectly right in his perception and description - because -

  1. It is spinning

  2. It is round, and thus ball-shaped and

  3. It emmits fire/ exhaust/ light etc.

Thus you have absolutely no way of saying that it was not a spinning ball of fire, because that is effectively and actually what it was!

I am certain that with this, you will be more circumspect in hastily presuming that the ancient writer is lying ignorantly.

In this recall the analogy of 10 blind men groping an elephat and each describing it differently. We are only blind men, you see, and our descriptions will all be imperfect, but partly true.

This can get me kicked out of school cause I ain't done exams yet, but why the hell not. . . I had to do some editing to make it fit youtube specs but I made sure all relevant parts are still in there. For some reason when I change the format it turns it sideways so if u are using a laptop just turn it sideways    I'll remove it in about an hour though . .

Hebrew Professor on Old Testament
[flash=400,400]http://www.yutube.com/v/D6-wOndG2tY&hl=en_US&fs=1&[/flash]

@Krayola

Do you really believe that people will want to listen to what a Hebrew professor of old testament has to say with regards to the OT or what their own sunday school teachers, pastors, priest, GO etc have to tell them about the OT?

Krayola!!!!!!! Brilliant! Nice one, thanks, i watched the video, perhaps it will do Mazaje some Good.

You for show us ya face na. . . i no know why i no been imagine b4 say na baritone you go get.

Nice one bro.

mazaje:

@Krayola

Do you really believe that people will want to listen to what a Hebrew professor of old testament has to say with regards to the OT or what their own sunday school teachers, pastors, priest, GO etc have to tell them about the OT?

I have videos of a Christian Professor saying the same stuff. . . And of a Priest who is also a prof saying the same stuff.   I'll keep trying till I get thru to somebody. . .Anybody. But I know what u mean. . . I have a lot of stuff, 14GB worth of stuff. If I can get thru to just one person it'll have been worth the effort.

Deep Sight:

Krayola!!!!!!! Brilliant! Nice one, thanks, i watched the video, perhaps it will do Mazaje some Good.

Am at work now and I can't watch the video will have to wait till I get home to watch it. . .

Krayola:

I have videos of a Christian Professor saying the same stuff. . . And of a Priest who is also a prof saying the same stuff.   I'll keep trying till I get thru to somebody. . .Anybody. But I know what u mean. . . I have a lot of stuff, 14GB worth of stuff. If I can get thru to just one person it'll have been worth the effort.

I will watch the video when I get home. . . .

Deep Sight:

Krayola!!!!!!! Brilliant! Nice one, thanks, i watched the video, perhaps it will do Mazaje some Good.

You for show us ya face na. . . i no know why i no been imagine b4 say na baritone you go get.

Nice one bro.

haha. Thanks.

My face dey all over Nairaland. Video of me dey somewhere for Nairaland sef

As to the matter about the star-struck earth (permit the pun), I believe DeepSight has done justice to my views. Thanks, sir.

@Mazaje: Thanks for sharing your view!   Okay here is what I think.

God never introduced confusion or intended to make sects spring up. Let me use an analogy to express myself, as I do often. Consider a radio station transmitting signals over a metropolis. Some receivers will obtain a clearer signal than some others, based on such factors as the length and material of the antennae, the ambient atmospheric conditions, the distance between the receiver unit and the transmitter base-station or repeater, the coefficient of attenuation (loss of signals) with respect to the mode of transmission (e.g. AM / FM), etc. But does that mean that the radio station is faltering or equivocating in conversation? No it doesn't. YEC and OEC may have differing views but where it really matters, we know the truth.

And that is a reason why God continually warns us all in the Bible to test all things, approve of that which is good and hold fast to it, tenaciously.

Php 1:10  So that you may surely learn to sense what is vital, and approve and prize what is excellent and of real value [recognizing the highest and the best, and distinguishing the moral differences], and that you may be untainted and pure and unerring and blameless [so that with hearts sincere and certain and unsullied, you may approach] the day of Christ [not stumbling nor causing others to stumble].

1Co 14:10  There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.

Pro 23:23  Buy the truth and sell it not; not only that, but also get discernment and judgment, instruction and understanding.

1Th 5:21  But test and prove all things [until you can recognize] what is good; [to that] hold fast.

1Jn 4:1  BELOVED, DO not put faith in every spirit, but prove (test) the spirits to discover whether they proceed from God; for many false prophets have gone forth into the world.
1Jn 4:2  By this you may know (perceive and recognize) the Spirit of God: every spirit which acknowledges and confesses [the fact] that Jesus Christ (the Messiah) [actually] has become man and has come in the flesh is of God [has God for its source];
1Jn 4:3  And every spirit which does not acknowledge and confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh [but would annul, destroy, sever, disunite Him] is not of God [does not proceed from Him]. This [nonconfession] is the [spirit] of the antichrist, [of] which you heard that it was coming, and now it is already in the world.

The above scripture is the foundation of faith in God, since our path to Him is through Christ Jesus. The foundation IS NOT the age of the earth or any other such thing. After all, that's why science and archaeology exist.

And that is one thing I have learnt in my walk with God: the things we NEED that pertain to life and godliness have been supplied by His divine Power, and are without any conflict, or confusing shadow. Things such as KNOWING that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. Any teaching against that is not of our faith.

2Pe 1:3  For His divine power has bestowed upon us all things that [are requisite and suited] to life and godliness, through the [full, personal] knowledge of Him Who called us by and to His own glory and excellence (virtue).

This entire YEC, OEC discussion is simply an exercise for man in the understanding of the earth we live in; as much as Adam in the garden of Eden spent hours daily (I presume) studying the animals and plants. Its not like God could not have told him EVERYTHING he had to know about Eden's flora and fauna, but like a good father, He let Adam discover life and enjoy it.

2Ti 2:15  Study and be eager and do your utmost to present yourself to God approved (tested by trial), a workman who has no cause to be ashamed, correctly analyzing and accurately dividing [rightly handling and skillfully teaching] the Word of Truth.

Besides, it is one fulfillment of the prophecy:

Dan 12:4  But you, O Daniel, shut up the words and seal the Book until the time of the end. [Then] many shall run to and fro and search anxiously [through the Book], and knowledge [of God's purposes as revealed by His prophets] shall be increased and become great. [Amos 8:12.]

@Krayola: I am checking out the video ASAP. I think it should be good stuff!!

Deep Sight:

I am sure you are conversant with the saying that perception is cognitive reality.

Thus when you see a UFO today, it is your reality that it is an unidentified flying object.

You are right in that perception.

If a child sees it, it may appear to him simply as an aeroplane.

The child is also right in that perception.

If the prophet Elijah saw one, it is very real for him, and his reality, that it is a spinning ball of fire.

Have you stopped to ponder the fact that the prophet is actually perfectly right in his perception and description - because -

  1. It is spinning

  2. It is round, and thus ball-shaped and

  3. It emmits fire/ exhaust/ light etc.

Thus you have absolutely no way of saying that it was not a spinning ball of fire, because that is effectively and actually what it was!

I am certain that with this, you will be more circumspect in hastily presuming that the ancient writer is lying ignorantly.

In this recall the analogy of 10 blind men groping an elephat and each describing it differently. We are only blind men, you see, and our descriptions will all be imperfect, but partly true.

The writers of the bible say that stars will fall into the earth when the earth will come to an end, They also said as toneyb ponited out that stars fought alone side them in battles, I am letting their writings speak for themselves. . . . .No need adding conjectures and maybe's to rationalize something that I know is not true. . . Elijah saw a flying UFO and assumes it is a flying ball of fire when it is not on what basis should people believe that he truly knows what he is talking about?

Some people once thought that the rainbow was the neckless that their goddess wears around here neck which she displays when ever she is happy? On what basis should people believe this story and assume the writer that wrote such thoughts down knows what he or she is talking about?

The Bible has all the answers to man's questions

God has all the answers because He was an eyewitness to His creation and the revealer of it in His Holy Word, The Bible.  The answers as to who created, what was created, how it was created, when it was created and how long it took for Him to create are clearly communicated in the language we can understand.  These are the questions and answers:

1.  Who created?------------God
2.  What was created?  ----All things
3.  How was it created?--- By His Power
4.  When was it created?—In the beginning
5.  How long did it take to
     Create?------------------- 6 days

Some top and highly qualified Hebrew scholars, who are called lexigraphers wrote in the most widely recognised Hebrew lexicons and dictionaries, published in the 20th century says that the creation days written in the book of Genesis are literal days.

Below is a partial list of Hebrew scholars and scientists who believe in the Bible's account of literal creation as is recorded in the book of Genesis and through their professional fields have come to the scientific conclusion that confirms the Bible's account:

Danny Faulkner         Ph.D.  Astronomy
John Byl                     Ph.D.  Astronomy
Tom Greene               Ph.D.  Astronomy
James Dire                 Ph.D.  Astrophysics
Dave Harrison            Ph.D. Astrophysics
Steven Boyd               Ph.D. Hebraic and Cognitive Studies
Floyd Nolen Jones     Th.D., Ph.D.  Authour of Chronology of the Old Testament
Herb Hirt                    Ph.D.  Biblical Exposition
Robert Cole                Ph.D.  Semitic languages
Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon
Georgia Purdon          Ph.D. Molecular Genetics
Duane Gish                Ph.D. Biochemistry
David Menton            Ph.D. Cell Biology
Donald Chittick          Ph.D.  Physical Chemistry
Tom Greene              Ph.D.  Astronomy
Jason Lisle                Ph.D.  Astrophysics
Russell Humphreys   Ph.D  Physics
Don DeYoung            Ph.D.  Physics
Terry Mortenson       Ph.D. History of Geology
John baumgardner   Ph.D. Geophysics
Bob Compton            Ph.D. Physiology, DVM
Andy McIntosh         Ph.D.  Combustion Theory
John Johnson           Ph.D. Mathematics
Tommy Mitchel          M.D.
Andrew Snelling       Ph.D. Geology
Emil Silvestre           Ph.D. Geology
Esther Su                 Ph.D. Biochemistry
David DeWitt           Ph.D. Neuroscience

And above all is the One who knows it all with absolute certainty and has recorded it with His own caligraphy:

"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."  Exodus 20:11

“For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers:  all things were created by Him, and for him.”  Colossians 1:16

Which is the strong foundation that makes our faith certain as it is based on the solid rock of evidence.

@ mavenbox

Did you see where OLAADEGBU stated that believing that the universe or the earth is 6000 years old sets a proper foundation for beliving in Jesus, He has very strong convictions and truly believes that. If you ask him he will tell you that the holy spirit of god told him that through the bible so again why the disagreement?. . . .To the YEC its not just about discussing the age of the earth as you are trying to say, To the YEC believing that the earth is 6000 years old is also the foundation on which his christian belief lies, it is also part of the basis for his belief in Jesus as properly displayed here by OLAADEGBU. . . .Back in the days I used to visit the YEC websites and that is how most of them feel. . . . . YECism is much more than a discussion about the age of the earth to them. . . .

@Olaadegbu: Many days I wish I could have more than 24 hours, there's always so much to do and so little time (besides wasting a good part of it on this new addiction: Nairaland). So why should God in his omnipotence be limited by this same 24 hour day?

The way I understand those Genesis days is this:

Each "day" started when God decided to continue the work.

Each day ended immediately God saw that it was good. Then Night came.

On the 7th "day", it started when God decided to take a break as a symbol to mankind that rest is important.

When he was done resting, the seventh day ended because its purpose was done.

God was not limited to 86400 seconds, which by the S.I. units is the duration of 794243384928000 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom  

Hey, man, give the Creator some credit!

This is VERY different from man's experience, where the day ends without your control, and whatever you didn't get done will be shifted to the next day.

There are clear indications of nature-control methods like this in places where Jesus, sent of God, interacted with nature. He stepped out onto water, and the water had to hold him up, it didn't consult the laws of surface tension first of all. He spoke to the winds and the waves. He told his disciple to get a coin from a fish's mouth and the fish HAD to swallow the coin (maybe from a fisherman's leaking pocket?) and position itself to be caught.

Nature aligns itself with God's plan, God does not squeeze into nature's box.

OLAADEGBU:

The Bible has all the answers to man's questions

God has all the answers because He was and eyewitness to His creation and the revealer of it in His Holy Word, The Bible. The answers as to who created, what was created, how it was created, when it was created and how long it took for Him to create are clearly communicated in the language we can understand. These are the questions and answers:

1. Who created?------------God
2. What was created? ----All things
3. How was it created?--- By His Power
4. When was it created?—In the beginning
5. How long did it take to
Create?------------------- 6 days

Some top and highly qualified Hebrew scholars, who are called lexigraphers wrote in the most widely recognised Hebrew lexicons and dictionaries, published in the 20th century says that the creation days written in the book of Genesis are literal days.

Below is a partial list of Hebrew scholars and scientists who believe in the Bible's account of literal creation as is recorded in the book of Genesis and through their professional fields have come to the scientific conclusion that confirms the Bible's account:

Danny Faulkner Ph.D. Astronomy
John Byl Ph.D. Astronomy
Tom Greene Ph.D. Astronomy
James Dire Ph.D. Astrophysics
Dave Harrison Ph.D. Astrophysics
Steven Boyd Ph.D. Hebraic and Cognitive Studies
Floyd Nolen Jones Th.D., Ph.D. Authour of Chronology of the Old Testament
Herb Hirt Ph.D. Biblical Exposition
Robert Cole Ph.D. Semitic languages
Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon
Georgia Purdon Ph.D. Molecular Genetics
Duane Gish Ph.D. Biochemistry
David Menton Ph.D. Cell Biology
Donald Chittick Ph.D. Physical Chemistry
Tom Greene Ph.D. Astronomy
Jason Lisle Ph.D. Astrophysics
Russell Humphreys Ph.D Physics
Don DeYoung Ph.D. Physics
Terry Mortenson Ph.D. History of Geology
John baumgardner Ph.D. Geophysics
Bob Compton Ph.D. Physiology, DVM
Andy McIntosh Ph.D. Combustion Theory
John Johnson Ph.D. Mathematics
Tommy Mitchel M.D.
Andrew Snelling Ph.D. Geology
Emil Silvestre Ph.D. Geology
Esther Su Ph.D. Biochemistry
David DeWitt Ph.D. Neuroscience

And above all is the One who knows it all with absolute certainty and has recorded it with His own caligraphy:

"For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." Exodus 20:11

“For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers: all things were created by Him, and for him.” Colossians 1:16

Which is the strong foundation that makes our faith certain as it is based on the solid rock of evidence.

Thanks for this piece Sir.May God continually bless you richly in your endeavours. May He continue to enrich you with wisdom. You see, there's little you can do.You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Just try as much as possible not to waste too much of your precious time. Thank you

@ Olaagbedu. . .giving us a list of names doesn't really do much. Can u please provide us with the arguments they make so we can make informed decisions?

@Olaadegbu: I still await your submission on my perspectives. Or maybe Kolaxy's, but he didn't even answer the first time I asked. Cheers.

@Mavenbox, Krayola et al,

Let us use the Bible to consider the "Days" of Genesis 1. What does the Bible tell us about the meaning of "day" in Genesis 1? A word can have more than one meaning, depending on the context. For instance, the English word "day" can have perhaps 14 different meanings.

In Genesis 1, the first occurrence of "day" means "time" in a general sense. The second "day," where a number is used, refers to an ordinary day, and the third refers to the daylight portion of the 24-hour period. The point is that words can have more than one meaning, depending on the context.

To understand the meaning of "day" in Genesis 1, we need to determine how the Hebrew word for "day", yom, is used in the context of Scripture. Consider the following:

[list]
[li]A typical concordance will illustrate that yom can have a range of meanings: a period of light as contrasted to night, a 24-hour period, time, a specific point of time, or a year.[/li]
[/list]

[list]
[li]A classic, well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon (a dictionary) has seven headings and many subheadings for the meaning of yom—but it defines the creation days of Genesis 1 as ordinary days under the heading "day as defined by evening and morning."[/li]
[/list]

[list]
[li]A number and the phrase "evening and morning" are used with each of the six days of creation (Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31).[/li]
[/list]

[list]
[li]Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with a number 359 times, and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception?[/li]
[/list]

[list]
[li]Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with the word "evening" or "morning" 23 times. "Evening" and "morning" appear in association, but without yom, 38 times. All 61 times the text refers to an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception?[/li]
[/list]

[list]
[li]In Genesis 1:5, yom occurs in context with the word "night." Outside of Genesis 1, "night" is used with yom 53 times, and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception? Even the usage of the word "light" with yom in this passage determines the meaning as ordinary day.[/li]
[/list]

[list]
[li]The plural of yom, which does not appear in Genesis 1, can be used to communicate a longer time period, such as "in those days." Adding a number here would be nonsensical. Clearly, in Exodus 20:11, where a number is used with "days," it unambiguously refers to six earth-rotation days.[/li]
[/list]

[list]
[li]There are words in biblical Hebrew (such as olam or qedem) that are very suitable for communicating long periods of time, or indefinite time, but none of these words are used in Genesis 1. Alternatively, the days or years could have been compared with grains of sand if long periods were meant.[/li]
[/list]

The 19th century liberal Professor Marcus Dods, New College, Edinburgh, said:

"If, for example, the word "day" in these chapters does not mean a period of twenty-four hours, the interpretation of Scripture is hopeless."

If we are prepared to let the words of the language speak to us in accord with the context and normal definitions, without being influenced by outside ideas, then the word for "day" found in Genesis 1, which is qualified by a number, the phrase "evening and morning" and for Day 1 the words "light and darkness" obviously means an ordinary day (about 24 hours).

This is the position of John Calvin on the age of the earth:

"Albeit the duration of the world, now declining to its ultimate end, has not yet attained six thousand years. , God’s work was completed not in a moment but in six days."

Luther also had similar convictions and both were the backbone of the Protestant Reformation that called the church back to Scripture; Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). Both of these men were adamant that Genesis 1 taught six ordinary days of creation, only thousands of years ago.

And finally, The Almighty God when He commanded Moses to say to the children of Israel in Exodus 31:12:

"Six days may work be done, but on the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Therefore the sons of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant. It is a sign between me and the sons of Israel forever. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested, and was refreshed" (Exodus 31:15–17).

Because God is infinite in power and wisdom, there’s no doubt He could have created the universe and its contents in no time at all, or six seconds, or six minutes, or six hours, after all, "with God nothing shall be impossible" (Luke 1:37).

However, the question to ask is, "Why did God take so long? Why as long as six days?" The answer is also given in Exodus 20:11, and that answer is the basis of the Fourth Commandment:

"For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."

The seven-day week has no basis outside of Scripture.  In this Old Testament passage, God commands His people, Israel, to work for six days and rest for one, thus giving us a reason why He deliberately took as long as six days to create everything.  He set the example for man.  Our week is patterned after this principle.  Now if He created everything in six thousand (or six million) years, followed by a rest of one thousand or one million years, then we would have a very interesting week indeed.

These are some of the reasons why Christians should build their thinking on the Bible instead on the assumptions of fallible sinners's ideologies.

^^^^ You did not address my perspectives about God and Nature, who takes precedence? Does the time wait for God, or does God hurry to achieve his objectives within a set time? I rest my case. Over to whoever wants to continue the discussion. (after all, I am neither YEC nor OEC).

mavenbox:

^^^^ You did not address my perspectives about God and Nature, who takes precedence? Does the time wait for God, or does God hurry to achieve his objectives within a set time? I rest my case. Over to whoever wants to continue the discussion. (after all, I am neither YEC nor OEC).

Some of the early church fathers believed that God created everything in only one day or in an instant. To counter this teaching, Martin Luther wrote:

"When Moses writes that God created Heaven and earth and whatever is in them in six days, then let this period continue to have been six days, and do not venture to devise any comment according to which six days were one day. But, if you cannot understand how this could have been done in six days, then grant the Holy Spirit the honour of being more learned than you are. For you are to deal with Scripture in such a way that you bear in mind that God Himself says what is written. But since God is speaking, it is not fitting for you to wantonly turn His Word in the direction you wish it to go."