If you read my linked-to post, you will discover that I address these statements as Earth-based observations for an Earth-based race. This certainly makes sense as the Bible was written for people in this dispensation of time.
What is a "dispensation of time" in the context of what you are saying?
By changing the point of reference to the observation of people on Earth, you open up the Bible for all sorts of interpretations.
From the viewpoint of the Hebrews that produced Genesis, the animals appear to have always been in the form (kinds) that they are now. So from the observer's point of view God created them all as they are now, which may not have been how God actually did it or how long God actually took to do it.
"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."
(Genesis 1:3)
The phrase "Let there be" is the Strong's 1961 (haw-yaw') and means "be or become, come to pass". It does not convey a creation, at least, not necessarily.
The word used for the creation of the Sun, Moon and stars is `asah which means to make or create. That means the stars were created on
Day 4. Are you saying that it actually means the observance of the creation of the stars occurred on Day 4 even though they were made billions of years before that? Who was there to observe this creation event so that it could be noted that this occurred on Day 4, plants? Did God time all the creation of the stars such that they would appear on the same day? The Sun could have been created on the same day, but Proxima Centauri was created 4.2 years before that. Sirius created 8.6 years before Day 4. The star that became SN1987A was created 168,000 years before that? Is this how you view the creation scenario?
Again, I believe the best understanding and most logical interpretation of these verses conveys Earth-based observations, especially considering that Earth existed before this re-creation event. I think it's safe to assume that light and stars did also.
The Earth existing prior to Day 1 does not require the stars to exist at that time. A literal reading of the Bible shows the stars being created on Day 4.
In my understanding of these verses, this question is irrelevant because, again, the Biblical account is written for primitive, nontechnical Earth-based observers.
People that might not need to know the details of inflation theory or evolution in order to understand that God is mighty and that He is a personal God.
I personally have no problem with an old universe, perhaps even very old.
Ok...then we have no disagreement here unless you say Genesis 1 and 2 are literal history.
Nevertheless, I do believe CTD's statements deserve consideration.
Maybe, but I doubt it. Since CTD didn't explain how his quotes relate to the 6000 year old Earth concept, I won't try to reply in detail to what he is posting here. I don't want to run afoul of the moderators like Linda almost did upthread.
Until he actually relates it to my thread topic in a clear fashion, I will treat it as an off-topic diversion.
