In Mormonism the earth IS 10,000 years old...

[_DrW]

C'mon Drifting - why don't you cut BCSpace a break?

We all know that, within the Mormon lexicon of stock responses to critic's questions, the following generic and general purpose responses are absolutely indispensable:

1. The LDS Church has no official doctrine on that issue (and if it had such doctrine in the past, it has long since gotten rid of it.)

2. The LDS Church does not provide a definitive answer or take any position on this issue because one's eternal salvation is not dependent on the answer. (LDS doctrine is internally inconsistent and providing a definite answer to such questions, or taking definite positions on such issues, would highlight and underscore these internal inconsistencies.)

3. We are instructed not to concern ourselves with these questions in this life. If we are righteous, all will be revealed when we meet the Lord. (The LDS Church leadership has no clue, or cannot agree on a reasonable answer, or no reasonable answer exists. This is the Church kicking the can down the road.)

One must also realize that Mormons have been conditioned to accept such responses with a smile and continue on in perfectly happy and blissful state. And if it is good enough for the LDS faithful, it is sure as he!! good enough for a critic.

[_Themis]

Only in your fantasy world. How many times have you run away from threads after saying things like absence of evidence is not evidence of absence when people easily refute such incorrect statements?

Matches #3 It's a truism that can't be refuted.

It already has been many times as I had already demonstrated with your absence of evidence statement. You never have tried to back it up.

[_bcspace]

I don't think I'm the only one to notice that you avoided answering both the questions...

You're upset that one of your favorite chestnuts has been negated since I referenced official doctrine which you avoided addressing. Now you are trying to reframe the question in hopes that the doctrine will be ignored. You will have no such luck:

A third theory says that the word day refers to a period of an undetermined length of time, thus suggesting an era. The word is still used in that sense in such phrases as “in the day of the dinosaurs.” The Hebrew word for day used in the creation account can be translated as “day” in the literal sense, but it can also be used in the sense of an indeterminate length of time (see Genesis 40:4 , where day is translated as “a season”; Judges 11:4 , where a form of day is translated as “in the process of time”; see also Holladay, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, pp. 130–31). Abraham says that the Gods called the creation periods days (see Abraham 4:5, 8 ).

If this last meaning was the sense in which Moses used the word day, then the apparent conflict between the scriptures and much of the evidence seen by science as supporting a very old age for the earth is easily resolved. Each era or day of creation could have lasted for millions or even hundreds of millions of our years, and uniformitarianism could be accepted without any problem. (For an excellent discussion of this approach see Henry Eyring, “The Gospel and the Age of the Earth,” [ Improvement Era, July 1965, pp. 608–9, 626, 628]. Also, most college textbooks in the natural sciences discuss the traditional dating of the earth.)

While it is interesting to note these various theories, officially the Church has not taken a stand on the age of the earth. For reasons best known to Himself, the Lord has not yet seen fit to formally reveal the details of the Creation. Therefore, while Latter-day Saints are commanded to learn truth from many different fields of study (see D&C 88:77–79 ), an attempt to establish any theory as the official position of the Church is not justifiable.

Old Testament Student manual - Genesis 1-2 The Creation

[_Themis]

1. The LDS Church has no official doctrine on that issue (and if it had such doctrine in the past, it has long since gotten rid of it.)

This issues tend to be one where the church has not been very consistent, but most have viewed it as either six 24 hours periods or 6000 years.

[_Drifting]

Thank you bcspace.

How do you rationalise the content of the Book of Abraham that explicitly states that one God day = 1,000 earth days?

[_bcspace]

How do you rationalise the content of the Book of Abraham that explicitly states that one God day = 1,000 earth days?

How do you know that "day" in Genesis is from the Lord's frame of reference with Kolob mentioned in the Book of Abraham?

[_Drifting]

How do you rationalise the content of the Book of Abraham that explicitly states that one God day = 1,000 earth days?

How do you know that "day" in Genesis is from the Lord's frame of reference with Kolob mentioned in the Book of Abraham?

I don't, I was assuming God would be consistent when talking with His Prophets....

You will answer my question though, right?

[_DrW]

Started on a post to ask what is so special about the Genesis creation myth that some Christians spend a significant part of their lives trying to rationalize it with modern science, while paying no attention to the hundreds of other creation myths that humankind has come up with since they learned to tell stories.

Since the post I came up with was a derail, I started a new thread.

Please carry on.

[_DrW]

How do you rationalise the content of the Book of Abraham that explicitly states that one God day = 1,000 earth days?

How do you know that "day" in Genesis is from the Lord's frame of reference with Kolob mentioned in the Book of Abraham?

What??

Are you joking?

Joseph Smith claimed that the Book of Abraham was written by the hand of Abraham upon papyrus.

Abraham is the main character in Genesis, a book in the Old Testament, which was also written in large part so that humankind would know about Abraham (presumably just in case his own papyri were somehow lost).

Why would an omniscient and loving God have one measure for time in the history of Abraham in the Old Testament and another in the papyri written by Abraham's own hand?

BCSpace, sooner or later the silliness of all of this Mormon pseudo-doctrine and made up religion is going to dawn on you, and when it does, I'll be here for you.

Really.

[_bcspace]

How do you know that "day" in Genesis is from the Lord's frame of reference with Kolob mentioned in the Book of Abraham?

I don't

Then you've answered your own question in the same way the LDS Church does.

Abraham is the main character in Genesis

Abraham is at least several thousand years removed from the Fall.

Why would an omniscient and loving God have one measure for time in the history of Abraham in the Old Testament and another in the papyri written by Abraham's own hand?

Since "day" in Genesis can be multiple things, how do you know that day elsewhere in the Book of Abraham doesn't mean multiple things? Both Genesis and the Book of Abraham are translations......

BCSpace, sooner or later the silliness of all of this Mormon pseudo-doctrine and made up religion is going to dawn on you, and when it does, I'll be here for you.

I'm not going in the direction of intellectual dishonesty. But if you'd like, I'll bring you some water to cool your tongue when the time comes.