6days
New member
Your idea of evidence is quotes from theistic evolutionists who deny and twist Scripture.
If Evolution
- Thread starter CherubRam
- Start date
The second creation story says “the day;” why is the first creation story literal history and the second isn’t?
No, have you not read Genesis 6?
Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever * they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward *, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Or it is figurative.
Since the second creation story says “the day,” it is not possible that all of the first two chapters of Genesis are literal.
Stripe, how long has it been since you read the second creation story which begins in Genesis 2.4b?
Lon
Well-known member
I have a solid memory. I also remember a history book that said an Indian (native) chief converted to Christianity when he and his warriors couldn't shoot General George Washington with arrows off his horse. I haven't seen that textbook since either.
How would I even begin? I do trust my memory.
Public elementary, 1970's, WA state. I'd think you better have means than I to find it. It does exist.
Agree BUT what you question more, to me, looks like issue.
I think 6-days makes an appropriate point that Moses believed and wrote that it was 6 days.
Nick, I think, was the first to quote Exodus over the matter on TOL, but it begins a solid case for taking the scripture seriously.
I suppose if you are trying to predict the next eruption of Mt. Ranier, but that's about data interpretation, not the concepts. Neither here nor there really, because you are actually making my point rather than debating it:
You inadvertently agree with me that science doesn't compare to knowing God. That said, God is completely able to teach us. Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were apt students, better than the kings however, when Paul compared his extensive learning to that of knowing Christ, he called it 'rubbish' in comparison. My sig is Paul's prayer that we discover the 'height, depth, and breadth of God's love for us, which is beyond those measures. No, I'm not 'very very wrong' when you are agreeing upon that premise. Rather, I've said that when God says something, we need to pay attention much more than what a fallible man would say. The Holy Spirit leads into ALL truth (that we'd apprehend). John 16:13
It is wrong.
On the contrary, your denial of the plain language of the second creation story is a mangling of scripture.
Yeah, astronomers have difficulty with that, I'm sure you discussed that with some of them.
Your god did nothing
It is figurative. It is not literal history. Pretending it is literal history is what is wrong.
CherubRam
New member
The creation days are epochs of time.
Lon
Well-known member
We can do so intellectually. We 'extrapolate' a good many science distances and years. How long does it 'actually' take for light to get to us? Was Einstein correct that light speed doesn't change? Or was Newton correct that gravity affects it?
But what it 'cannot' do is tell us if our expectation of the way gravity works here on earth, is the same in space in effecting orbits (I've seen professors use examples, well, in Australia, such would spin the opposite way as their gravity constrained models).
I do believe scientists get 'tunnel' vision and don't always seem to see the bigger picture. It is why there are few Einsteins, even among fairly brilliant men.
Does it take light from an exploding star billions of years to reach us? I've seen some speculation but I'm not convinced. An evolutionist believes that life all evolved from the same pool and branched out toward more complex organisms and began to morph differently, some to plants, others to animals and other microorganisms. God could have done it any way He wanted. The Bible says He fashioned a man from the ground and breathed life into him as well as created him in His image. The Genesis account clearly demarks a morning/evening day (yom). There are better terms for longer periods of time which Moses could have used.
How long does it take for light from an exploding star to reach the earth? I don't know, God is not a physical being. If He were, He'd be constrained by, instead of above His creation. I can sail to Hawaii by conventional means, or I can speed up that process and fly. God is not constrained by our expectations nor is He limited by them. I've heard 'God is lying if that is so.' Not when He has given Genesis 1 and 2 clearly, He has not.
6days
New member
Jesus and Paul and followers of Christ since the beginning argued against false beliefs in an old earth. It would seem the Jews long before Christ would also have rejected an old earth. Adam and Moses didn't believe in an old earth. Even Augustine argued against old earthers. So... it would seem this "modern interpretation" of a 6000 year old creation...is about 6000 years old.Barbarian said:
Greg Jennings
New member
Then how about this, why are dinosaurs not found alongside wolves, cows, humans, horses, rhinos, elephants, dogs, cats, lions, tigers, leopards, hippos, apes, monkeys, lemurs, weasels, wolverines, deer, moose, antelope, musk ox, bison, coyotes, bats, platypi or echidnas, kangaroos, wallabies, seals, sea lions, bears, whales/dolphins, and so on?
Why does the fossil record not show any of these dead with dinosaurs?
Lon
Well-known member
",Asserted the man with no substantiation or qualifier. It was all stuff and fluff in lieu of meaningful or substantial conversation..."
I'm not. You can think I'm 'fearful' as you like too :noway:
I'm not sure if you understand what baiting is or if you realize that it is what you do. I can't tell if it is purposeful, thus cheeky, or just inept.
Lon
Well-known member
6days
New member
CherubRam said:
*The context of the word 'day' in Genesis does not allow for anything other than what we refer to as a 24 hour day
* Epochs of time destroys the purpose of the cross. If death existed before sin, then why did Jesus go to the cross?
* If epochs of time is correct, then Jesus was wrong connecting humanity with the foundations of the world...and The beginning of creation.
* if epochs of time is correct, then the majority of early church fathers and Christians did not understand the Bible correctly.
God's word tells us that in 6 days God created the heavens and the Earth and everything in them.
Greg Jennings
New member
It did. From your link:
"The fossil of the mammal that ate the dinosaur is so well preserved that scientists were able to examine the teeth of the Psittacosaurus found in the mammal's belly. The fact that there were teeth, and that they showed wear, indicated that the dinosaur was not eaten as an embryo in the egg. Measurements suggest the dinosaur was about one-third the size of the R. robustus that ate it."