Real Science Friday: Baraminologist Dr. Roger Sanders on RSF

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian, in the past, I showed you with Scripture that you can't possibly be under Peter (even as a Catholic) but that Paul is your apostle "to the Gentiles." You refused to even consider the matter.

I looked at your "proof" and it was hooey. That's all that one can say about it.

If you want to do a Bible study on Ezekiel 31, zeroing in on verses 15 and 16 which can be tied in to the Genesis Flood, I will be glad to do so. But if your mind is made up, I will not bother.

Feel free to do it, but a straightforward reading won't do what you want it to.

What heppened to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

It wasn't a real tree; it was an allegory for man becoming aware of good and evil.

What did this Tree represent?

You will know, when you can answer this question:
Did the serpent lie to Eve when he said that eating from that tree would not result in death, but that she would become like God?

Where is the Tree of Life?

It's not really a tree. It's a symbol for the life that flows from a very different tree. Do you know what that is?

What does this Tree represent?

If you know that, you will have your other answers as well. What do you think it is?

Just curious, does water exist anywhere in the universe except earth? I'm honestly asking. I don't know for sure.

Yep. Almost everywhere there is matter around a star.

 

[Stripe]

You guys still think it's flat?

More recreative reading from Barbie. It's very disappointing that you will not even make an effort to understand what it is you are up against. :nono:

The creation week is such an allegory. Genesis is an allegory for creation.

This is the most idiotic thing you have come up with for a long time. An allegory has meaning because the reader understands something. You don't make an allegory to describe creation and use a creation story to make the allegory.

That's just plain dumb.

The word "raqua" meant something like a vessel beaten out of malleable material, like copper.

And you think the sky is like that and the crust of the Earth isn't.

You got answers to several questions you asked. But you're still dodging what I asked you.

No, you're just lying.

(Barbarian explains to Stipe that the "firmament" was where the sun and stars were located)
Genesis 1:6 And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters. [7] And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so. [8] And God called the firmament, Heaven; and the evening and morning were the second day.

Where was the water, Barbie? Hint: try reading the couple of verses before these ones. :thumb:

Yep. So your attempt to make this into a history, requires that the waters you suppose were up there were beyond the sun and the stars.

No, it doesn't. :idunno:

The one that told you there was water above the firmament. He lied to you about it being the crust of the Earth, too. Don't you ever read the Bible, Stipe?

Who are you talking about? :idunno:

A bit of a problem, that. No sun to have them. So, this is either an allegory, or you have to redefine "morning" and "evening."

Or we can just accept that with an alternate light source and a rotating Earth we can call what we see evening and morning. What would be wrong with that? :idunno:

You could call anything you want anything you want. But if you want to communicate in English, you have to use words they way they are understood.

I understand. I bet I can find any number of people who understand. Why are you so contrary? :idunno:

Once you start insisting on private definitions of words to save your bad theology, anything goes.

There's no private definition. What I think it perfectly accessible. Feel free to give actual reasons as to why what I think cannot be so. :thumb:

About the same as Jesus' purposes and His relationship with us, when He said a mustard seed is the smallest seed. Not technically accurate, but something His listeners could hear and understand His meaning.

So what do the details in Genesis 1:6-8 mean?

When Jesus told the parable of the mustard seed there was a distinct message for the listener to take away. A lesson on faith and the power of God. All it's details had meaning and explanations. What was the message of Genesis if it was not exactly what it meant? What do the details pertain to?

We have this passage:

Genesis 1:6-8
Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.​

So you say it does not err because it is an allegory in the same way Jesus did not err when He told the parable about the mustard seed.

Matthew 13:31-32
Another parable He put forth to them, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field, which indeed is the least of all the seeds; but when it is grown it is greater than the herbs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.”​

In that parable we have explanations about its elements and its details. The mustard seed is like the kingdom of heaven. We learn that the seemingly inconsequential can become substantial. What about the Genesis passage? How does the Genesis passage work like this parable? What does the firmament refer to? What does the water refer to? What does it mean for the firmament to divide the water? Where is the explanation of this "allegory"? What are we meant to learn?

you think the "firmament" was the crust of the Earth, there's a lot about Scripture that seems to be a surprise for you.

Like what? :idunno:

Allegories are no less true than any other way of communication. We don't use them so much anymore, but they are an equally valid way of expressing the truth. Notice Augustine calls his work, "The Literal Meaning of Genesis" and he is pointing out that it's an allegory.

Who?

A Christian. The most respected theologian of the early Christian church. You wouldn't know about him.

When a guy is generally respected that is usually good reason to suspect he denies God's word. Consider the real theologians of the actual bible. Was Moses generally respected? Was Paul respected? Was Jesus?

You can tell me till you're blue in the face that some random guy believes something other than what the bible plainly says. Sorry. I'm gonna go with the bible. :thumb:

It says God made the Earth and the Heavens. But it's not a exposition of astronomy.

But you're willing to say "it means exactly what it says".

Notice this puts your "water canopy" above the sun and the stars of the firmament. (which is not, contrary to your belief, the Earth's surface.

No, it doesn't. It shows how very unwilling you are to discover what it is a man believes.

all peoples in the ancient world thought of the sky as solid.

:rotfl:

Barbarian notes the supposed location of the waters:Above the sun and the stars of the firmament.

Haven't read the verses I suggested you read yet, right?

Well, let's take a look...
Genesis 1:6 And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Genesis 1:7
And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so.
Genesis 1:8
And God called the firmament, Heaven;

Surprise.

No surprise at all. :idunno:

You've a long and well documented history of not caring what people say to you and wandering blithely on as if your opponent's words do not exist. How about you go away, try again, read the verses I pointed to and answer the question. Where was the water that was divided by the firmament, Barbie?

Hint. Read the first six verses of Genesis 1. The answer is pretty clear. :thumb:

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian chuckles:
You guys still think it's flat?

More recreative reading from Barbie.

Until the 80s there was still a group of creationists dedicated to the idea that the Earth is flat. There still are many geocentric creationists. Which are you?

It's very disappointing that you will not even make an effort to understand what it is you are up against.

Apparently, you don't know as little about creationism as you do about the Bible.

Barbarian observes:
The creation week is such an allegory. Genesis is an allegory for creation.

This is the most idiotic thing you have come up with for a long time.

I don't think calling names is going to help you. Explaining how you decided that the "firmament" is the Earth's crust might help.

An allegory has meaning because the reader understands something. You don't make an allegory to describe creation and use a creation story to make the allegory.

God just used an allegory to describe creation. Doesn't seem like a difficult concept to me.

Barbarian, regarding the Hebrew word for "firmament:
The word "raqua" meant something like a vessel beaten out of malleable material, like copper.

And you think the sky is like that

I'm pointing out that the Hebrews thought it was like that.

Gen. 1:6 And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters. [7] And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so. [8] And God called the firmament, Heaven; and the evening and morning were the second day.

and the crust of the Earth isn't.

It isn't heaven. Someone's led you down the path, Stipe.

Barbarian observes:
You got answers to several questions you asked. But you're still dodging what I asked you.

No, you're just lying.

I don't think that's going to help you now. What would help was to show us that "firmament" refers to the Earth's crust.

(Barbarian explains to Stipe that the "firmament" was where the sun and stars were located)
Genesis 1:6 And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters. [7] And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so. [8] And God called the firmament, Heaven; and the evening and morning were the second day.

Where was the water, Barbie?

The early Hebrews thought some of it was under a solid dome that was the sky, and some of it above the dome. It's an allegory, Stipe.

Barbarian observes:
Yep. So your attempt to make this into a history, requires that the waters you suppose were up there were beyond the sun and the stars.

No, it doesn't.

That's what it says, Stipe. The one that told you there was water above the firmament. He lied to you about it being the crust of the Earth, too. Don't you ever read the Bible, Stipe?

(declines to answer)

Barbarian, regarding the new doctrine of literal days in Genesis:
A bit of a problem, that. No sun to have them. So, this is either an allegory, or you have to redefine "morning" and "evening."

Or we can just accept that with an alternate light source and a rotating Earth we can call what we see evening and morning.

That's the second choice; redefine "morning."

What would be wrong with that?

You could call anything you want anything you want. But if you want to communicate in English, you have to use words they way they are understood.

I understand.

Your personal definition, which you set up to cover your misconception that "firmament" means "the crust of the Earth."

Once you start insisting on private definitions of words to save your bad theology, anything goes.

There's no private definition.

If you've decided "morning" means "big light in the sky", there is.

Barbarian observes:
About the same as Jesus' purposes and His relationship with us, when He said a mustard seed is the smallest seed. Not technically accurate, but something His listeners could hear and understand His meaning.

So what do the details in Genesis 1:6-8 mean?

About the same as the details of the size and structure of a mustard seed mean in Jesus' parable.

When Jesus told the parable of the mustard seed there was a distinct message for the listener to take away.

I think Genesis also has a distinct message for the listener to take away. Can you explain why you don't think so?

Genesis 1:6-8
Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.

I don't think this helps you much; clearly God is not referring to the Earth's crust as "heaven."

Barbarian observes:
you think the "firmament" was the crust of the Earth, there's a lot about Scripture that seems to be a surprise for you.

Like what?

Like common usage of words.

Stipe, regarding St. Augustine

Who?

A Christian. The most respected theologian of the early Christian church. You wouldn't know about him.

When a guy is generally respected that is usually good reason to suspect he denies God's word.

Jesus was also generally respected by the early Christian Church.

Consider the real theologians of the actual bible. Was Moses generally respected? Was Paul respected? Was Jesus?

Barbarian chuckles:
Yes, I believe so, if we can trust what the early Christians wrote.

You can tell me till you're blue in the face that some random guy believes something other than what the bible plainly says. Sorry. I'm gonna go with the bible.

That's your problem. You want to convert "morning" to "big light in the sky." You want to convert "heaven", to "the Earth's crust" and so on. That's not believing it.

Barbarian observes:
It says God made the Earth and the Heavens. But it's not a exposition of astronomy.

But you're willing to say "it means exactly what it says".

Yep. And you aren't.

Barbarian observes:
Notice this puts your "water canopy" above the sun and the stars of the firmament. (which is not, contrary to your belief, the Earth's surface.

(Barbarian notes the supposed location of the waters:Above the sun and the stars of the firmament.)

Haven't read the verses I suggested you read yet, right?

Well, let's take a look...
Genesis 1:6 And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Genesis 1:7
And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so.
Genesis 1:8
And God called the firmament, Heaven;

Surprise.

No surprise at all.

I don't think denial will help you.

You've a long and well documented history...

I don't think accusations about the evil Barbarian will help you now.

What would help is for you to show us how the "firmament" means "crust of the Earth." It's critical to your argument, and you clearly are wrong about it.

Let's look at the first seven verses in Genesis:
Gen. 1:1 In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. [2] And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters. [3] And God said: Be light made. And light was made. [4] And God saw the light that it was good; and he divided the light from the darkness. [5] And he called the light Day, and the darkness Night; and there was evening and morning one day.

[6] And God said: Let there be a firmament made amidst the waters: and let it divide the waters from the waters. [7] And God made a firmament, and divided the waters that were under the firmament, from those that were above the firmament, and it was so. [8] And God called the firmament, Heaven; and the evening and morning were the second day.

Still think "firmament" means "Earth's crust?"

 

[Stripe]

Barbarian chuckles:You guys still think it's flat?Until the 80s there was still a group of creationists dedicated to the idea that the Earth is flat. There still are many geocentric creationists. Which are you?Apparently, you don't know as little about creationism as you do about the Bible.Barbarian observes:The creation week is such an allegory. Genesis is an allegory for creation.I don't think calling names is going to help you. xplaining how you decided that the "firmament" is the Earth's crust might help.God just used an allegory to describe creation. Doesn't seem like a difficult concept to me.Barbarian, regarding the Hebrew word for "firmament:he word "raqua" meant something like a vessel beaten out of malleable material, like copper.I'm pointing out that the Hebrews thought it was like that.en. e"]And God called the firmament, Heaven[/COLOR]; and the evening and morning were the second day. It isn't heaven. Someone's led you down the path, Stipe.Barbarian observes:You got answers to several questions you asked. But you're still dodging what I asked you.I don't think that's going to help you now. What would help was to show us that "firmament" refers to the Earth's crust.(Barbarian explains to Stipe that the "firmament" was where the sun and stars were located)
The early Hebrews thought some of it was under a solid dome that was the sky, and some of it above the dome. It's an allegory, Stipe.Barbarian observes:Yep. So your attempt to make this into a history, requires that the waters you suppose were up there were beyond the sun and the stars.That's what it says, Stipe. The one that told you there was water above the firmament. He lied to you about it being the crust of the Earth, too. Don't you ever read the Bible, Stipe?(declines to answer) Barbarian, regarding the new doctrine of literal days in Genesis:A bit of a problem, that. No sun to have them. So, this is either an allegory, or you have to redefine "morning" and "evening."That's the second choice; redefine "morning."You could call anything you want anything you want. But if you want to ommunicate in English, you have to use words they way they are understood.Your personal definition, which you set up to cover your misconception that "firmament" means "the crust of the Earth."Once you start insisting on private definitions of words to save your bad theology, anything goes.If you've decided "morning" means "big light in the sky", there is.Barbarian observes:About the same as Jesus' purposes and His relationship with us, when He said a mustard seed is the smallest seed. Not technically accurate, but something His listeners could hear and understand His meaning.About the same as the details of the size and structure of a mustard seed mean in Jesus' parable.I think Genesis also has a distinct message for the listener to take away. Can you explain why you don't think so?I don't think this helps you much; clearly God is not referring to the Earth's crust as "heaven."Barbarian observes:you think the "firmament" was the crust of the Earth, there's a lot about Scripture that seems to be a surprise for you.Like common usage of words.Stipe, regarding St. AugustineA Christian. The most respected theologian of the early Christian church. You wouldn't know about him.Jesus was also generally respected by the early Christian Church.Barbarian chuckles:

:blabla:

:yawn:

Yes, I believe so, if we can trust what the early Christians wrote.

I see. You know who the earliest Christian authors were?

Here's how well respected Moses was:

Exodus 17 - Water from the Rock
1 Then all the congregation of the children of Israel set out on their journey from the Wilderness of Sin, according to the commandment of the LORD, and camped in Rephidim; but there was no water for the people to drink. 2 Therefore the people contended with Moses, and said, “Give us water, that we may drink.”
So Moses said to them, “Why do you contend with me? Why do you tempt the LORD?”
3 And the people thirsted there for water, and the people complained against Moses, and said, “Why is it you have brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our livestock with thirst?”
4 So Moses cried out to the LORD, saying, “What shall I do with this people? They are almost ready to stone me!” ​

Here's what Paul had to say about how well respected he was:

2 Corinthians 11
24 From the Jews five times I received forty stripes minus one. 25 Three times I was beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I have been in the deep; 26 in journeys often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; 27 in weariness and toil, in sleeplessness often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness— 28 besides the other things, what comes upon me daily: my deep concern for all the churches. 29 Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble, and I do not burn with indignation?
30 If I must boast, I will boast in the things which concern my infirmity. 31 The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is blessed forever, knows that I am not lying. 32 In Damascus the governor, under Aretas the king, was guarding the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desiring to arrest me; 33 but I was let down in a basket through a window in the wall, and escaped from his hands.​

Here's how well Jesus was prophesied to be respected:

Isaiah 53
1 Who has believed our report?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant,
And as a root out of dry ground.
He has no form or comeliness;
And when we see Him,
There is no beauty that we should desire Him.
3 He is despised and rejected by men,
A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.
And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9 And they made His grave with the wicked—
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.​

God's prophets told you explicitly that His people, even His son, will be despised, rejected and maltreated. Yet Barbie likes to choose his theology based on how popular the writer is.

Bad choice, Barbie. :nono:

You need to learn some humility. :thumb:

That's your problem. You want to convert "morning" to "big light in the sky." You want to convert "heaven", to "the Earth's crust" and so on. That's not believing it. arbarian observes:It says God made the Earth and the Heavens. But it's not a exposition of astronomy.Yep. And you aren't.Barbarian observes:Notice this puts your "water canopy" above the sun and the stars of the firmament. (which is not, contrary to your belief, the Earth's surface.(Barbarian notes the supposed location of the waters:Above the sun and the stars of the firmament.)Well, let's take a look urprise.I don't think denial will help you.I don't think accusations about the evil Barbarian will help you now.

:blabla:

:yawn:

What would help is for you to show us how the "firmament" means "crust of the Earth." It's critical to your argument, and you clearly are wrong about it.

Where is the water, Barbie?

Let's look at the first seven verses in Genesis:

:BRAVO:

Genesis 1 - The History of Creation
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.​

Still think "firmament" means "Earth's crust?"

Where was the water, Barbie?

 

[Flipper]

:blabla:

:yawn:

I see. You know who the earliest Christian authors were?

Here's how well respected Moses was:

You might want to check the order of the books in the bible again, Stripe, if you think Moses was a Christian.

 

[TeeJay]

=The Barbarian;2708849]I looked at your "proof" and it was hooey. That's all that one can say about it.

Again, if Peter is your apostle (and first pope), then why are you not observing the Abrahamic Covenant of Circumcision? Circumcision, Sabbath Law, feasts are "PERPETUAL" covenants for Israel. If they are perpetual, then Peter will be observing these laws in the thousand year kingdom and in the new heaven and the new earth.

You can't place yourself under the Gospel of Circumcision (law) and then claim to be saved by grace alone. That's not possible!

Feel free to do it, but a straightforward reading won't do what you want it to.

Here your worldview (set of presuppositions) excludes any possibility other than your preconceived beliefs. But realize that Genesis to you is an "alegory." But now Ezekiel must also be an alegory because it refers back to Genesis. So now you have an alegory that is alegorical to an alegory.

It wasn't a real tree; it was an allegory for man becoming aware of good and evil.

I will tell you where your worldview will eventually lead. Eventually you will deem Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection as just an alegory.

Was the Tree of Life also an alegory? "Then the Lord God said, 'Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, AND EAT AND LIVE FOREVER...'" (Gen. 3:22). God could allow man to live forever in a righteous state (eating only from the Tree of Life). But He could not let man live forever in a sinful state, for man's evil would know no end.

Question: Why would the Lord be concerned that Adam and Eve would eat of an alegory?

This was a real tree with real fruit. The Tree of LIfe (which represents Jesus Christ) ends up in the New Jerusalem: "In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the TREE OF LIFE , which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the HEALING OF THE NATIONS" (Rev. 22:2).

What happened to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? It was cast into hell. Why? Because Jesus said, "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire" (Mat. 17:19).

Most Bible scholars agree that Ezekiel 28:12 refers to Lucifer. God here symbolizes the glory and subsequent fall of the king of Tyre (Ezek. 28:12 by describing Satan's fall and his role in Eden. By this same literary device (and extended illustration) Ezekiel 31 refers to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. God here describes the Tree's role in the garden and its literal fall as a simile for the magnificence and later destruction of Pharaoh (Ezek. 31:2).

The Tree of Knowledge represents the law. By the Tree is the knowledge of sin (Gen. 3:22). And by the law is the knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:20). Both are ministries of death. "The law is a ministry of death" (2 Cor. 3:7). The Tree is a ministry of death (Gen. 2:17)

God cast the Tree of Knowledge into hell: "In the day when it went down to hell, I caused morning" (Ezek. 31:15). The Tree went to Hell in the Flood (v. 15). Referring back to the Flood, God says, "I restrained its rivers, and the great waters were held back" (v. 15). This restraining of the waters caused a great drought: "I caused Lebanon to mourn for it, and all the trees of the field wilted because of it" (v. 15). The restraining of the rivers caused enormous underground pressure: "I made the nations shake at the sound of its fall, when I cast it down to hell together with those who descend into the Pit, and all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon..." (v. 16). Then we see God's sarcasim: "...all that drink water, were comforted in the depths of the earth" (v. 16). Translation: After God stopped the water flow, many complained that they had no water to drink. Here God is saying, "You want water. I've give you water--more water than you can drink."

Man put himself under the law when Adam ate from the Tree. But then man abandoned the law and did not keep it. God "repented that He had made man" in the first place. If Noah had not been righteous in God's eyes, we would not be here.

Jesus also hung on a tree (the Cross). He nailed the law ("the ordinances that were against us") to the Tree (which symbolized the real Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

You will know, when you can answer this question:
Did the serpent lie to Eve when he said that eating from that tree would not result in death, but that she would become like God?

Satan said that she would not die. But Eve died. Would she have died if she had eaten only from the Tree of Life?

It's not really a tree. It's a symbol for the life that flows from a very different tree. Do you know what that is?

Revelation 22:2. Is this an alegory too?

Yep. Almost everywhere there is matter around a star.

Proof please?

Something for atheists on this site to consider: They will read Walt Brown and deem him beyond absurd. But then they believe without hesitation that nothing exploded and then we had a universe.

Then they believe, without hesitation, that life came from non-life.

Then they argue that nothing but matter exists while using the immaterial laws of logic to argue that only matter exists.

They claim there is no moral God but then become righteously indignant when they see immorality around them.

They claim they can only know what their five senses tell them. But which of there five senses told them that was true?

They rely on the scientific, but have no rational foundation to believe that there should be any uniformity in nature.

They are inconsistent in their worldview. If their worldview was true, they could know nothing. There would be no rational thought, laws of logic, morality, uniformity in nature, or anything abstract such as liberty or justice. None of these things can exist in a random chance universe of accidental chemical reactions.

Tom

 

[The Barbarian]

You might want to check the order of the books in the bible again, Stripe, if you think Moses was a Christian.

Remember, Stipe thinks the "firmament" was the Earth's crust. And he doesn't think "morning" means has anything to do with sunrise.

He has a lot of weird misconceptions.

 

[Stripe]

Where was the water, Barbie?

It was a little silly to include Moses as a Christian (though I bet he is one now). Can you show some humility and respond in a straightforward manner to a simple question?

 

[The Barbarian]

Again, if Peter is your apostle (and first pope), then why are you not observing the Abrahamic Covenant of Circumcision? Circumcision, Sabbath Law, feasts are "PERPETUAL" covenants for Israel. If they are perpetual, then Peter will be observing these laws in the thousand year kingdom and in the new heaven and the new earth.

You can't place yourself under the Gospel of Circumcision (law) and then claim to be saved by grace alone. That's not possible!

If your theology depends on confusing the Gospels with the old Testament, you'll be continuously confused. I understand you want us to believe in your new religion. But it's not Christianity, Tom.

But realize that Genesis to you is an "alegory." But now Ezekiel must also be an alegory because it refers back to Genesis.

If that was true, then Tom must be an allegory. If someone mentions an allegory, that doesn't mean that they are allegories.

Barbarian observes:
It wasn't a real tree; it was an allegory for man becoming aware of good and evil.

I will tell you where your worldview will eventually lead.

Salvation. Tom, I know you prefer your new version. But it's not good enough. No revision is good enough to supplant God's word.

Eventually you will deem Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection as just an alegory.

Over 60 years I haven't. For 2000 years, Christians haven't. So it's kinda hard to take that seriously, Tom.

Was the Tree of Life also an alegory? "Then the Lord God said, 'Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, AND EAT AND LIVE FOREVER...'" (Gen. 3:22).

Yep. Think. So there's this tree that Adam can eat some of the fruit from and become immoratal, even against God's will. If that's literally true, we're all in big trouble, Tom.

Question: Why would the Lord be concerned that Adam and Eve would eat of an alegory?

Rather, the entire passage is allegorical. Adam could not successfully defy God's will even with a magic tree.

The Tree of Knowledge represents the law. By the Tree is the knowledge of sin (Gen. 3:22).

And allegory, in other words. You see, by becoming aware of good and evil, men became like God and potentially capable of fellowship with Him. But because they could not be truly good, they were also estranged from God. That's why a Savior was needed.

Jesus also hung on a tree (the Cross). He nailed the law ("the ordinances that were against us") to the Tree (which symbolized the real Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

You misunderstand. The tree on which Jesus was hung is the tree of life, which is foretold in the Genesis story. But until we were saved by His sacrifice, we were unable to eat from it.

You will know, when you can answer this question:
Did the serpent lie to Eve when he said that eating from that tree would not result in death, but that she would become like God?

Satan said that she would not die. But Eve died.

Remember, God said that they would die the day they ate from the tree. Did that happen, Tom? Did they become like God? If you'll stop dodging the question honestly to yourself, then you will know.

Barbarian observes:
It's not really a tree. It's a symbol for the life that flows from a very different tree. Do you know what that is?

Revelation 22:2. Is this an alegory too?

Yes, Revelations is an allegory.

Barbarian, regarding water:
Yep. Almost everywhere there is matter around a star.

Proof please?

Neufeld and Decin both said they have already found water vapor around other stars using the Hershel satellite, but the results have not yet been released. Neufeld said that water around carbon stars appears to be a widespread phenomenon.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/09/hot-star-water/

Water ice is a major component of the Kuiper belt beyond Pluto.

Something for atheists on this site to consider: They will read Walt Brown and deem him beyond absurd. But then they believe without hesitation that nothing exploded and then we had a universe.

If that's what happened, it certainly wasn't an explosion, and it wasn't nothing. You seem to have the creationist misunderstanding of the Big Bang.

Then they believe, without hesitation, that life came from non-life.

God says that life came from non-life. You should believe Him. I'm pretty sure He's not an atheist.

They claim there is no moral God but then become righteously indignant when they see immorality around them.

Could be. But this doesn't have much to do with your rejection of God's word in Genesis.

 

[Nick M]

The friction generated by moving entire continents at those rates would generate enough heat to boil the oceans.

Not when they are sliding on the lubricant(water) that is being ejected.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
The friction generated by moving entire continents at those rates would generate enough heat to boil the oceans.

Not when they are sliding on the lubricant(water) that is being ejected.

Steam isn't a lubricant. If the water was accelerated with enough force to achieve escape velocity, it would be steam. You see, all that energy must be released as heat somehow; it doesn't magically disappear. So the Earth heats up no matter how you play it. First law of thermodynamics.

 

[Yorzhik]

Steam isn't a lubricant. If the water was accelerated with enough force to achieve escape velocity, it would be steam.

It would be steam at atmospheric pressure. But not under the pressure of the crust.

You see, all that energy must be released as heat somehow; it doesn't magically disappear. So the Earth heats up no matter how you play it. First law of thermodynamics.

It's true the energy turned mostly into heat. However, I don't think there is enough heat there to kill all the life on earth. A great deal of that heat has stayed under the crust where it is being released over time.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Steam isn't a lubricant. If the water was accelerated with enough force to achieve escape velocity, it would be steam.

It would be steam at atmospheric pressure. But not under the pressure of the crust.

Since water is essentially incompressible, then it wouldn't explode out of the Earth's crust without turning to steam. Certainly not at seven miles per second.

Barbarian observes:
You see, all that energy must be released as heat somehow; it doesn't magically disappear. So the Earth heats up no matter how you play it. First law of thermodynamics.

It's true the energy turned mostly into heat. However, I don't think there is enough heat there to kill all the life on earth.

We can calculate that. How much water do you think was so ejected?

A great deal of that heat has stayed under the crust where it is being released over time.

Well, let's just see what the water that was ejected would do. How much water do you suppose was released from the crust?

Edit: Specific heat of water is 4186 joules/kg-C. Specific heat of air varies with temp, but is roughly 1000 Joules/kg-C.
Mass of the atmosphere is about 5×1018 kg.

Tell us about the water.

 

[Stripe]

Tell us about the water.

Good idea!

Where does Genesis 1 tell us the water was in its opening verses?

 

[The Barbarian]

Good idea!

Where does Genesis 1 tell us the water was in its opening verses?

Let's see... It says the sky is a solid dome with water above the sun and stars, and there is also water below the sun and stars. I know you think "firmament" means "crust of the Earth", but it means the heavens, as Genesis 1 makes very clear. If you try to make Genesis a literal history, you have a layer of water above the stars, and a layer on Earth, below the stars. One of the reasons we know it isn't a literal history.

But it is pretty much the ancient thought of all peoples. God wasn't correcting misconceptions of the sky, though. He was talking about creation and what it meant to man.

Since you're here, we're trying to see what all that heat would do to the atmosphere. How much water do you think was thrown up through the atmosphere?

 

[Stripe]

Let's see... It says the sky is a solid dome with water above the sun and stars, and there is also water below the sun and stars. I know you think "firmament" means "crust of the Earth", but it means the heavens, as Genesis 1 makes very clear. If you try to make Genesis a literal history, you have a layer of water above the stars, and a layer on Earth, below the stars. One of the reasons we know it isn't a literal history. But it is pretty much the ancient thought of all peoples. God wasn't correcting misconceptions of the sky, though. He was talking about creation and what it meant to man. Since you're here, we're trying to see what all that heat would do to the atmosphere. How much water do you think was thrown up through the atmosphere?

Where was the water in Genesis 1:2?

 

[Yorzhik]

Since water is essentially incompressible, then it wouldn't explode out of the Earth's crust without turning to steam. Certainly not at seven miles per second.

Right.

We can calculate that. How much water do you think was so ejected?

Well, let's just see what the water that was ejected would do. How much water do you suppose was released from the crust?

Edit: Specific heat of water is 4186 joules/kg-C. Specific heat of air varies with temp, but is roughly 1000 Joules/kg-C.
Mass of the atmosphere is about 5×1018 kg.

Tell us about the water.

I don't know. I'll have to find out.

 

[Stripe]

Right.

Water is very compressible at high temperatures. It escaped as liquid water.

I don't know. I'll have to find out.

About half the water in today's oceans was trapped beneath the ~20km thick firmament.

 

[TeeJay]

Barbarian,

Perhaps it would be easier if you just listed only the Scriptural verses that you deem not an allegory. I will have to leave you confused on Genesis. I do believe that when you meet Jesus, you will argue that He didn't really mean what He said.

You accused me of "confusing the gospels with the Old Testament." Please xplain how I did that? Barbarian, it's hard for me to relate to your allegorical interpretation of Genesis (and now Revelation). But I can relate to your confusion concerning the gospels. I once was a confused Catholic mylelf.

Question: If you died right now, would you go to hell or heaven? I just want a simple answer: A. Heaven. B. Hell.

Tom

 

[some other dude]

In Barbie's confused quasi-Catholic theology, heaven and hell are allegories. So is Jesus :squint: