Posted on 04/17/2009 7:59:08 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
I’ve stated that before. It’s in my posting history...... somewhere......
The one example I do remember referring to is the earth being *formless and void* being a apt description of the solar nebula theory and the proto earth.
It was not well received by whoever I posted it to.
I've read your matchup of the events in Genesis with the order science says things happened in. But I always thought you were arguing that science supported the 6-day version because the order was the same. I didn't understand that you were allowing a lot of time for the Genesis account to occur.
My point was the match up itself of how science and Scripture are not at such odds as some like to believe, on either side. I never mentioned the time frame.
Okay. Since my post to which I think you were replying mentioned the time frame, and you said “we’ve been trying to tell you guys that for a long time,” I assumed you were agreeing with the time frame.
I see. What I was referring to was the conciseness (if that’s a word) of Scripture; that instead of going into great detail, God just kept is simple in terms that virtually anyone could comprehend.
He gave us just enough information to let us know what He did, how He did it (He spoke it into existence), and that HE was the One who did it.
Even if He had gone into great detail about what He did, if it varied from what scientists currently believe about the history of the universe, it would still be declared wrong. So in that regard, it doesn’t matter much if He just gave us a summary or a whole set of encyclopedias.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.