Posted on 06/17/2005 8:33:25 AM PDT by blam
"As I Thessalonians 5:11 states:" "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." "The Bible itself demands and commends a logical test of its claims.(Acts 17:11)
Creationists have a much more recent history than the Ancient Israelies. In the 1800's when Creationism was the leading theory/explaination of the day scientists actually tried impressively to fit new physical findings to the books of Moses. As the Ark got bigger and bigger to hold all the new species it sunk. But those scientists unlike the 'got-ya' Creationists of today actually had a scientific theory of origins to defend.
Genesis never said that the life that went into the ark was adults in age. And to be precise, Genesis never said that the ark carried each species, but each kind. The classification by species is but a few hundered years old.
Creationism is so anti-conservative. It involves a blind faith that is threatened by science/rational thought. It attacks what it sees as the alternative(science) yet claims that any discussion of itself is invalid because it is anti-God(CK post 92). The progressive/socialists/communists dream of Man induced Heaven on Earth/social justice/world peace is also untouchable. Like Creationism it has had its day, a complete and utter failure. The believers are out to destroy the alternative (liberal-democratic-capitalism) and any discussion of the failed Dream of Heaven on Earth(like Creationism) results in an attack as a racist, sexist, homophobe, tool of the corporations (or called atheist by Creationists.) Both are ‘any means justifies the end’/ 'can't be debated' beliefs and are scary.
Biblical faith is not blind. That's why I've quoted Hebrews 11:1 which cites evidence as a component of faith. Why is creationism anti-rational? Everything had a begining. Nobody was around for that begining. Why is it itrrational to think that God created all things? What explanation is more logical?
"The rain lasted 40 days. The longer period of time was for the lowering of the water level" (ref your post 92)
My reply :
Genesis 7:4,+12, +17 : "The flood was on the earth 40 days and 40 nights "
but Genesis 8:5 says :"and the waters continued receding until the 10th month , on the first of the 10th month the 'tops of the mountains' appeared."
This is literal reading. The Flood lasted both 40 days +40 nights 'and' 10 months(perhaps Noah took two Cruises, not one). Which do we teach in science? J or P? And why are you intentionally misinterpreting your source of 'all' knowledge ??
And was Moses on these cruises? He supposedly wrote all these versions of the same story.
Do you know how much theological and popular (let alone scientific) credibility the flat earth model has enjoyed throughout history? Without question if science is open to discussion it will not altogether discount intelligent design as an agent in creating and sustaining the universe as we know it. The model actually fits well inasmuch as aggregations of matter with function and purpose have sprung up down to the molecule, DNA being a case in point.
I will be the first to admit certain proponents of theology are capable of erring both in their understanding of biblical texts and ther lack of appreciation for the physical sciences. I would only think it reasonable for science to speak with certainty concerning matter it knows, and with some qualification in matters of reasonable conjecture.
Genesis 7:17 is speaking of the 40 days that the flood was on the earth AND the waters increased. It's a conjuction, not a contradiction.
How long were Adam's fingernails when he was created?
IF this thread does not die, then it must have survived because it was successful at living. If you want it to die and it doesn't then you have no control over it.
"Genesis 7:17 is speaking of the 40 days that the flood was on the earth AND the waters increased."
My Reply :
It does not say that. You are adding that as to make it seem like one story. Gen 7:24 : "And the waters grew strong on the earth 150 days". More :
Gen 8:7 He sends out a Raven to find land, But Gen 8:8+10 he sends out a dove.
In J he brings a pair of each type of animals but in P he is concerned with clean and unclean animals because the writers of P were the priests ,gate keepers of sacrifice of animals at the temple. Check for yourself::
J:Gen 6:19 And of every living thing, of all flesh, you shall bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female
P: Gen 7:2 :Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate;
Gen7:3 and seven pairs of the birds of the air also, male and female, to keep their kind alive on the face of all the earth.
Lets see creation where in P man is created last, but in J he is created first.
P first: Gen 1:11 In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth,
Gen 1:24 And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures of every kind: cattle and creeping things and wild animals of the earth of every kind." And it was so.
Gen 1:25 God made the wild animals of the earth of every kind, and the cattle of every kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground of every kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."
Gen 1:27 So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
But in the J version the order is reversed. J: Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,
Gen 2:5 when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no one to till the ground;
Gen 2:6 but a stream would rise from the earth, and water the whole face of the ground—
7 then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.
8 And the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 18 Then the Lord God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner."
19 So out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
20 The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper as his partner.
So, the incredible variation in species we have now, including those that went recently extinct, is a result of 4500 years of evolution? WOW.
Because it goes against so many tested and verified scientific developments and the literal reading of the story presents objects and events that are unlikely or impossible.
"Everything had a begining. Nobody was around for that begining. Why is it itrrational to think that God created all things? What explanation is more logical?"
That the beginning can be determined through investigation and the compilation and examination of information, without resorting to the supernatural.
Just a quick pair-a-question. Where did all this water come from and go to?
The later reference to seven clean beasts can be seen as merely as a further elaboration and addition to the basic instructions of one pair of every kind. This is the way it has always been understood and reconciled. I don't see why is it impossible to be reconciled now except it doesn't fit in with somebody's recent theory.
I think that the different numbers in the flood account are easily reconciled to be referring to different periods. 7:17 is the days of rain, the reference to 150 days is the increasing of the waters, the remainder of the time is the time it took for the waters to recede. That is the way it has been understood for thousands of years with no problem. But now we are to believe than mankind has suddenly increased in intelligence to see contradictions heretofore undetected. Again I say that the compilers of the E and J would be pretty dense not to smooth out such a clear contradiction as you allege. So do you think the reconciliation of these numbers that have been accepted as one story throughout history is impossible?
While I can see how someone whose heart is set on the documentary theory manufacturing a contradiction with the numbers, I don't see how anyone can have trouble with the section about the birds. Genesis 8:8 says that he ALSO sent forth a dove. There's nothing that says that if he sent forth a raven he couldn't send a dove later. Next time you look for contradictions, I wouldn't bother with that one. That bird won't fly.
As far Genesis 2:19 is concerned, I think you need to take note of a word missing in 2:19 that is present elsewhere. The word "THEN" is not in 2:19. If "then" was present we would have a contradiction, but the absence of this word eliminates the need to tie this verse to strict sequential order. We can now understand this to be referring to something that God had done previously and be in perfect harmony with Genesis 1.
The beginning is going to have to be supernatural. We don't see the creation of the universe every day. It seems only the most illogically hardcore of atheists would maintain that matter is eternal. If the creation of matter is supernatural work of God, the creation of life is a small thing. Could not the creator of all matter create life in seven days, especially if He revealed that mankind? He certainly could have used the Darwinist method had He chosen, but the natural law we read about is that life begets its own kind. Jesus Christ endorsed the Genesis account as fact in Matthew 19:4. A lot of people who profess belief in Christ try to keep a foot in both camps by belief in a "theistic evolution". But this is the same as rejecting Jesus as an ignorant charlatan.
The "fountains of the deep were broken up". Sounds like something geological. Maybe the icecaps were melted. Seems to me that a God who could create the earth with a word would have no problem producing and dispensing with a flood.
"Genesis never said that the life that went into the ark was adults in age. And to be precise, Genesis never said that the ark carried each species, but each kind. The classification by species is but a few hundered years old."
So, the incredible variation in species we have now, including those that went recently extinct, is a result of 4500 years of evolution? WOW.
So no evolution ever, unless they need Noah's boatload of animals to evolve into all species we now see of bird and beast. But I guess that isn't "Macro" evolution because a deer still gave rise to all the different species of deer. WOW indeed! Other words escape me.
"How long were Adam's fingernails when he was created?"
More importantly 'was he created with a belly button?'
Sometimes you just have to sit down, take a deep breath, smack your forehead and wonder 'what the heck were they thinking?'.
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.