Posted on 12/15/2010 5:17:34 AM PST by ImProudToBeAnAmerican
“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day.” (Exodus 20:11a KJV)
According to evolutionary scientists, the earth is over 4 billion years old; but Biblical chronology dates the age of the earth at about 6,000 years. In an attempt to reconcile the two extreme positions, many creation scientists have used 2 Peter 3:8 to state that the six days mentioned in the Genesis account were not literal 24-hour days. However, if we used the “a day is as a thousand years” formula, we would have the six days of creation plus the day of rest equaling 7,000 years, at most. Hardly a good reconciliation with 4 billion years. So, how old is the earth?...
Fifth article in a series about Creation by Rosemarie Thompson.
Comments welcome!
(Excerpt) Read more at inspiretomorrow.wordpress.com ...
Good retort! That was humorous, and oh so succinct.
Evolutionary, and Scientist are two words that do not belong in the same sentence.
.
Exactly, the Flood covered the dinosaurs heads. ;)
I’m glad to see that, even though some here might disagree, we can keep our sense of humor. That’s not always the case.
It was God's job to make a help meet, it was Adam's job to find which one since God didn't know which one would suit Adam. It turned out that God failed in his effort, fell back to the drafting board and had to come up with a new plan (Eve).
kjv:
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
> “I’ll never understand why science and religion cannot live peacefully along side each other.”
.
They can; the problem is that Old Earth theories are not based in honest science, any more than Global Warming, and the two share the same highly biased form of ‘research’ that cherry-picks data and evidence, and disregards the majority of the data, in favor of a few bits that can be twisted to support their pre-conceived conclusion.
.
"...It doesn't take very long to realize that a thorough understanding of the Bible -- and this would actually apply to any complex work from any culture -- requires specialized knowledge, and a broad range of specialized knowledge in a variety of fields. Obviously the vast majority of believers spend their entire lives doing little more than reading the Bible in English (or whatever native tongue) and importing into its words whatever ideas they derive from their own experiences. This process is very often one of "decontextualizing" -- what I have here called "reading it like it was written yesterday and for you personally." ...
Let's anticipate and toss off the obvious objection: "Why did God make the Bible so hard to understand, then?" It isn't -- none of this keeps a person from grasping the message of the Bible to the extent required to be saved; where the line is to be drawn is upon those who gratuitously assume that such base knowledge allows them to be competent [interpreters] of the text, and make that assumption in absolute ignorance of their own lack of knowledge -- what I have elsewhere spoken of in terms of being "unskilled and unaware of it."
And is my observation to this effect justified? Well, ask yourself this question after considering what various fields of knowledge a complete and thorough (not to say sufficient for intelligent discourse, though few even reach that pinnacle, especially in the critical realm) study of the Bible requires: [snip]..."
The Creation of Time
Each day of creation is numbered. Yet Nahmanides points out that there is discontinuity in the way the days are numbered. The verse says: "There is evening and morning, Day One." But the second day doesn't say "evening and morning, Day Two." Rather, it says "evening and morning, a second day." And the Torah continues with this pattern: "Evening and morning, a third day... a fourth day... a fifth day... the sixth day." Only on the first day does the text use a different form: not "first day," but "Day One" ("Yom Echad"). Many English translations that make the mistake of writing "a first day." That's because editors want things to be nice and consistent. But they throw out the cosmic message in the text! That message, as Nahmanides points out, is that there is a qualitative difference between "one" and "first." One is absolute; first is comparative. The Torah could not write “a first day” on the first day because there had not yet been a second day relative to it. Had the perspective of the Bible for the first six days been from Sinai looking back, the Torah would have written a first day. By the time the Torah was given on Sinai there had been hundreds of thousands of "second days." The perspective of the Bible for the six days of Genesis is from the only time in the history of time when there had not been a second day. And that is the first day. From the creation of the universe to the creation of the soul of Adam, the Torah views time from near the beginning looking forward. At the creation of Adam and Eve, the soul of humanity, the Bible perspective switches to earth based time. And therefore the biblical description of time changed.
Yes. Adam wasn’t made a baby to fend for himself. He was created mature with a brain full of knowledge.
Already did. But you'll have to read my posts in this thread. NOTE: The operative word is "read". "Comprehend" is the companion operative word (without preconceived notions / indoctrinations).
So here’s my question. I could possibly agree that Satan fell during the gap period and took his followers with him at that time, but it doesn’t address the issue that without sin, there is no death. Sin didn’t enter the creation until Adam fell, so before the Fall there could be no death.
How do you square that with your gap theory?
Or any answer other than one they don't want.
Yes.
But if there is a conflict in the details, then it really matter that you have different details than Joe Blow, as long as you agree on the concept?
I.E. Do the details of your 'faith' have to agree with my someone else's details, in order for you both to remain faithful?
What if the TRUTH is that you are both slightly wrong about the details?
What if EVERYONE is slightly wrong, just about different things?
YET... the concepts remain.
One of the biggest 'concepts' I have of Genesis is that I have no way to comprehend what a 'day' meant to GOD. Therefore, trying to compare GOD's day to mankind's modern measurement of time based on the current speed of the planet's rotation is an exercise in futility.
Our 'ships' don't have wheel wells.
No. You get:
3.13953588372093023255811395348837...
And it is STILL NOT PI.
How close did the Jews need to be?
No. How accurate does the Bible have to be?
More accurately, you should have said, "You don't believe my biblically illiterate / fundie interpretation of Scripture."
You're right. I don't.
Hey, if it’s churchschool time, I want to play.
In the Bible, it says a rich man will have a harder time getting into heaven than a camel through the eye of a needle.
What needle are they referring to? How big was the needle?
I have Schroeder's book Genesis and the Big Bang and found it interesting since Schroeder came across as kind of a Jewish agnostic overall. Yet his comparison of the physics of the big bang and comparson to the descriptions in the Genesis account to be very revealing.
LOL
bttt
Again, back to a man’s intrepretation of God’s word, when God himself explains it sufficiently. Typical of one who’s never known the rebirth and doesn’t trust God or His word.
If you cannot even trust God enough to take Him at His word, you don’t have the Faith to attain a saving faith.
You better hope you’re right about man being more intelligent and trustworthy than God, your salvation depends upon it.
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.