Merged (edited) General thoughts about Christianity and the bible

[Rusty Tyler]

For example, the sun wasn't created until day four. So it doesn't make sense to interpret days one through three as literal sunrise-to-sunset time periods. Even just reconciling the biblical account with itself requires some poetic license.

Good point.
As I understand it, God makes His own light.

Revelation 21:23 NIV
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it,
for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.

 

[JayUtah]

Good point.
As I understand it, God makes His own light.

…which is different than the sun and doesn’t give rise to day and night. Non-literalists have no problem here.

 

[Darat]

Good point.
As I understand it, God makes His own light.

Revelation 21:23 NIV
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it,
for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.

You've got through the theology I linked you to pretty quickly. Does that mean you have learned how to reconcile your beliefs with evolution?

 

[theprestige]

Good point.
As I understand it, God makes His own light.

Revelation 21:23 NIV
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it,
for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.

You're being overly literal, but okay, sure. The CMBR is God's light. Now we see through a "glass" darkly [the light of heaven is attenuated by distance and expansion]. Later, when He reverses the expansion of spacetime, and gathers everything back unto Himself, we will see clearly face to faced [once again within the horizon of the primordial singularity that precedes the big bang].

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

You are framing illegal aliens as "the poor and needy".
We have already given them plenty. Yet they failed to complete the required documentation for citizenship.
They are bad for America. They need to go.

The Biden democrats had 4 years to change the laws. They opened the floodgates instead.
Now we have a serious problem to correct.

Did Jesus say, "Suffer little children to come unto me so I can deport them to Venezuela"?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Good point.
As I understand it, God makes His own light.

Missing the point rather. If each day in the creation record contains a statement about a sunset and a sunrise, as you stated a few posts ago, but the sun was not created until the fourth day, how could the first three sunsets and sunrises possibly have occurred? The thing that is stated to have set and risen didn't even exist.

Dave

 

[JayUtah]

You're being overly literal, but okay, sure.

He also seems to have missed the most obvious answer to the "sun on the 4th day," conundrum:

Gen. 1:3-5 (NIV) "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light 'day,' and the darkness he called 'night.' And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day."

The text makes a distinction between night and day in order to demarcate the creative periods, but there's no reference to the then-uncreated sun or any other means of determining the length of these periods. If @Darat hadn't already brought up the two incompatible accounts of creation, I would have. I read the inclusion of two factually incompatible accounts as an instruction not to take the story literally. I don't see any reason in the text to believe that the creative periods were literal 24-hour days, and no basis yet in the emerging creation for timekeeping beyond the demarcation.

 

[8enotto]

Rusty, do what fundies do when outside sources challenge the beliefs of the sect.

Label it as wrong, blasphemy or whatever and proceed as if such blithering doesn't exist.
Why would one who knows the "truth" without any doubt bother with anything else?

What shook your faith so much you would question the world outside it?
Why was it able to break it's hold on you?

One of them is in error. We can't make you believe anything. You have been presented with good sources of the non religious veiw.
It's on you to take any next steps.

 

[theprestige]

Ironically, it will require Rusty to make a good faith effort to reconcile the various narratives.

 

[JayUtah]

Ironically, it will require Rusty to make a good faith effort to reconcile the various narratives.

...which I don't think is forthcoming. The "Yikes! Mutations!" point is a good example. It doesn't take much effort to understand what scientists mean by it, that it is an early and correct usage of the term, and that co-opting the term decades later for entertainment purposes doesn't reflect backwards on the origin of the term in science. Yet @Rusty persists in casting "mutation" as some sort of scary, dangerous thing that should be avoided at all costs.

This is not what evolution is talking about.

 

[Thermal]

Good point.
As I understand it, God makes His own light.

The way I used to square the light thingy was to assume "Let there be light" was the way you explain 'energy' to uneducated goat herders.

 

[theprestige]

nm; too tangential

 

[theprestige]

...which I don't think is forthcoming.

And that's the irony: Rusty is attempting to advance a faith-based narrative, but struggles with the concept of good faith engagements.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

...so this should be a walk in the park.

I first read that as " ..walk on the plank,"

If only.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I first read that as " ..walk on the plank,"

If only.

Long walk on a short pier.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

I reckon our interlocutor is looking at more of a Mandelbrot set than a square...

 

[JayUtah]

And that's the irony: Rusty is attempting to advance a faith-based narrative, but struggles with the concept of good faith engagements.

Even though Fundamentalists are explicitly told that it's not okay to lie even if it advances God's work, some people seem so sorely tempted. Maybe it's one of those parts that @Rusty Tyler doesn't believe in.

The way I used to square the light thingy was to assume "Let there be light" was the way you explain 'energy' to uneducated goat herders.

Sure, why not. But I think it's only useful in some cases to map specific claims in the creation stories to specific physical phenomena or history. Suddenly having light might be a reference to the Big Bang, which is also hypothetical. But I don't think the authors of the creation stories necessarily had any actual insight into how the universe came about. I think they're just making stuff up. Some of it accidentally sounds like it might work, just like some stuff in Star Trek seems like it might work.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

The clearest answer I've always found to be that nature does not care about your beliefs.

Most of the universe, in both distance and time, is not in any way influenced by humanity. To the universe, our existence does not matter. So believe what you want. Nothing will change, and those willing to accept our insignificance will keep understanding the universe better and by improve your life.

 

[Steve]

The clearest answer I've always found to be that nature does not care about your beliefs.

Most of the universe, in both distance and time, is not in any way influenced by humanity. To the universe, our existence does not matter. So believe what you want. Nothing will change, and those willing to accept our insignificance will keep understanding the universe better and by improve your life.

Those who think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's (thanks Douglas Adams) will not be able to comprehend this.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

Our interlocutor is quibbling about the development of what is essentially the mould on the surface of a chunk of rock, circling an insignificant star out on the unfashionable spiral arm of a not very noticeable galaxy among many, many millions upon millions of galaxies...

Yer man needs to get a sense of perspective...

Fill in your own gags here.