• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Seven Days

David Henson said:
I don't care whether you care. It doesn't matter to me. If you disagree with my findings tell me why other than that you just do.
Click to expand...
Findings about what? That you can match what's written in a book with reality?

Great works of fiction can do better.
Bravo.
 
TraneWreck said:
Let me sum that up:

The Bible is awesome because stuff it said was confirmed by science.

Except for the stuff it said that wasn't confirmed, but was actually contradicted by, science. In that case, the science is wrong.
Click to expand...

Try and understand these very simple facts. The Bible doesn't agree or disagree with the age of the universe according to science. The Bible doesn't say that the universe was created in 144 hours. The majority of atheists believe the Bible says the universe was created in 144 hours. Science has very little to say about the Bible and the Bible has very little to say about science.

I need for you or anyone else here to tell me why you think that the Bible says the universe, that is the heavens and earth, were created in 6 days.

That is all I am interested in hearing. Show me where I'm wrong.
 
David Henson said:
Why should you? Did I say that the Bible was a science textbook? The point in this thread is the same point of the one I did on the soul. That is to say that what you think the Bible says it doesn't.
Click to expand...
So?
What refutation do I have from the oppisition so far? Uninformed opinion. Show me where I'm wrong. Show me where the Bible says the universe was created in a litteral 144 hours.
Click to expand...
And if it doesn't? So?
 
paximperium said:
Findings about what? That you can match what's written in a book with reality?

Great works of fiction can do better.
Bravo.
Click to expand...

You know . . . I read your signature and I read your posts and I just laugh.

If you are going to criticize the Bible why not pay a little more attention to the knowledge of it rather than just being threatened by it like a child in the dark?
 
David Henson said:
Try and understand these very simple facts. The Bible doesn't agree or disagree with the age of the universe according to science. The Bible doesn't say that the universe was created in 144 hours. The majority of atheists believe the Bible says the universe was created in 144 hours. Science has very little to say about the Bible and the Bible has very little to say about science.

I need for you or anyone else here to tell me why you think that the Bible says the universe, that is the heavens and earth, were created in 6 days.

That is all I am interested in hearing. Show me where I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
I don't believe much about the Bible. It tells a nice wishy-washy story that can be interpreted many different ways. It's a good story but can be pretty nasty at times.

So?
 
David Henson said:
You know . . . I read your signature and I read your posts and I just laugh.

If you are going to criticize the Bible why not pay a little more attention to the knowledge of it rather than just being threatened by it like a child in the dark?
Click to expand...
Criticize what?
What knowledge are you talking about?
Why should anyone care what is written in your story book?
 
David Henson said:
I need for you or anyone else here to tell me why you think that the Bible says the universe, that is the heavens and earth, were created in 6 days.
Click to expand...

Yeah, can't imagine how I would get that impression:

"On the seventh day God had finished his work of creation, so he rested from all his work."

But now you go coasting down one slick slope. If that wasn't literal, maybe this isn't either:

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

How does one go through the Bible accurately choosing the parts that are meant literally and those that are just poetry? God did a really bad job of making that clear.
 
Shalamar said:
Does it really matter?
Click to expand...
Exactly my point.

This is about as relevant as Star Wars fans arguing if the Sith Lords were destroyed during the reign of the Old Republic or if Darth Monkeybrains is the stronger Darth.
 
Darat said:
Could we go back to your opening post and carry on from that?
Click to expand...

Okay . . .

David Henson said:
The Hebrew verb for “created” in Genesis 1:1 is in the perfect state, signifying completion. The creation was finished at this point. This is important when considering the verses that follow. The heavens had been created at this point, including the sun and moon and stars. The Hebrew verb has two states; the perfect state, which indicates completed action, and the imperfect state which indicates action in progress, incompleteness. In Genesis 1:1, "created" in the Hebrew was the perfect state indicating completeness. The act of creating the heavens and the earth were complete.

In 1:3, though the KJV doesn’t indicate the imperfect state of action in progress, when God says let there be light he actually proceeded to say let there be light, and light gradually came to be. A much more accurate translation, by J.W. Watts reads: “Afterward God proceeded to say, ‘Let there be light’; and gradually light came into existence,” Benjamin Willis Newton’s translation does likewise; brackets his: “And God proceeded to say [future], Let Light become to be, and Light proceeded to become to be [future].” The imperfect state is crucial to a fuller understanding of the first chapter of Genesis because it occurs 40 times.

Later verses indicate that though the light was gradually increasing after the first “day,” the source of that light wasn’t discernable until the fourth. This has caused a great deal of confusion with science minded skeptics. The sun had been created in verse 1, the light had penetrated the dust and debris by the first creative “day” but the source was not yet visible.

The Hebrew word for light used in verse 2 is ohr, which means the light given from the source rather than the source itself. Ohr is light diffused. Genesis 1:2 says it was dark upon the watery deep. Apparently there was a band of water vapor, gasses and dust that prevented the light from the sun from shinning upon the earth for some undetermined period of time. Keep in mind that the Hebrew word yohm translated day is not a literal 24 hour period.

On the first creative “day” light (Hebrew ohr, meaning light in a general sense, rather than the source itself) from the luminaries was visible on earth. Then, (1:14) on the fourth day the luminaries themselves (Hebrew maohr, meaning the source of light) were visible. The light on the first day had been diffused light, probably because of debris in the atmosphere from creation.

A brief aside: A comparison with science and the Bible. Moses wrote that the division of day and night were products of the luminaries in the sixteenth Century B.C.E. but up until the fifth it was thought that light was a bright vapor and darkness was a black vapor, the latter of which ascended from the ground.

At Genesis 1:16 the Hebrew word asah, meaning “make” is used. Earlier, in verse 1 the Hebrew word bara, meaning “create” was used. At Genesis 1:1, before the first creative “day,” the heavens, which would include the luminaries, had been created and now on the fourth creative “day” the luminaries are being made in the sense that a bed is made. Not that it is manufactured but that it is, already having been manufactured, now prepared in a way for use. Genesis 1:14-18 is talking about God preparing the already existing luminaries in the sense that he was appointing them in their way for use. The dust and debris now dissipated, the source of light is now discernible so as to distinguish seasons, among other obvious benefits.



Uh . . . if you ask me that is pretty impressive for a primitive bunch of goat-herders who didn't know what was going on.
Click to expand...
 
OK - and this was my follow-up post (ignoring the exchange that led to it)

Darat said:
Sorry I've re-read your opening post and I don't see anywhere that anything approaching a modern understanding of how the universe and the earth came into being is mentioned. Quite seriously can you just list the actual biblical verses that you think provide the currently accepted/consensus scientific view of the creation of the universe and the earth?

(By the way the English translation I tend to use is "Commentary on the Torah" by Richard Elliott Friedman.)
Click to expand...
 
David Henson said:
I always get the same sort of knee-jerk reaction from uninformed atheists - what a threat it is to their dogmatic approach to the Bible!
Click to expand...

Yes dear, keep telling yourself that.
I read what is says, you read whatever petty fantasy of yours you would like it to say. And of course I'm the bad guy, because I don't twist and torture it to make it fit what is now common knowledge. :rolleyes:
 
The native Hawai'ians have a legend that Pele originally lived on Ni'ihau, then moved to Kauai, and so on down the chain until she made her most recent home at Halemaumau crater on the Big Island. This fits very well with how modern geologists view the formation of the island chain.

Not bad for a violent bunch of fishermen!

Does this mean the story is likely to be true?
 
Hokulele said:
The native Hawai'ians have a legend that Pele originally lived on Ni'ihau, then moved to Kauai, and so on down the chain until she made her most recent home at Halemaumau crater on the Big Island. This fits very well with how modern geologists view the formation of the island chain.

Not bad for a violent bunch of fishermen!

Does this mean the story is likely to be true?
Click to expand...

But that's just stupid - Pele was a footballer how could he create islands?
 
Darat said:
But that's just stupid - Pele was a footballer how could he create islands?
Click to expand...
I didn't realize Pele played football?
Oh wait...is this some sort of soccer-football international definition issue?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom