Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interestingly, chapter 1 of Genesis states that God created the earth before he created the sun, moon and the stars. In fact, it even states that God created plants and grass on the third day before he created the sun on the fourth day. The authors of Genesis had a pretty different understanding of cosmology from what we now know to be true, to say the least.
Anyway, astronomers today routinely detect stars and planetary discs being formed in nebulae in our galaxy. There are no photographs that I know of which show a sentient being such as God forming these stars and planets.
Of course! , *sigh* and LOL He's INVISIBLE. Remember, He can't give any sign of his being there because it would Nullify Your Faith...if you had any. Besides which, it is obvious that there is God (Paul said so In Romans 1.20, so it must be true) so he doesn't need to actually do anything to show that he exists.
Interestingly, chapter 1 of Genesis states that God created the earth before he created the sun, moon and the stars. In fact, it even states that God created plants and grass on the third day before he created the sun on the fourth day. The authors of Genesis had a pretty different understanding of cosmology from what we now know to be true, to say the least.
Anyway, astronomers today routinely detect stars and planetary discs being formed in nebulae in our galaxy. There are no photographs that I know of which show a sentient being such as God forming these stars and planets.
Uh...zoiks. It would seem they didn't have a lot of understanding of plants, either.
It states that God created day and night on the first day. That was also when God created light.
Evidently, the Genesis authors thought that day and night could exist without the sun existing.
Yes, this further tangles things.
I mean it's obviously a fable. I don't see how anyone could think otherwise. Actually, most of the Christians I know (when this subject has come up, anyway...it's not the immediate go-to for sharing a cup at Starbucks or anything ) believe Genesis is fable/allegory/cautionary tales.
I mean it's obviously a fable. I don't see how anyone could think otherwise. Actually, most of the Christians I know (when this subject has come up, anyway...it's not the immediate go-to for sharing a cup at Starbucks or anything ) believe Genesis is fable/allegory/cautionary tales.
However, Genesis is also the sole basis for the claim that the Bible teaches God created the universe.
So, it's confusing. I guess we're supposed to believe it was just meant to be a fable, but then at some level it's also true. It's up to us to figure out what that level is.
Uh...zoiks. It would seem they didn't have a lot of understanding of plants, either.
The sun is sort of, well, required. (First...)
Well, if someone is engaging in a narrative that says an invisible intentional agent created the universe in six days using essentially magic, then how much more of a stretch is it for plants to magically not need sunlight? Or for there to be day and night without a sun? The whole notion is so fantastical that these extra fantastical elements are the least of the problems with the narrative.
Having grown up with these literalist interpretations of scripture, I can tell you that it has a side effect of freighting the distant / ancient past in your mind as a sort of special case or alternate universe where modern rules didn't apply -- where god just made things work in ways they wouldn't work today. We are supposed to live in a time now where god doesn't intervene and the machinery of the universe runs on natural law. And so I just didn't say, wait a minute, this isn't a credible story, because things don't work that way. Well, how they work now and how they worked then are just 2 different things in your mind. This imagined distinction is even stronger for non-pentecostals who believe that "signs and wonders" are "not for today" but "ceased" a nice discreet 2,000 years ago. All of these fantastic stories are easier to sell when they all happened "once upon a time". And you are supposed to believe them because faith is a virtue and "mere" human intellect is a vice.
Exactly. And that is why "Evilooshun" (which means the Darwinist alternative explanation to Genesis - it covers, Cosmology, Geology, Palaeontology, Archaeology and of course Abiogenesis as well...so saying "Abiogenesis is not part of evolution" is as redundant in the argument as listing discrepancies in the Bible) is so important in the debate. It is all about the evidence that the alternative Genesis account can't be true.
This means that the evidence either has to be made to fit Genesis or dismissed as simply wrong.
I contend that our creator has always existed. Another poster said eternal matter could have been the spark behind the universe. I asked why that eternal matter couldn't be our creator. I thought the poster made a good point and that we were close to agreeing.
As far as your last paragraph, it sounds like you're describing yourself! I don't struggle with my belief in a creator. It's solid.
What's your take on this theory?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, *sigh* and LOL He's INVISIBLE. Remember, He can't give any sign of his being there because it would Nullify Your Faith...if you had any. Besides which, it is obvious that there is God (Paul said so In Romans 1.20, so it must be true) so he doesn't need to actually do anything to show that he exists.
It would seem they didn't have a lot of understanding of plants, either.
