Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-17-2015, 12:54 AM
 
Location: California USA
1,714 posts, read 1,149,521 times
Reputation: 471

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
Everything was created on the first day and then put into place at the proper time...
Some believe that others do not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-17-2015, 01:26 AM
 
Location: California USA
1,714 posts, read 1,149,521 times
Reputation: 471
Some thought about why Biblically the creation days are not literal 24 hour days...

Biblical Reasons to Doubt the Creation Days Were 24-Hour Periods | TGC
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 03:28 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,088 posts, read 20,723,660 times
Reputation: 5930
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd4me View Post
Yet Genesis 1:1 states God created the heavens (the celestial bodies of which suns are part of) and the earth

The fourth day does not mean the sun was created at that time because Genesis 1:3 already tells us that there was light and before that the Bible starts off with Genesis 1:1 which tells us that the celestial bodies and earth were created. Additionally, the Hebrew word bara which means to create is used in Genesis 1:1. In contrast, the Hebrew word asah (found in the later verses which give some the impression that the sun, moon, etc were created at that time) does NOT mean to create but accomplish,appoint etc. As further support Job 37:9 states God swaddled the earth in thick gloom and clouds and that coincides with what science indicates was the condition of the early earth atmosphere. Thus, the sun, moon, stars etc would not have been visible but there would be light as indicated in Genesis 1:3. By "day 4" the sun, moon, stars,etc became visible. This would be in line with what science indicates about the earth's atmosphere evolving over a very long time, billion plus years, going from a thick methane haze and eventually clearing to reveal blue skies and the accompanying luminaries in the sky.
Sorry. This is more apologetic wriggling. You are describing how it looked from an earth shrouded in gloom and clouds (Job 37.9? "Out of the south comes whirlwind, and out of the north, cold."? You must have some other passage in mind.) and not as it actually was. But there was nobody around to see how it looked from the earth. The Bible (if it is telling us what God knew) should logically describe what actually happened at creation, not how it looked from the human point of view - when there were no humans around to view it.

You are simply doing more fiddling to try to get Genesis to fit what science tells us about the order in which things happened. As I see in all the links to articles trying to fiddle the meanings of the Bible text to make it say something different from what it does say - that the light and dark were separated and alternating and were called day and night. Morning and evening. And each day of creation is marked by these mornings and evenings.

It's as plain as a pikestaff but, because it makes no sense to have mornings and evenings before the sun was created, we get Bible apologists trying to reinterpret the Hebrew to make a 'day' mean something other than a day, or introduce the 'cloud -cover' excuse which, as I point out above, makes no sense from a book telling us what God knew.

Bite the bullet, folks: Genesis does not fit science. Assuming you don't reject science in favour of Myth (and if you do, you have no basis for arguing anything from scientifically validated evidence), accept that Genesis is not accurate, fact, History or science. It is a mythological story loosely based on the Mesopotamian stories of creation after the 1st millennium B.C.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 07-17-2015 at 03:46 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 10:51 AM
 
92 posts, read 163,117 times
Reputation: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
You're wrong...The Same word is used in both verse 3 (גוַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי אוֹר וַיְהִי אוֹר and verse 4 (.וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי מְאֹרֹת בִּרְקִיעַ הַשָּׁמַיִם לְהַבְדִּיל בֵּין הַיּוֹם וּבֵין הַלָּיְלָה וְהָיוּ לְאֹתֹת וּלְמוֹעֲדִים וּלְיָמִים וְשָׁנִים...The first one means light and the latter means lights...

It is actually M'Orot...

BTW...G-d is light is not from the OT it is from the NT so it would be in Greek...Not Hebrew...


So...There ya go...

maor...Does not mean an object that emits light...Where in the world do you get this stuff from?...
Richard. I did not say that the word for light in verse 3 and 4 were different they are the same. In Strong's dictionary. The word is ore number h216. In verse 14 the word is different, the word is maor and plural the word is maorot and the number is H3974. So this is where I get this stuff. It's funny to me that a different word supposedly meaning the same thing is not the same word. And in verse 14 the word maor means
light as a element.

Born-again Jerry
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
Others around here tend to not be as snippy and arrogant. He is constantly telling me I'm stupid, and others their religion is dumb and that Christians in general are idiots.
Yes, I am surprised he is still allowed to post here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 11:40 AM
 
Location: US
32,530 posts, read 22,033,127 times
Reputation: 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerrydb View Post
Richard. I did not say that the word for light in verse 3 and 4 were different they are the same. In Strong's dictionary. The word is ore number h216. In verse 14 the word is different, the word is maor and plural the word is maorot and the number is H3974. So this is where I get this stuff. It's funny to me that a different word supposedly meaning the same thing is not the same word. And in verse 14 the word maor means
light as a element.

Born-again Jerry
No...Orot is plural for light and the prefixed mem means "from"...Strong's may not be accurate, try a Hebrew concordance that might not be biased in it's meanings...There are a few single letter prefixes in Hebrew that imply certain things, like the vav prefixed to a word means "and"... Basically it is saying "from the light [that He had created on day 1] in the firmament to separate dray and night [this was the purpose of the light that He had created on day 1]..."...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 11:41 AM
 
Location: US
32,530 posts, read 22,033,127 times
Reputation: 2227
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd4me View Post
Some believe that others do not.
According to Jewish sages of eons past...That is the way it went down...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 12:52 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,088 posts, read 20,723,660 times
Reputation: 5930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerrydb View Post
Richard. I did not say that the word for light in verse 3 and 4 were different they are the same. In Strong's dictionary. The word is ore number h216. In verse 14 the word is different, the word is maor and plural the word is maorot and the number is H3974. So this is where I get this stuff. It's funny to me that a different word supposedly meaning the same thing is not the same word. And in verse 14 the word maor means
light as a element.

Born-again Jerry
But doesn't that leave us with the same problem? Light-as an element made by God to put on a show of night and day; evening and morning, just as it is now with the sun and earth's rotation doing it, but before the sun was made. It makes no sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 01:37 PM
 
19,942 posts, read 17,192,123 times
Reputation: 2017
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965 View Post
Ok...So G-d created Himself?...
Where did you get such an idea?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2015, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,184,822 times
Reputation: 14070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Yes, I am surprised he is still allowed to post here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top