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.
Some people say christian teachings are compatible with evolution.
But why is there nothing about evolution in the bible? The bible makes clear the
world was created in six days. There's nothing ambiguous about the origins of life according
to genesis. The world was created in 6 days, and a day mean means a day.
It doesn't mean a million years or a billion years.
The bible is not a science book. But how can a book that presumes to explain the origin of life
not say a word about something that is so critical and fundamental (evolution) to all life as we know it?
I'm not familiar with what Islam has to say about it but I'm sure there's probably a similar genesis story in the Koran
that is just as silly as the one in the Bible and Jewish Torah (which I think is just the OT).
Some people say christian teachings are compatible with evolution.
But why is there nothing about evolution in the bible? The bible makes clear the
world was created in six days. There's nothing ambiguous about the origins of life according
to genesis. The world was created in 6 days, and a day mean means a day.
It doesn't mean a million years or a billion years.
The bible is not a science book. But how can a book that presumes to explain the origin of life
not say a word about something that is so critical and fundamental (evolution) to all life as we know it?
I'm not familiar with what Islam has to say about it but I'm sure there's probably a similar genesis story in the Koran
that is just as silly as the one in the Bible and Jewish Torah (which I think is just the OT).
It's not hard to understand at all if one considers the source: any and all things biblical were written hundreds-to-thousands of years ago.
Consider this:
People thousands of years ago did not know what people today know.
Let that sink in, if need be.
Take your time.
Thousands of years ago = people believed primitive things.
Can we all agree to that?
Ok - that was a firm "NO" from the Calvinists. They're over there, trying to get the fire going by rubbing sticks while shrugging off offers of Bics from the Atheists. Seems they figure the child-proof thingy is of the devil....
Vizio, I'm sure you know that the bible writings are supposedly revealed by god to the authors. Now, if that is the case, would that god make a mistake as blatant as the source of light on the moon? Really?
The scriptures are not revealed, but inspired. There is a difference. God didn't just dictate scriptures -- he inspired men to write them. That's why we see personal styles of writing. That's why you can tell Paul's writing apart from Peter's simply by reading the style.
Quote:
If it truly is a revealed book by your god, then you'd think that god would at least ensure the basics are right. One would think.
Not if you understand that God didn't dictate, but inspired. It's a figure of speech. One easily realizes that the moon does not have it's own source of light any more than the sun literally sets behind the horizon.
Quote:
However, if that book and the writings in it are not revealed by a god, but the words of men, well, all of a sudden, maybe that book ain't that worthy of being held up as infallible.
You're getting closer....they are the words of man....as inspired by God. They are without error, but they are written with figures of speech and style common to the culture.
Good grief, you are really nitpicking the Bible here. Yes, I believe in a literal Bible, but not to the extent where every single word must be factually literal. Language has to taken into account here. I've never had a problem with this verse because it is simply distinguishing night from day. Moonlight is a lesser light then sunlight. There is no reason to go into detail about the specific sources of these lights especially since it would be hard for these ancient people to grasp. So the passage is written in a way that these ppl can understand the creation yet not lose meaning for modern day readers. That is the supernatural essence of the Holy Bible.
If you want to hold the Bible against science then study the Mosaic laws which taught the Israelites how to protect against infectious diseases thousands of years before science even understood bacteria.
The amazing non-literal flexibility of the literalist.
Well, what makes you think this isn't the 1,500,000th time world has been re-made, and were only 6,000 years in on this iteration, on a planet billions of years old now? That's kind of depressing to think about. I know I, and the angels existed before this world did so technically that makes me at least 6,000 years old.
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.
