RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Part 2 Tree of the knowledge of good and evil - RightNation.US

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Part 2 Tree of the knowledge of good and evil Rate Topic: -----

#41 User is offline   rogerg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 06-May 04

Posted 18 July 2019 - 08:19 AM

View PostMontyPython, on 17 July 2019 - 11:57 PM, said:

???

Presuming you read my post immediately preceding your post (post #32), I must confess I don't understand your question. You did read my post, right? Then you've already read the answer to your question.

I mean, you recognize (I presume) that residue from something that happened, say, 10,000 years ago will be found underneath residue from something that happened, say, 5000 years ago, not above.

And in any case, SARGE's link does a much better job than I ever could.

B)


Guess I was trying to figure out what you actually know about the details of subject to understand why you believe it so strongly. From what I can gather, you believe it because... well.. because scientists say to believe it even though they don't seem to be real sure themselves. Please observe ( from the Washington Post):



"But scientists will keep trying to shave down that degree of uncertainty in their estimate by analyzing every ancient Earth rock, meteorite and solar system sample they can get their hands on. As the U.S. Geological Survey explains: “The best age for the Earth comes not from dating individual rocks but by considering the Earth and meteorites as part of the same evolving system.”

But as I'm unfamiliar with the subject, will continue to research it

This post has been edited by rogerg: 18 July 2019 - 08:20 AM

0

#42 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,806
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 18 July 2019 - 10:44 AM

View PostJerryL, on 18 July 2019 - 06:37 AM, said:

I have wanted to address this particular belief with you for some time, but have missed the opportunities previously.

IMHO, you are mistaken about this being a myth. God created time.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
Genesis 1:3-5

In that passage, God CREATES the first day...the first 24 hour period. Prior to that, the human and earthly concept of a 24 hour "day" did not exist. As God created time, he had to be there before time. So, you see, God exists outside of what we consider to be time. Existing outside of what we consider to be "time," he is not bound by that time. He "is" and he always "was," even before "time" existed.

You are doing the same thing that a certain poster who considered himself to be exceedingly Rational did. You are constraining God to human understanding. Who can say that God can't create billions of human/earthly years of geologic and creation/extinction/adaptation history in one 24 hour period of human time? Not I, certainly.


With the single exception of that final paragraph (which I think is rather unfair), I agree with every part of that, and always have. But I don't see how it addresses my positions at all. Yes, God exists outside time, and therefore to God, a split-second might just as well be a billion years. It makes no difference to Him. But we don't live outside time, and therefore we can't pretend a split-second is the same as a billion years. So we can't just arbitrarily dismiss the countless proofs of a billions-of-years-old world.

And remember that in both of these threads I have made it crystal clear that it's not my position that God "couldn't" have created the universe in any fashion He pleased, and at any speed. He could've done it in a split-second like snapping fingers, or in six 24-hour days, or in billions of years, or anywhere in between. I have never suggested there's anything God "couldn't" do.

As for His being perfectly capable of creating the universe in six 24-hour days, but leaving behind innumerable proofs of a billions-of-years-old world, the reason I can't accept that proposition is because I don't believe for one second in a "trickster" God, a God who would deliberately lead us astray. He gave us eyes to see, ears to hear, hands to touch, brains to think and minds to reason, and I simply do not accept any suggestion that we "aren't supposed to use them". The proofs of a billions-of-years-old world are all around us, and I believe it's sinful to not use those gifts God gave us to recognize them.

I would also point out the fact that when the books of the Bible were written, there was no such word as "day", because there was no such thing as "The English Language". The word was "Nom", and while it was sometimes used in reference to a 24-hour period, it was also used in reference to an indeterminately long period of time, like "Back in my day"...or..."In the day of the dinosaur"...or..."In the day of chivalry and knights in armor"...and so forth. It was modern imperfect human translators who chose to use the word "day"...rather imprecisely in this particular case.


View Postrogerg, on 18 July 2019 - 08:19 AM, said:

Guess I was trying to figure out what you actually know about the details of subject to understand why you believe it so strongly. From what I can gather, you believe it because... well.. because scientists say to believe it even though they don't seem to be real sure themselves. Please observe ( from the Washington Post):



"But scientists will keep trying to shave down that degree of uncertainty in their estimate by analyzing every ancient Earth rock, meteorite and solar system sample they can get their hands on. As the U.S. Geological Survey explains: “The best age for the Earth comes not from dating individual rocks but by considering the Earth and meteorites as part of the same evolving system.”

But as I'm unfamiliar with the subject, will continue to research it


No link. Therefore I have no way of knowing the author's whole point, nor his biases, nor his religious (if any) constraints, nor his credibility or integrity or objectivity, nor anything else about him.

But from that short blurb, it seems as though he's suggesting there's something wrong with analyzing everything we can get our hands on. If that's not his point, then it's written very poorly. But if it is, then that's ridiculous.

:shrug:

This post has been edited by MontyPython: 18 July 2019 - 10:44 AM

0

#43 User is offline   rogerg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 06-May 04

Posted 18 July 2019 - 12:21 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 18 July 2019 - 10:44 AM, said:

With the single exception of that final paragraph (which I think is rather unfair), I agree with every part of that, and always have. But I don't see how it addresses my positions at all. Yes, God exists outside time, and therefore to God, a split-second might just as well be a billion years. It makes no difference to Him. But we don't live outside time, and therefore we can't pretend a split-second is the same as a billion years. So we can't just arbitrarily dismiss the countless proofs of a billions-of-years-old world.

And remember that in both of these threads I have made it crystal clear that it's not my position that God "couldn't" have created the universe in any fashion He pleased, and at any speed. He could've done it in a split-second like snapping fingers, or in six 24-hour days, or in billions of years, or anywhere in between. I have never suggested there's anything God "couldn't" do.

As for His being perfectly capable of creating the universe in six 24-hour days, but leaving behind innumerable proofs of a billions-of-years-old world, the reason I can't accept that proposition is because I don't believe for one second in a "trickster" God, a God who would deliberately lead us astray. He gave us eyes to see, ears to hear, hands to touch, brains to think and minds to reason, and I simply do not accept any suggestion that we "aren't supposed to use them". The proofs of a billions-of-years-old world are all around us, and I believe it's sinful to not use those gifts God gave us to recognize them.

I would also point out the fact that when the books of the Bible were written, there was no such word as "day", because there was no such thing as "The English Language". The word was "Nom", and while it was sometimes used in reference to a 24-hour period, it was also used in reference to an indeterminately long period of time, like "Back in my day"...or..."In the day of the dinosaur"...or..."In the day of chivalry and knights in armor"...and so forth. It was modern imperfect human translators who chose to use the word "day"...rather imprecisely in this particular case.




No link. Therefore I have no way of knowing the author's whole point, nor his biases, nor his religious (if any) constraints, nor his credibility or integrity or objectivity, nor anything else about him.

But from that short blurb, it seems as though he's suggesting there's something wrong with analyzing everything we can get our hands on. If that's not his point, then it's written very poorly. But if it is, then that's ridiculous.

:shrug:


Sorry -- forgot to include that:


https://www.washingt...m=.a1c203a1ecd6
0

#44 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,806
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 18 July 2019 - 12:33 PM

View Postrogerg, on 18 July 2019 - 12:21 PM, said:

Sorry -- forgot to include that:


https://www.washingt...m=.a1c203a1ecd6


Oh. Rats. It's a "subscriber only" site and I'm not a subscriber. So it won't allow me to read it.

:shrug:
0

#45 User is offline   SARGE 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,915
  • Joined: 26-June 03

Posted 18 July 2019 - 01:03 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 18 July 2019 - 10:44 AM, said:

With the single exception of that final paragraph (which I think is rather unfair), I agree with every part of that, and always have. But I don't see how it addresses my positions at all. Yes, God exists outside time, and therefore to God, a split-second might just as well be a billion years. It makes no difference to Him. But we don't live outside time, and therefore we can't pretend a split-second is the same as a billion years. So we can't just arbitrarily dismiss the countless proofs of a billions-of-years-old world.

And remember that in both of these threads I have made it crystal clear that it's not my position that God "couldn't" have created the universe in any fashion He pleased, and at any speed. He could've done it in a split-second like snapping fingers, or in six 24-hour days, or in billions of years, or anywhere in between. I have never suggested there's anything God "couldn't" do.

As for His being perfectly capable of creating the universe in six 24-hour days, but leaving behind innumerable proofs of a billions-of-years-old world, the reason I can't accept that proposition is because I don't believe for one second in a "trickster" God, a God who would deliberately lead us astray. He gave us eyes to see, ears to hear, hands to touch, brains to think and minds to reason, and I simply do not accept any suggestion that we "aren't supposed to use them". The proofs of a billions-of-years-old world are all around us, and I believe it's sinful to not use those gifts God gave us to recognize them.

I would also point out the fact that when the books of the Bible were written, there was no such word as "day", because there was no such thing as "The English Language". The word was "Nom", and while it was sometimes used in reference to a 24-hour period, it was also used in reference to an indeterminately long period of time, like "Back in my day"...or..."In the day of the dinosaur"...or..."In the day of chivalry and knights in armor"...and so forth. It was modern imperfect human translators who chose to use the word "day"...rather imprecisely in this particular case.




No link. Therefore I have no way of knowing the author's whole point, nor his biases, nor his religious (if any) constraints, nor his credibility or integrity or objectivity, nor anything else about him.

But from that short blurb, it seems as though he's suggesting there's something wrong with analyzing everything we can get our hands on. If that's not his point, then it's written very poorly. But if it is, then that's ridiculous.

:shrug:

0

#46 User is offline   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 12,407
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 18 July 2019 - 01:33 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 18 July 2019 - 10:44 AM, said:

With the single exception of that final paragraph (which I think is rather unfair), I agree with every part of that, and always have. But I don't see how it addresses my positions at all. Yes, God exists outside time, and therefore to God, a split-second might just as well be a billion years. It makes no difference to Him. But we don't live outside time, and therefore we can't pretend a split-second is the same as a billion years. So we can't just arbitrarily dismiss the countless proofs of a billions-of-years-old world.

And remember that in both of these threads I have made it crystal clear that it's not my position that God "couldn't" have created the universe in any fashion He pleased, and at any speed. He could've done it in a split-second like snapping fingers, or in six 24-hour days, or in billions of years, or anywhere in between. I have never suggested there's anything God "couldn't" do.

As for His being perfectly capable of creating the universe in six 24-hour days, but leaving behind innumerable proofs of a billions-of-years-old world, the reason I can't accept that proposition is because I don't believe for one second in a "trickster" God, a God who would deliberately lead us astray. He gave us eyes to see, ears to hear, hands to touch, brains to think and minds to reason, and I simply do not accept any suggestion that we "aren't supposed to use them". The proofs of a billions-of-years-old world are all around us, and I believe it's sinful to not use those gifts God gave us to recognize them.

I would also point out the fact that when the books of the Bible were written, there was no such word as "day", because there was no such thing as "The English Language". The word was "Nom", and while it was sometimes used in reference to a 24-hour period, it was also used in reference to an indeterminately long period of time, like "Back in my day"...or..."In the day of the dinosaur"...or..."In the day of chivalry and knights in armor"...and so forth. It was modern imperfect human translators who chose to use the word "day"...rather imprecisely in this particular case


Back at you tomorrow. Too much to respond to on my phone. But rest assured that I didnít mean to question you in any negative or aggressive manner. You know I respect you, brother!
0

#47 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,806
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 18 July 2019 - 01:55 PM

View PostJerryL, on 18 July 2019 - 01:33 PM, said:

Back at you tomorrow. Too much to respond to on my phone. But rest assured that I didnít mean to question you in any negative or aggressive manner. You know I respect you, brother!


Yup, I do know that. You're a good friend, and I didn't take any of your comments as though they were "negatively" intended.

I have a hunch that, just like with Roger, we're simply going to disagree, and our canyon-wide disagreements will probably never be bridged. I am a Christian, I believe in God, I have accepted Jesus as my personal savior, I attend a VERY loving Bible-based church full of courageous prayer-warriors, and am absolutely confident in my salvation. But I am equally confident that, while the Bible is the final authority on all things spiritual, it just plain can not be taken literally when it comes to things like history, geology, anthropology, science, etc. It's a great book full of excellent lessons on how to be a good, loving, forgiving, generous, courageous, strong person, as well as plenty of exciting stories and adventure and stuff. But it simply isn't an accurate source for the description or explanation of the creation of the world. The creation story as given in Genesis is a lovely but very simplistic story intended for very simplistic tribes who simply weren't sophisticated enough to be familiar with concepts like geology/anthropology/evolution/scientific research/etc.

B)
0

#48 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,806
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 18 July 2019 - 03:13 PM

By the way, today is my day with my grandson (YAY!), so I likely won't be back here until late tonight or sometime tomorrow.

B)
0

#49 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,806
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 18 July 2019 - 03:23 PM

Oh, and one more "by the way" - I see I have once again taken one of these threads completely off-topic. :blush: This is supposed to be about the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, not the validity or non-validity of the 6-day creation.

Sorry.

:blush:
0

#50 User is offline   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 12,407
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 19 July 2019 - 02:29 AM

View PostMontyPython, on 18 July 2019 - 10:44 AM, said:

With the single exception of that final paragraph (which I think is rather unfair), I agree with every part of that, and always have. But I don't see how it addresses my positions at all. Yes, God exists outside time, and therefore to God, a split-second might just as well be a billion years. It makes no difference to Him. But we don't live outside time, and therefore we can't pretend a split-second is the same as a billion years. So we can't just arbitrarily dismiss the countless proofs of a billions-of-years-old world.

And remember that in both of these threads I have made it crystal clear that it's not my position that God "couldn't" have created the universe in any fashion He pleased, and at any speed. He could've done it in a split-second like snapping fingers, or in six 24-hour days, or in billions of years, or anywhere in between. I have never suggested there's anything God "couldn't" do.

As for His being perfectly capable of creating the universe in six 24-hour days, but leaving behind innumerable proofs of a billions-of-years-old world, the reason I can't accept that proposition is because I don't believe for one second in a "trickster" God, a God who would deliberately lead us astray. He gave us eyes to see, ears to hear, hands to touch, brains to think and minds to reason, and I simply do not accept any suggestion that we "aren't supposed to use them". The proofs of a billions-of-years-old world are all around us, and I believe it's sinful to not use those gifts God gave us to recognize them.

I would also point out the fact that when the books of the Bible were written, there was no such word as "day", because there was no such thing as "The English Language". The word was "Nom", and while it was sometimes used in reference to a 24-hour period, it was also used in reference to an indeterminately long period of time, like "Back in my day"...or..."In the day of the dinosaur"...or..."In the day of chivalry and knights in armor"...and so forth. It was modern imperfect human translators who chose to use the word "day"...rather imprecisely in this particular case.


First, a couple of verses:

As you do not know the path of the wind,
or how the body is formed in a motherís womb,
so you cannot understand the work of God,
the Maker of all things.
Ecclesiastes 11:5

As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Isaiah 55:9

Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
The Lord is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.
Isaiah 40:28

Great is the Lord and most worthy of praise;
his greatness no one can fathom.
Psalm 145:3

Bottom line is we don't know how he created the Heavens and the Earth. We don't know whether it was done in a 24-hour day or in a period of time, or even a concept of time known only to God. All we know is that His thoughts and His power and His ways are beyond our comprehension...we CANNOT understand them. He has told us this.

I am sorry, but you can't say, particularly as you acknowledge what God "can" do, that you "know" that billions of years of time, as we understand it, elapsed getting us to where we are now. You can believe it, but you can't "know" it.

But here is the beauty of it. It doesn't really matter. You and I both believe that Jesus is the Son of God, born of a virgin, who led a life free from sin. We believe that he was crucified, conquered the grave and Satan and paid our sins in full. We believe that, upon his resurrection, he made the way for you and I to become sons of God, our sins fully forgiven, and granted eternal life with Him.

I don't know what kind of "day" is meant in the creation story. I think it makes for interesting discussion from a theological point of view. What I do know, though, is that Satan uses it to separate man from God. Look at the Rational one. He doesn't believe in the God that we believe in because he doesn't believe that God can do anything that he is unable to comprehend...even though the Bible tells us the exact opposite. His mind does not allow the concept of a being that is greater than himself. That is "W" for Satan.

I think that once we get to heaven, all the seeming "contradictions" and "impossibilities" will make perfect sense. Until then, the "Salvation" story is the only one that really matters.

If you believe in Salvation and also believe that the world is billions of years old, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and also believe that the world is 6000 years old, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and don't know how the world was created, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and also believe in strict creationism when it comes to man and animals, or speciation, or adaptation, or evolution, or any combination of them all....GREAT! We are brothers in Christ.

And I don't, even for a second, doubt or question your Christianity, brother.

Hope you had a great day with your grandson and my best to your lovely lady!
0

#51 User is offline   rogerg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 06-May 04

Posted 19 July 2019 - 08:37 AM

View PostJerryL, on 19 July 2019 - 02:29 AM, said:

First, a couple of verses:

As you do not know the path of the wind,
or how the body is formed in a motherís womb,
so you cannot understand the work of God,
the Maker of all things.
Ecclesiastes 11:5

As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Isaiah 55:9

Do you not know?
Have you not heard?

The Lord is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.
Isaiah 40:28

Great is the Lord and most worthy of praise;
his greatness no one can fathom.
Psalm 145:3

Bottom line is we don't know how he created the Heavens and the Earth. We don't know whether it was done in a 24-hour day or in a period of time, or even a concept of time known only to God. All we know is that His thoughts and His power and His ways are beyond our comprehension...we CANNOT understand them. He has told us this.

I am sorry, but you can't say, particularly as you acknowledge what God "can" do, that you "know" that billions of years of time, as we understand it, elapsed getting us to where we are now. You can believe it, but you can't "know" it.

But here is the beauty of it. It doesn't really matter. You and I both believe that Jesus is the Son of God, born of a virgin, who led a life free from sin. We believe that he was crucified, conquered the grave and Satan and paid our sins in full. We believe that, upon his resurrection, he made the way for you and I to become sons of God, our sins fully forgiven, and granted eternal life with Him.

I don't know what kind of "day" is meant in the creation story. I think it makes for interesting discussion from a theological point of view. What I do know, though, is that Satan uses it to separate man from God. Look at the Rational one. He doesn't believe in the God that we believe in because he doesn't believe that God can do anything that he is unable to comprehend...even though the Bible tells us the exact opposite. His mind does not allow the concept of a being that is greater than himself. That is "W" for Satan.

I think that once we get to heaven, all the seeming "contradictions" and "impossibilities" will make perfect sense. Until then, the "Salvation" story is the only one that really matters.

If you believe in Salvation and also believe that the world is billions of years old, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and also believe that the world is 6000 years old, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and don't know how the world was created, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and also believe in strict creationism when it comes to man and animals, or speciation, or adaptation, or evolution, or any combination of them all....GREAT! We are brothers in Christ.

And I don't, even for a second, doubt or question your Christianity, brother.

Hope you had a great day with your grandson and my best to your lovely lady!


I mostly agree with your post but I would add the following :

[Gen 1:5 KJV]
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

As I mentioned previously, as far as I can determine (and consider that I just began looking into this yesterday), in the above verse, God clearly
sets the parameters of what constitutes a single day. I guess we could disagree based upon geographical location or some other factor, but the difference would be a question of
hors, not billions of years.

I also noticed that God informed us that He used the same time/day construct for the remaining creation days with no alteration to what was written regarding the first day.

Please observe:
[Gen 1:8, 13-14, 16, 18-19, 23, 31 KJV]
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: [he made] the stars also.
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that [it was] good.
(God institutes the sun and the moon to divide the day from the night but didn't change what constitutes a day -- only provided a visible demarcation between them
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Since God "rested" on the sixth day, after that point, a change to the construct of a day couldn't possibly have occurred.
The sun and the moon remain the timekeepers even today. Until they're removed (which will eventually occur) a day today remains the same day as it was during creation
because the sun and the moon remain.

I very well might have missed something, or just don't understand, but I am unable to find any intervening verses where God tells us (or implies) that He changed this pattern -
but it's certainly possible that I have.

Sorry -- I missed many yesterday's posts until this morning but wanted to include this one too
0

#52 User is offline   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 12,407
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 19 July 2019 - 08:57 AM

View Postrogerg, on 19 July 2019 - 08:37 AM, said:

I mostly agree with your post but I would add the following :

[Gen 1:5 KJV]
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

As I mentioned previously, as far as I can determine (and consider that I just began looking into this yesterday), in the above verse, God clearly
sets the parameters of what constitutes a single day. I guess we could disagree based upon geographical location or some other factor, but the difference would be a question of
hors, not billions of years.

I also noticed that God informed us that He used the same time/day construct for the remaining creation days with no alteration to what was written regarding the first day.

Please observe:
[Gen 1:8, 13-14, 16, 18-19, 23, 31 KJV]
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: [he made] the stars also.
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that [it was] good.
(God institutes the sun and the moon to divide the day from the night but didn't change what constitutes a day -- only provided a visible demarcation between them
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Since God "rested" on the sixth day, after that point, a change to the construct of a day couldn't possibly have occurred.
The sun and the moon remain the timekeepers even today. Until they're removed (which will eventually occur) a day today remains the same day as it was during creation
because the sun and the moon remain.

I very well might have missed something, or just don't understand, but I am unable to find any intervening verses where God tells us (or implies) that He changed this pattern -
but it's certainly possible that I have.

Sorry -- I missed many yesterday's posts until this morning but wanted to include this one too

We aren't in any big disagreement. I agree that it was on the "first day" that the very concept of time, as we track it, was "created." I also agree that God used that unit of time for the rest of his creation. All I am saying is that God, who exists outside of the time He created, is not limited in what He can accomplish in a period of our time.

If He wanted to compress billions of years of geologic and biologic record into the first 24 hours of His creation of the heavens and the earth and night and day, who am I to say He couldn't do that and that the billions of years had to pass as we witness time passing?
0

#53 User is offline   rogerg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 873
  • Joined: 06-May 04

Posted 19 July 2019 - 09:12 AM

View PostJerryL, on 19 July 2019 - 08:57 AM, said:

We aren't in any big disagreement. I agree that it was on the "first day" that the very concept of time, as we track it, was "created." I also agree that God used that unit of time for the rest of his creation. All I am saying is that God, who exists outside of the time He created, is not limited in what He can accomplish in a period of our time.

If He wanted to compress billions of years of geologic and biologic record into the first 24 hours of His creation of the heavens and the earth and night and day, who am I to say He couldn't do that and that the billions of years had to pass as we witness time passing?


Yep gotta agree with that
0

#54 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,806
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 19 July 2019 - 11:19 AM

:coffeenpc:

Moving straight to the real meat of the matter:

View PostJerryL, on 19 July 2019 - 02:29 AM, said:

I think that once we get to heaven, all the seeming "contradictions" and "impossibilities" will make perfect sense. Until then, the "Salvation" story is the only one that really matters.

If you believe in Salvation and also believe that the world is billions of years old, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and also believe that the world is 6000 years old, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and don't know how the world was created, great! We are brothers in Christ.
If you believe in Salvation and also believe in strict creationism when it comes to man and animals, or speciation, or adaptation, or evolution, or any combination of them all....GREAT! We are brothers in Christ.


PERFECTLY put. I had put together responses to the parts that came before that, but after reading the above I realized that's all that really matters.

:2up:


View PostJerryL, on 19 July 2019 - 02:29 AM, said:

And I don't, even for a second, doubt or question your Christianity, brother.


Yup, I knew that, the same right back atcha, Brother! :yes:

And for the record, the same goes for you too, Roger. :yes:


View PostJerryL, on 19 July 2019 - 02:29 AM, said:

Hope you had a great day with your grandson and my best to your lovely lady!


I did have a great day, though completely exhausting, LOL. I'm sure you know as well as I how much energy is bundled up into a 6-yr-old kid, and how hopeless it is for a 64-yr-old man to try to keep up!

:hot:
0

#55 User is offline   ASE 

  • You do NOT have a right to NOT BE OFFENDED!!
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 7,807
  • Joined: 15-June 03

Posted 19 July 2019 - 12:45 PM

View PostWag-a-Muffin (D), on 16 July 2019 - 04:58 PM, said:

I disagree.
In my opinion The Old Testament is a record of God's dealings with His Chosen People. My husband and I are reading it together and I don't know how many times we've been instructed (in the text) to read more on a topic in a book that isn't included in our Bible. (Book of Jasher. Book of Gad the seer and others.) And The New Testament is a collection of writings from first and second person journals. (The Gospels, Acts, and Revelation.) John and Matthew actually saw and knew Christ. Mark and Luke were writing from what they had heard about him and letters to new church members, unsure of doctrine, which were made into a book. We don't have the letters written to the Apostles from the new church members, so we just have to "guess" at what questions the new converts who were trying to live the faith had.


The Bible is the word of God. But it wasn't handed down to us, like the 10 commandments. It was compiled by people who were doing the best they could, with help from the Lord.

You don't have to agree with me. (As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure you won't.) And that's okay. But I wanted to post what I believe and why.

Actually, if you read translations of some of the really old Sumerian texts, the creation they mention (much older than the Biblical account) is quite similar, and some folks even claim that the scriptures of the ancient jews were taken from even older accounts, perhaps even the Sumerian writings.

Also, regarding the 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil', I don't think it was an actual tree; I think it was symbolic of guidance from God on what to take into your body, and what not to, and that if you do take certain things in, your life will be shortened for doing so. (Read: 'Jesus the Christ', by James E. Talmage)
0

#56 User is offline   ASE 

  • You do NOT have a right to NOT BE OFFENDED!!
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 7,807
  • Joined: 15-June 03

Posted 19 July 2019 - 01:57 PM

I believe that the 6000 years time-frame may have come from this:

(KJV) 2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the LORD as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I would have thought the passage was illustrating that time has no relevance for God; He is without beginning or end, and is therefore constant and timeless.

Also, there are two creations mentioned. In the first one, on the 6th 'day', creation was complete, and on the 7th God rested.
Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

However, if you read further, in Gen 2:4 - 5 it is saying that these are the generations (or the creation process) of the heavens and the earth, and the plants of the field before they were in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. There was not yet a man to till the ground, and it had not rained on the earth.

Now, how could this be if we already read that creation was complete?

Unless...

The first creation was a spiritual creation, and the 2nd was the physical creation. In Gen 2:7 is described the creation of man's physical body, and then reading further, you see that man is alone, and had to be put to sleep to enable the creation of the woman, despite the prior mention in Gen 1:27 that 'male and female created He them.'

Now, the 2nd creation does not give any indication of how long it took. I will postulate that it may have taken far longer than we are aware. In Gen 1:16 the sun, moon, and stars are created. Some of those stars are millions of light years away, and even the closest ones are 4.7 light years away. Yet, despite those distances, we are able to see more than we can count. If creation took only 6000 years, and the stars are mentioned as having their creation during this process (Gen 1:16), how are we able to see them? The only way that makes sense is if 2nd creation, the physical one, took far longer.

Another consideration is that we see the fossil record, and if the date-setting methods have any reliability, those are millions of years old. Even, if only partially accurate, those are still far older than a mere 6000 years. By Him, we have been given brains, minds, and by a small measure, the power to reason. We see the evidence of our eyes. Surely God would not expect us to completely discount what is plainly evident? I don't see any contradiction between what is written, and what I see.

This post has been edited by ASE: 20 July 2019 - 01:15 PM

0

#57 User is offline   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 12,407
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 19 July 2019 - 04:28 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 19 July 2019 - 11:19 AM, said:

:coffeenpc:

Moving straight to the real meat of the matter:



PERFECTLY put. I had put together responses to the parts that came before that, but after reading the above I realized that's all that really matters.

:2up:




Yup, I knew that, the same right back atcha, Brother! :yes:

And for the record, the same goes for you too, Roger. :yes:




I did have a great day, though completely exhausting, LOL. I'm sure you know as well as I how much energy is bundled up into a 6-yr-old kid, and how hopeless it is for a 64-yr-old man to try to keep up!

:hot:

Brothers in Christís love ! Ainít it beautiful.

You have an awesome weekend!

This post has been edited by JerryL: 19 July 2019 - 04:28 PM

0

#58 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,806
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 19 July 2019 - 07:20 PM

View PostJerryL, on 19 July 2019 - 04:28 PM, said:

Brothers in Christ’s love ! Ain’t it beautiful.

You have an awesome weekend!


You too. And Rochelle says hello to you too, and (Oops) your lovely wife (edited to remove her name. Didn't know if you wanted it posted publicly.)

B)

This post has been edited by MontyPython: 19 July 2019 - 07:22 PM

0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users