Posts: 2610
Threads: 22
Joined: May 18, 2012
Reputation:
17
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 8, 2014 at 8:51 pm
(January 8, 2014 at 6:28 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth."
Wrong. The scientific consensus places the age of the Universe to be around 13.8 billion years old. We could rightly say this constitutes the beginning. The Earth, on the other hand, is 4.5 billion years old. Does the beginning include the 9.3 billion years or so that followed the birth of the Universe? Perhaps Christians define "beginning" to include all time but that's obviously a dumb idea. Maybe we should re-define "heavens," "and," and "Earth" too.
So when Christians say that science doesn't contradict the Bible, tell them to open the first page and read the first sentence. Bam.
You have to try harder than that or you could just read a few verses further.
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin.
Posts: 5399
Threads: 256
Joined: December 1, 2013
Reputation:
60
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 8, 2014 at 8:58 pm
(January 8, 2014 at 8:51 pm)Polaris Wrote: (January 8, 2014 at 6:28 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth."
Wrong. The scientific consensus places the age of the Universe to be around 13.8 billion years old. We could rightly say this constitutes the beginning. The Earth, on the other hand, is 4.5 billion years old. Does the beginning include the 9.3 billion years or so that followed the birth of the Universe? Perhaps Christians define "beginning" to include all time but that's obviously a dumb idea. Maybe we should re-define "heavens," "and," and "Earth" too.
So when Christians say that science doesn't contradict the Bible, tell them to open the first page and read the first sentence. Bam.
You have to try harder than that or you could just read a few verses further.
You mean when we get to the magical fruit bit?
Posts: 2610
Threads: 22
Joined: May 18, 2012
Reputation:
17
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm
(January 8, 2014 at 8:58 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: (January 8, 2014 at 8:51 pm)Polaris Wrote: You have to try harder than that or you could just read a few verses further.
You mean when we get to the magical fruit bit?
That's a bad attempt at a joke, right?
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin.
Posts: 5399
Threads: 256
Joined: December 1, 2013
Reputation:
60
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 8, 2014 at 9:23 pm
(This post was last modified: January 8, 2014 at 10:37 pm by Mudhammam.)
(January 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm)Polaris Wrote: (January 8, 2014 at 8:58 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: You mean when we get to the magical fruit bit?
That's a bad attempt at a joke, right? Something like that. Wait. You don't actually believe a talking snake is the reason there are handicapped children in the world, do you?
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 9, 2014 at 12:48 am
(January 8, 2014 at 6:28 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth."
Wrong. The scientific consensus places the age of the Universe to be around 13.8 billion years old. We could rightly say this constitutes the beginning. The Earth, on the other hand, is 4.5 billion years old. Does the beginning include the 9.3 billion years or so that followed the birth of the Universe? Perhaps Christians define "beginning" to include all time but that's obviously a dumb idea. why is this a dumb idea? Because you decided to trivialize it? Please explain.
In the beginning God created the heavens, the Hebrew word for heavens is:
שָׁמַיִם shamayim. It means abode of the stars. This came first. The scientific consensus you mentioned agrees. Then the passage mentions 'the earth.' This came after the creation of the heavens, which again your source material confirms.. There is no time frame mentioned between the creation of heaven and earth. The only part of creation that is mentioned that ties itself to a time frame is the creation of light. Light was created on the first day. Don't confuse this with what happened 'in the beginning.'
Posts: 5389
Threads: 52
Joined: January 3, 2010
Reputation:
48
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 9, 2014 at 5:50 am
(January 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm)Polaris Wrote: (January 8, 2014 at 8:58 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: You mean when we get to the magical fruit bit?
That's a bad attempt at a joke, right?
And after that the bible gets really stupid.
If you're not supposed to ride faster than your guardian angel can fly then mine had better get a bloody SR-71.
Posts: 5399
Threads: 256
Joined: December 1, 2013
Reputation:
60
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 9, 2014 at 8:59 am
(January 9, 2014 at 12:48 am)Drich Wrote: (January 8, 2014 at 6:28 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth."
Wrong. The scientific consensus places the age of the Universe to be around 13.8 billion years old. We could rightly say this constitutes the beginning. The Earth, on the other hand, is 4.5 billion years old. Does the beginning include the 9.3 billion years or so that followed the birth of the Universe? Perhaps Christians define "beginning" to include all time but that's obviously a dumb idea. why is this a dumb idea? Because you decided to trivialize it? Please explain.
In the beginning God created the heavens, the Hebrew word for heavens is:
שָׁמַיִם shamayim. It means abode of the stars. This came first. The scientific consensus you mentioned agrees. Then the passage mentions 'the earth.' This came after the creation of the heavens, which again your source material confirms.. There is no time frame mentioned between the creation of heaven and earth. The only part of creation that is mentioned that ties itself to a time frame is the creation of light. Light was created on the first day. Don't confuse this with what happened 'in the beginning.'
How convenient that interpretations of the text can change when the sciences actually discover how the world works. Does it ever work the other way around, where the interpretation enlightens our scientific knowledge? I think not. But even if you are smart enough to read Genesis as myth most of your brothers and sisters in heaven and on earth do/did not.
Posts: 6990
Threads: 89
Joined: January 6, 2012
Reputation:
103
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 9, 2014 at 9:02 am
(January 8, 2014 at 9:11 pm)Polaris Wrote: (January 8, 2014 at 8:58 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: You mean when we get to the magical fruit bit?
That's a bad attempt at a joke, right?
Genesis is the joke.
Posts: 13392
Threads: 187
Joined: March 18, 2012
Reputation:
48
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 9, 2014 at 9:07 am
(January 9, 2014 at 8:59 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: (January 9, 2014 at 12:48 am)Drich Wrote: why is this a dumb idea? Because you decided to trivialize it? Please explain.
In the beginning God created the heavens, the Hebrew word for heavens is:
שָׁמַיִם shamayim. It means abode of the stars. This came first. The scientific consensus you mentioned agrees. Then the passage mentions 'the earth.' This came after the creation of the heavens, which again your source material confirms.. There is no time frame mentioned between the creation of heaven and earth. The only part of creation that is mentioned that ties itself to a time frame is the creation of light. Light was created on the first day. Don't confuse this with what happened 'in the beginning.'
How convenient that interpretations of the text can change when the sciences actually discover how the world works. Does it ever work the other way around, where the interpretation enlightens our scientific knowledge? I think not. But even if you are smart enough to read Genesis as myth most of your brothers and sisters in heaven and on earth do/did not. We are only responsible for what we are given to understand. If we have an understanding of how the world works outside the bible then we are to reconcile the what we under with scripture. Scripture being the unchanging foundation. If we do not have this understanding then we do not know how to 'read it accurately.' As with revelation, a full understanding is not required, just responsibility for what we understand.
Posts: 6990
Threads: 89
Joined: January 6, 2012
Reputation:
103
RE: Genesis 1:1 contradicts science.
January 9, 2014 at 9:09 am
(This post was last modified: January 9, 2014 at 9:09 am by Fidel_Castronaut.)
(January 9, 2014 at 9:07 am)Drich Wrote: We are only responsible for what we are given to understand. If we have an understanding of how the world works outside the bible then we are to reconcile the what we under with scripture. Scripture being the unchanging foundation. If we do not have this understanding then we do not know how to 'read it accurately.' As with revelation, a full understanding is not required, just responsibility for what we understand.
"So even when scripture seems wrong, it's actually you that is wrong as scripture is always right...even when it's wrong, which it can't be as it's always right."
Sounds legit.
|