Godschild. I worry that you don't even know which language many of the scriptures were originally written in.
The concept of time measured in "hours" was not defined when Genesis was written. Day was used (as even you acknowledged) to signify both a solar day and a significant period in time. A day of destiny does not literally mean 24 hours. Why you keep measuring the lunar calendar is beyond me as the moon wasn't created until day 4 (and it says nothing about it being set in motion). Time in the old testament cannot be accurately judged by modern standards because of a lack of understanding of basic principles regarding the motions of the sun and the moon. Seasons were often counted as years which also led to mistakes during bouts of unusual weather. If you take away our modern definitions of hour, day, month, year etc. how WOULD you describe 6 separate periods of creation? Ergo, saying it was the first day (of Creation) does not mean it was the first 24 hours. Let's face it, Genesis doesn't even say which day God started on (because Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday etc. didn't exist as words when Genesis was written), so why assume Saturday or Sunday is his Sabbath? The Babylonians hadn't sold Moses one of their new Pirelli Calendars so with the greatest of respect to the author of the first few books, he didn't really have much of a handle on timekeeping or recording.
Suggesting it took place at night was what we normal people call "a joke" because it says "the evening and the morning were the n'th day" and not vice versa.
Did I deny his omnipotence or did I suggest that he had chosen a particular method of creation? What I have done is remove all human limits from him. I simply believe that human ideas of time have been added to the story to help people make sense of it, so everything fits in a place. It simply isn't necessary and it makes no sense to make the literal translation so fundamental to having faith in God.
The Bible does not clearly draw distinctions between metaphor, parable, poetic language and historical account. One important reason it doesn't and can't is because it is an in-annotated collection of different writings from different sources that were collected over a period of 300 years and chosen by a committee. This committee chose and rejected scripture for a range of different.t reasons, which we simply are not party to. Politics, power, personal beliefs, favourite texts? The bible is not infallible.
By insisting upon the 6 day creation rather than what is obviously observable, you say you get a really nice image of God. So your preferred view of God is more important than what is obvious to all basic observations?
Creating the universe is awesome no matter how long it took. Is all you want a game of "my God's better than your God"?
The concept of time measured in "hours" was not defined when Genesis was written. Day was used (as even you acknowledged) to signify both a solar day and a significant period in time. A day of destiny does not literally mean 24 hours. Why you keep measuring the lunar calendar is beyond me as the moon wasn't created until day 4 (and it says nothing about it being set in motion). Time in the old testament cannot be accurately judged by modern standards because of a lack of understanding of basic principles regarding the motions of the sun and the moon. Seasons were often counted as years which also led to mistakes during bouts of unusual weather. If you take away our modern definitions of hour, day, month, year etc. how WOULD you describe 6 separate periods of creation? Ergo, saying it was the first day (of Creation) does not mean it was the first 24 hours. Let's face it, Genesis doesn't even say which day God started on (because Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday etc. didn't exist as words when Genesis was written), so why assume Saturday or Sunday is his Sabbath? The Babylonians hadn't sold Moses one of their new Pirelli Calendars so with the greatest of respect to the author of the first few books, he didn't really have much of a handle on timekeeping or recording.
Suggesting it took place at night was what we normal people call "a joke" because it says "the evening and the morning were the n'th day" and not vice versa.
Did I deny his omnipotence or did I suggest that he had chosen a particular method of creation? What I have done is remove all human limits from him. I simply believe that human ideas of time have been added to the story to help people make sense of it, so everything fits in a place. It simply isn't necessary and it makes no sense to make the literal translation so fundamental to having faith in God.
The Bible does not clearly draw distinctions between metaphor, parable, poetic language and historical account. One important reason it doesn't and can't is because it is an in-annotated collection of different writings from different sources that were collected over a period of 300 years and chosen by a committee. This committee chose and rejected scripture for a range of different.t reasons, which we simply are not party to. Politics, power, personal beliefs, favourite texts? The bible is not infallible.
By insisting upon the 6 day creation rather than what is obviously observable, you say you get a really nice image of God. So your preferred view of God is more important than what is obvious to all basic observations?
Creating the universe is awesome no matter how long it took. Is all you want a game of "my God's better than your God"?
Love 'n' hugz,
Lord Chad
4th Earl of Catsuit
There is nothing more dangerous than a man who knows he is right.
Lord Chad
4th Earl of Catsuit
There is nothing more dangerous than a man who knows he is right.
