- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Feb. 08 2014,06:32) http://debatelive.org/?utm_source=debate-update-20140204-group&utm_medium=email&utm_content=body-link&utm_campaign=bill-nye-ken-ham-debate
I'm a disciple of Jesus of Nazareth, I believe some of the things in some of the books written about him.I find it utterly disheartening, embarrassing, that contemporary Christians believe in the Hebrew governments story of creation, intended for a more child like mind of that age.
Genesis Is fraught with factual blunders.
So, so, so sad!
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Feb. 09 2014,04:44) Quote (Colter @ Feb. 09 2014,01:01) Genesis Is fraught with factual blunders.
For instance….
Who was there to hear God speaking and recount the story?God made “light” on the first day (Genesis 1:3), but then made the Sun and stars later (Genesis 1:16). The light, as we know it, comes from the chemical and atomic reactions of Hydrogen and Helium in the Sun. These chemical and atomic reactions cause energy to come out of the Sun in the form of light.
The speed of light is a constant, the light from stars that is observable now started traveling loooooong before the young earth myth.
“And there was evening, and there was morning–the first day.” To say that there was morning and evening assumes the location of the Sun and its rays. In the morning, the Sun is low and in the evening, the Sun is also low. To say morning or evening is to presume the location of the Sun. However, the Sun did not exist yet. The Sun was created on the fourth day (Genesis 1:16). There was no existing Sun to distinguish between morning or evening on the first day. Also, the second day when God separated sky and Earth, it still claimed the morning and evening without the existence of the Sun (Genesis 1:8). The same problem holds true on the third day, as well (Genesis 1:13). A morning and evening cannot exist without a Sun. It's all so stupid even to have to explain!
The third day God created vegetation (Genesis 1:12). Plants contain chlorophyll that turns sunlight into energy. However, the Sun was created on the fourth day (Genesis 1:16), after the creation on plants. Plants, who need light to survive, existed without the creation of the Sun. Silly mistakes but the author did not even claim to be writing the word of God.
It goes on and on, someone counted 300 mistakes like this.
Quote (Colter @ Feb. 09 2014,08:17) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Feb. 09 2014,04:44) Quote (Colter @ Feb. 09 2014,01:01) Genesis Is fraught with factual blunders.
For instance….
Who was there to hear God speaking and recount the story?God made “light” on the first day (Genesis 1:3), but then made the Sun and stars later (Genesis 1:16). The light, as we know it, comes from the chemical and atomic reactions of Hydrogen and Helium in the Sun. These chemical and atomic reactions cause energy to come out of the Sun in the form of light.
The speed of light is a constant, the light from stars that is observable now started traveling loooooong before the young earth myth.
“And there was evening, and there was morning–the first day.” To say that there was morning and evening assumes the location of the Sun and its rays. In the morning, the Sun is low and in the evening, the Sun is also low. To say morning or evening is to presume the location of the Sun. However, the Sun did not exist yet. The Sun was created on the fourth day (Genesis 1:16). There was no existing Sun to distinguish between morning or evening on the first day. Also, the second day when God separated sky and Earth, it still claimed the morning and evening without the existence of the Sun (Genesis 1:8). The same problem holds true on the third day, as well (Genesis 1:13). A morning and evening cannot exist without a Sun. It's all so stupid even to have to explain!
The third day God created vegetation (Genesis 1:12). Plants contain chlorophyll that turns sunlight into energy. However, the Sun was created on the fourth day (Genesis 1:16), after the creation on plants. Plants, who need light to survive, existed without the creation of the Sun. Silly mistakes but the author did not even claim to be writing the word of God.
It goes on and on, someone counted 300 mistakes like this.
It is a matter of interpretation. I believe that the sun, moon and stars were created on the FIRST day, but not in a completely fulfilled state. The the day and the night was on the first day of creation.From a human perspective, we expect to see things in order of our time. But God is outside of time. You see exactly the same thing in the Book of Revelation. One minute it is talking of this time, and then that time, and back to another time.
And the fact that on a certain day the sun was created proves that the day may not be an Earth day, but a period of time.
Further, when the two lights appeared in the sky, that could be because the sky had cleared after volcanic eruptions or whatever making these two lights appear in the sky thereby allowing life as we know it to exist.
There are just too many variables here and forcing the book to our understanding and own scientific method is silly when our ways came much later.
Genesis says God created the Heavens and the Earth and he did it in stages and we know he created time, so is not subject to it.
Lastly, I have never understood where people get a young Earth from when reading Genesis. Can someone enlighten me on that? Because when the Earth was formless and void, that just might be the beginning of a new epoch after what was there before being destroyed to make way for renewal. Also, God told man to repopulate the Earth according to some and said the same thing to Noah.
Who knows how many ages the Earth has seen. Too many things are possible and so little information. Therefore speaking with full authority on this subject is a bit arrogant IMO.
We are given a little bit of information as a matter of fact. Such scant detail can be used to support or deny just about every theory out there.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Feb. 10 2014,09:43) Quote (Colter @ Feb. 09 2014,08:17) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Feb. 09 2014,04:44) Quote (Colter @ Feb. 09 2014,01:01) Genesis Is fraught with factual blunders.
For instance….
Who was there to hear God speaking and recount the story?God made “light” on the first day (Genesis 1:3), but then made the Sun and stars later (Genesis 1:16). The light, as we know it, comes from the chemical and atomic reactions of Hydrogen and Helium in the Sun. These chemical and atomic reactions cause energy to come out of the Sun in the form of light.
The speed of light is a constant, the light from stars that is observable now started traveling loooooong before the young earth myth.
“And there was evening, and there was morning–the first day.” To say that there was morning and evening assumes the location of the Sun and its rays. In the morning, the Sun is low and in the evening, the Sun is also low. To say morning or evening is to presume the location of the Sun. However, the Sun did not exist yet. The Sun was created on the fourth day (Genesis 1:16). There was no existing Sun to distinguish between morning or evening on the first day. Also, the second day when God separated sky and Earth, it still claimed the morning and evening without the existence of the Sun (Genesis 1:8). The same problem holds true on the third day, as well (Genesis 1:13). A morning and evening cannot exist without a Sun. It's all so stupid even to have to explain!
The third day God created vegetation (Genesis 1:12). Plants contain chlorophyll that turns sunlight into energy. However, the Sun was created on the fourth day (Genesis 1:16), after the creation on plants. Plants, who need light to survive, existed without the creation of the Sun. Silly mistakes but the author did not even claim to be writing the word of God.
It goes on and on, someone counted 300 mistakes like this.
It is a matter of interpretation. I believe that the sun, moon and stars were created on the FIRST day, but not in a completely fulfilled state. The the day and the night was on the first day of creation.
My “interpretation” is that the story was literal and intended for the child like mind of another age. The authors don't make ANY claim to be writing the word of God or by any inspiration. Parts of the OT are a redacted fabrication meant to rally the dejected, scattered Israelite community in Babylon. When they edited the books they left tell tail signs of their editing which we can see today.I agree with Bill Nye, God would have had to violate his on constants in physics like the speed of light from far distant stars.
Put it like this, if these proposals were outside of the Bible than rational people would discount them out of hand as ridiculous, but because they are in the scripture man simply deludes himself into believing what is obviously untrue.
The Book of Revelation says about Jesus, ” his mouth came a sharp sword to strike down the nations”. Apply that to the modern scientific method and it is ridiculous. But that is not the method to use. And it is written in such a way that the self proclaimed wise will write it off and the wicked will not understand. I believe it is working. Those who are humble and innocent like children will understand however.
Paleontologist (evolutionist) claims Bill Nye told a huge lie during the debate.
http://thetruthwins.com/archive….-layers
t8, please delete my post immediately above. I forgot to post the link. Thanks.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Feb. 11 2014,09:32) Paleontologist (evolutionist) claims Bill Nye told a huge lie during the debate. http://thetruthwins.com/archive….-layers
t8, please delete my post immediately above. I forgot to post the link. Thanks.
Correction: The Paleontologist contradicts Bill Nye.Quote (Colter @ Feb. 11 2014,11:46) Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Roger C. Wiens
You didn't answer the article. Paleontologist and evolutionist Donald Burge contradicts Nye's assertions about fossil layers. Burge says that mammals and other modern animals are found with dinosaur bones. He says also that dinosaur tissue is found with some bones which could not happen if they were billions of years old.Please deal with this.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Feb. 11 2014,20:14) Quote (Colter @ Feb. 11 2014,11:46) Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Roger C. Wiens
You didn't answer the article. Paleontologist and evolutionist Donald Burge contradicts Nye's assertions about fossil layers. Burge says that mammals and other modern animals are found with dinosaur bones. He says also that dinosaur tissue is found with some bones which could not happen if they were billions of years old.Please deal with this.
I'm not Bill Nye's keeper, I didn't have a stance on his argument that layers do not commingle. With the shifting of plates over millions of years one would expect to find such, so I don't have any need to defend Nye.Are you prepared to defend Ken Hams teaching that a 600 year old man could gather and load 2,000,000 plants and animals (including dinosaurs) onto an arch, float around for a year, land after which the world rapidly re-evolved?
And can you show me where Genesis claims to have be the word of God inspired by God? After you don't find that, can you explain where the idea comes from?
Quote (Wakeup @ Feb. 11 2014,22:22) Jesus himself mentioned Noah.
Our Jesus,not your Jesus.wakeup.
The authors of the Gospel's simply got that wrong, Jesus never validated the story of Noah written for the child like mind of another age.The only reason you believe the flood story is because it's in the Bible, outside of the Bible it would be a joke.
There is only one Jesus and many believers who do the best they can to understand him. Your conceit is duly noted and often repeated.
Your interpretation of the Noah story may be a joke, but the planet is subject to global catastrophes and it is possible that they are used as a renewal period to start a new age/aeon. When the Earth was formless and void, that in itself could suggest a global event took place before the age of man.
But I guess you would believe it if it was in the Urantia Planet book and the arc was a DNA vault navigated by Captain Kirk.
Regardless I think Noah took aboard 2 pairs or 7 pairs of kinds. We know that breeding kinds can result in wide variation, so he didn't have to take every species or variation is my guess. Also, it is not hard to accept that if God were going to start a new age, that he could rescue some old species rather than recreate them later. He could also have created new ones too leaving some of the older ones to perish which would agree with the fossil record. Just too many variables here to make the kind of judgement you make.
2 Corinthians 11:4
For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.Paul rebukes you Colter.
Quote (Colter @ Feb. 10 2014,09:51) I agree with Bill Nye, God would have had to violate his on constants in physics like the speed of light from far distant stars.
Like when God made the sun stand still in the sky in Joshua 10?If they are truly “his own constants in physics”, as you've said, then surely the Almighty Creator of those things is able to disrupt them, or work outside of them if He wants to.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 12 2014,13:57) Quote (Colter @ Feb. 10 2014,09:51) I agree with Bill Nye, God would have had to violate his on constants in physics like the speed of light from far distant stars.
Like when God made the sun stand still in the sky in Joshua 10?If they are truly “his own constants in physics”, as you've said, then surely the Almighty Creator of those things is able to disrupt them, or work outside of them if He wants to.
Quote (t8 @ Feb. 12 2014,13:46) Your interpretation of the Noah story may be a joke, but the planet is subject to global catastrophes and it is possible that they are used as a renewal period to start a new age/aeon. When the Earth was formless and void, that in itself could suggest a global event took place before the age of man. But I guess you would believe it if it was in the Urantia Planet book and the arc was a DNA vault navigated by Captain Kirk.
Regardless I think Noah took aboard 2 pairs or 7 pairs of kinds. We know that breeding kinds can result in wide variation, so he didn't have to take every species or variation is my guess. Also, it is not hard to accept that if God were going to start a new age, that he could rescue some old species rather than recreate them later. He could also have created new ones too leaving some of the older ones to perish which would agree with the fossil record. Just too many variables here to make the kind of judgement you make.
If God did all that he could have made man right in the first place, but it's the Hebrew government who claimed that God became frustrated in his own creation and exaggerated the flood story.At least you have faith in something.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
