Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
A day, as per Genesis, is morning and evening, or a LUNAR cycle. Today it is 24 hours, but since the beginning it was separated into 24 parts, based on the 24 knuckles of our hands. I know that sounds weird but that's how it came about. There isn't one reputable Hebrew scholar today that thinks YOM is anything but a lunar day, in the context of Gen 1. The following link is very technical but may help your perspective.The Barrd said:The thing about 6-day creation is this--how long is a day?
A day is not the same length of time, even on this one planet...and how long is day on Jupiter, for instance?
We don't even truly know how long a day is for this bit of rock we call home...how can we possibly know how long a day is for God?
We do know this...we mere mortals cannot work hard for longer than approximately six days without a break, or we risk total collapse...
All of that might make more sense, if this one planet were all God created. But we now know that this is not so--unlike Moses, who certainly did not have any idea how vast God's Creation truly is! There are an infinite number of stars out there...more than we can ever hope to count...and we know that many of them have planet systems around them. It is unreasonable to limit Creation to just this one planet, as if this were all God created.StanJ said:A day, as per Genesis, is morning and evening, or a LUNAR cycle. Today it is 24 hours, but since the beginning it was separated into 24 parts, based on the 24 knuckles of our hands. I know that sounds weird but that's how it came about. There isn't one reputable Hebrew scholar today that thinks YOM is anything but a lunar day, in the context of Gen 1. The following link is very technical but may help your perspective.
http://creation.com/the-meaning-of-yom-in-genesis-1
The Bible was written for man, not God, so even from that perspective, it's normal inference is based on our common connotations, and secondary connotations unless the context clearly conveys that.
Something like that, HeretoEternity!heretoeternity said:Or maybe "a day is like a thousand years to God, a thousand years it like a day" Ps 90 and 2 Peter 3.
That's right, to God, not to us. You'll find both scriptures deal with men thinking God is slow or not quick to fulfill his promises.heretoeternity said:Or maybe "a day is like a thousand years to God, a thousand years it like a day" Ps 90 and 2 Peter 3.
Again not something we can understand. Scientist know that the universe is continuing to expand, but does that change the fact that it is the way God made it to be? Again the Bible is not FOR God, it is for us, in our universe, in our reality, in our time.The Barrd said:All of that might make more sense, if this one planet were all God created. But we now know that this is not so--unlike Moses, who certainly did not have any idea how vast God's Creation truly is! There are an infinite number of stars out there...more than we can ever hope to count...and we know that many of them have planet systems around them. It is unreasonable to limit Creation to just this one planet, as if this were all God created.
Perhaps, from God's perspective, a "day" is the length of time it takes the entire universe to revolve?
What is more likely is that God phrased these things in ways that we poor mortals might attempt to understand them. In other words, He "dumbed it down" for us...
Honestly, now...if God had truly given us the technical details as to how He created the universe...or even just this one planet, with all the majesty it contains...
Do you think we'd have any hope at all of understanding it?
It would not matter if God were to give us a brand new version today...He'd still have to "dumb it down" for us.StanJ said:Again not something we can understand. Scientist know that the universe is continuing to expand, but does that change the fact that it is the way God made it to be? Again the Bible is not FOR God, it is for us, in our universe, in our reality, in our time.
What is a fact is that we are to be people of faith, and as such are to accept His word as it is plainly given. That it is "dumbed down" as you put it, is a given, especially given when it was supplied to us.
No, and that is entirely my point, we don't and never will, despite our efforts to do so. Some accept that in their faith walk, and others who do not walk in faith, try to understand what has happened by their own means, without God being in the picture. That of course is bound to fail.
Given that man's science still doesn't understand, I agree. Paul said now we know in part. It appears we still do in this and many regards.The Barrd said:It would not matter if God were to give us a brand new version today...He'd still have to "dumb it down" for us.
We are not nearly as "smart" as some of us seem to think that we are. We are simply not capable of understanding the technical details of Creation...nor will we ever be.
At least, not in this life...
Oh, even to look up at the majestic glory of the night sky, full of tiny twinkling lights...and each one of those tiny lights, a far-off star...how can we even dare to imagine that we have any hope at all of "knowing"?
How long did it actually take God to create it all? He could have done it in an instant of time....or, He could have lingered lovingly over His Creation for millions of years. But these are human terms, and in the final analysis, completely meaningless...
In the end, does it really matter?
What science fails to recognize is man is fallible. God is not. Well, God aside, man is still fallible.StanJ said:Given that man's science still doesn't understand, I agree. Paul said now we know in part. It appears we still do in this and many regards.
It matters, as science currently disagrees with what God's word says. Other than that, it does not matter to me.
Indeed....I've never heard of a scientist who DOESN'T make errors.Born_Again said:What science fails to recognize is man is fallible. God is not. Well, God aside, man is still fallible.
Have you ever heard of a theologian who doesn't?StanJ said:Indeed....I've never heard of a scientist who DOESN'T make errors.
I have read some theologians who err, but also I have read many theologians who don't. My point is what God's word clearly says and what some scientists contradict.The Barrd said:Have you ever heard of a theologian who doesn't?
Would God deceive us? Roll that question around in your head. The scientist are the ones who are saying how old that stuff is....The Barrd said:Unfortunately, science does seem to have quite a bit of hard evidence on their side.
Now, I do not believe that God hid fossils in the earth to deceive us...do you?
Yet, those fossils do exist, and must somehow be explained.
Do you have any ideas about that?
I'm curious....
Of course, God would not deceive us.Born_Again said:Would God deceive us? Roll that question around in your head. The scientist are the ones who are saying how old that stuff is....
It would be impossible for me to convey all I know and have read about this subject here and now, but there are plenty of good books and articles about the fossil record. You may be surprised at what a different perspective other than the so-called scientific one will do for your understanding.The Barrd said:Unfortunately, science does seem to have quite a bit of hard evidence on their side.
Now, I do not believe that God hid fossils in the earth to deceive us...do you?
Yet, those fossils do exist, and must somehow be explained.
Do you have any ideas about that?
I'm curious....
SEEM would be the operative word here.The Barrd said:Of course, God would not deceive us.
Yet, those fossils do exist, and it does seem that they are very, very old.
I never really worried very much about this.StanJ said:SEEM would be the operative word here.