Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

Creationism vs. Evolution, Live Tonight @ 7PM

bill nye vs ken ham creationism evolution

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
604 replies to this topic

#601 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • Joined: 10-January 11
  • posts: 18,178
  • Reputation: 9,875
SUPPORTER

Posted 14 February 2014 - 09:02 PM

Seems to me the "days doesn't actually equal days" line of thinking is no more than revisionist history.

 

An attempt to provide at least a smidgeon of plausibility to the Bible's version of events in modern times.

 

If the authors of the Bible wanted to convey that God required a greater time period than six day's, they could have easily done so. 

 

At least Biblical literalists (as misguided as they are) understand once you start changing the meaning of the Bible's text, you immediately undermine the rest of the book's legitimacy as the "word of God".

 

I don't know if you are talking about me, but I did not mean that the "day doesn't exactly equal a day" although I can see why that may have been interpreted that because of how I worded it.  I simply meant that the days may not have been successive but reflect moments in time during Earth's evolution.  No matter how long evolution takes place, there is a defining moment, whether it be the first time an ape walks upright, or the first time we gained greater consciousness.  For everything there is a singular moment.

 

The time and space comment from my post was more of a broader generality of time and the Bible.  Not anything too specific

 

As far as changing the meaning of the Bible's text that is discernible only in the eyes and mind of the reader.  I don't think anyone has a monopoly on the meaning of the text of the Bible.  And because of that I don't ridicule other's interpretations of the Bible just as I try not to impress my interpretation onto others.  it is simply my interpretation and therefore that is the meaning to me.

 

But just to humor the notion that "six days are not six days", I mentioned Venus in my post.  The length of a year on Venus is @224 Earth days. But a DAY on Venus is 243 Earth days.

 

So a day on Venus is 19 Earth days longer than a year on Venus.  With that in mind why do we think that time and space for God is the same as it is for humans?



#602 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • Joined: 09-November 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,644
  • Reputation: 2,193
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2014 - 01:27 AM

I don't know if you are talking about me, but I did not mean that the "day doesn't exactly equal a day" although I can see why that may have been interpreted that because of how I worded it.  I simply meant that the days may not have been successive but reflect moments in time during Earth's evolution.  No matter how long evolution takes place, there is a defining moment, whether it be the first time an ape walks upright, or the first time we gained greater consciousness.  For everything there is a singular moment.
 
The time and space comment from my post was more of a broader generality of time and the Bible.  Not anything too specific
 
As far as changing the meaning of the Bible's text that is discernible only in the eyes and mind of the reader.  I don't think anyone has a monopoly on the meaning of the text of the Bible.  And because of that I don't ridicule other's interpretations of the Bible just as I try not to impress my interpretation onto others.  it is simply my interpretation and therefore that is the meaning to me.
 
But just to humor the notion that "six days are not six days", I mentioned Venus in my post.  The length of a year on Venus is @224 Earth days. But a DAY on Venus is 243 Earth days.
 
So a day on Venus is 19 Earth days longer than a year on Venus.  With that in mind why do we think that time and space for God is the same as it is for humans?

 
Thanks for the post teeray, but I wasn't responding to anyone's post in particular.  Certainly there are as least as many interpretations of the Bible as there are people who have read it, and to me that is a big problem.
 
Assuming that every one of the oral stories, authors, translations, revisions and scribes was divinely inspired through the centuries, I would have to believe God was referring to an earth day.

Anything other than that is a failure on God's part to convey a clear message to his intended audience.

An all seeing, all powerful god must realize his ambiguous stories are undermining the credibility of his message.  
 
Sadly, God's continued failure to craft a clearer message has resulted in billions of his children around the globe rejecting him as their savior.  

 

Thanks to God's poor communication skills, those billions of lost souls will be spending eternity in hell.



#603 NanuqoftheNorth

NanuqoftheNorth

    Frosty Alaskan Amber

  • Joined: 09-November 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,644
  • Reputation: 2,193
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2014 - 01:50 AM



#604 ckad79

ckad79

    Enjoy yourself, it's later than you think.

  • Joined: 01-December 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 842
  • Reputation: 90
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2014 - 02:02 AM

I think halfway through a debate, when your answer is: "Well, we know the bible is true because the bible says it's true", you've really lost all hope.

 

It was a tough crowd. Congrats on Bill for walking into the lion's den.

 

I did love the joke he made about his old boss... which I think got one laugh. Maybe it's a sin to have a sense of humor?  :mad: 

 

As Ken Ham admitted, parts of the bible are to be taken as poetry and parts as literal. I guess they take the abortion and gay parts literally but not being able to eat some delicious shell fish, file for a divorce from an abusive husband or get a tramp stamp of a cross on their a** as mere poetry. Give me a break.

 

The bible isn't there to cherry pick out what you want when it works for you and make others suffer when it doesn't.



#605 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,178
  • Reputation: 2,382
HUDDLER

Posted 15 February 2014 - 08:55 AM

Seems to me the "days doesn't actually equal days" line of thinking is no more than revisionist history.

 

An attempt to provide at least a smidgeon of plausibility to the Bible's version of events in modern times.

 

If the authors of the Bible wanted to convey that God required a greater time period than six day's, they could have easily done so. 

 

At least Biblical literalists (as misguided as they are) understand once you start changing the meaning of the Bible's text, you immediately undermine the rest of the book's legitimacy as the "word of God".

 

Depends how you interpret the language, specific words used, and even the phrase "Word of God," imo.  There are plenty of people that call themselves Christians yet do not take much, if any, of the Bible literally, and use Jesus' teachings as guidelines and the like.

 

and fwiw, revisionist history may be a more accurate portrayal anyway. ;)