Exodus 20:9-11 (Creation)

[BobRyan]

I find several problems here. One is that Moses definitely did not write the Pentateuch.

Only in your mind.

Christ on the other hand - confirms that Moses did write it.

Those here who are Christians probably won't take the word of Hoghead1 over Christ -- as I think you and I would both agree.

Gen 2:5-end provides no timeline and not chronological sequence at all.

But Gen 1:2-2:4 provides a time-boxed chronological sequence into which the details of Gen 2:5-end are added.

What is more to the point of this thread is that Ex 20:11 confirms this point in legal code - as it highlights the Gen 2:1-4 details -- for "six days shall YOU labor...for in six days the LORD made..."

Your constant attack on the Bible - in defense of your belief in evolutionism - is much predicted. Even Darwin noted the problem and predicted that outcome for the true believers in evolutionism.

 

[ScottA]

And your support for this claim is?

The coming of Christ, He's death on the cross, resurrection from the dead, ascension, and gift of the Holy Spirit that we may be born again of the spirit of God - as I am a witness.

 

[Queller]

Nor was Daniel hanging around for Christ's baptism in Daniel 9. But the Bible says that God shows events past and future to prophets via dreams and visions.

Does the Bible say anything about Moses receiving all this in a vision?

So... the point remains. The Bible is true.

I've never claimed otherwise.

Just as Heb 8:5 tells us that God "showed Moses" the heavenly sanctuary as the pattern to make the earthly miniature -- so also God showed Moses a number of details including Genesis 1.

Book, chapter, and verse please.

In John 8 Christ said "Abraham SAW my day and was glad" not "God gave Abraham letters and when grouped together they told Abraham a story about My day -- and he was glad" in Joseph-Smith-style.

Rotation of the planet. That was going on - on day 1 in Genesis 1.

And what is the light source that gives morning and evening?

(Oh no wait! Some people here are arguing that the entire universe was going through day and night cycles!! really??!!)

I don't think so (I could be wrong). Lots of people do attempt to argue that there was a day and night cycle without the sun though

 

[Kenny'sID]

Do you, KWCrazy, and others decide?

For me the Bible/Gods word decides.

I didn't think you would be able to back up your claims that I twisted your plainly written words. Thank you for not surprising me.

Already done. As I said you'll see what you want, something you have made clear time and time again.

 

[BobRyan]

Umm, what? Moses was not there observing when God created the universe

Nor was Daniel hanging around for Christ's baptism in Daniel 9. But the Bible says that God shows events past and future to prophets via dreams and visions.


So... the point remains. The Bible is true.

Just as Heb 8:5 tells us that God "showed Moses" the heavenly sanctuary as the pattern to make the earthly miniature -- so also God showed Moses a number of details including Genesis 1. In John 8 Christ said "Abraham SAW my day and was glad" not "God gave Abraham letters and when grouped together they told Abraham a story about My day -- and he was glad" in Joseph-Smith-style.

Why does the earth have mornings and evenings?

Rotation of the planet. That was going on - on day 1 in Genesis 1.

(Oh no wait! Some people here are arguing that the entire universe was going through day and night cycles!! really??!!)

Does the Bible say anything about Moses receiving all this in a vision?

You mean - instead of just "making stuff up"?

Or do you mean "instead of getting everything one letter at a time" -- joseph-smith-style -- ??

or are you saying that Numbers 12:1-8 is new to you??

Seriously - it can't be "news" to anyone on this board that Moses was a prophet.

And that God "showed" Moses these things in vision - hint: Hebrews 8:5.

 

[BobRyan]

For those attacking the Bible to defend their belief in evolutionism in the case of legal code in Ex 20:11 "Six days you shall labor..for in SIX days the LORD MADE"

I have a question for you - what about Matt 17? Is that another part of the Bible you reject? Moses and Elijah talking to Christ on the mount of transfiguration?

Those who find it impossible to believe that God can make the world and all life on it - in 7 days as Gen 1:2-2:4 and Ex 20:8-11 legal code says -- and then they argue that God could not tell Moses what He did by showing the event to Moses in vision - must surely stroke-out when they read Matt 17.

 

[ScottA]

Enoch went directly to heaven - so also did Elijah.

Paul does not say in 1Cor 2 that we have infinite intelligence or that we are as all-knowing as God.

Context matters.

Paul put it his way. But Jesus put it like this: You must be born again of the spirit of God, and sent us the Holy Spirit, and told us that, not only could we speak with the authority of God - but that if He is with us, it is not we who speak, but the Holy Spirit.

 

[Hoghead1]

For me the Bible/Gods word decides.



Already done. As I said you'll see what you want, something you have made clear time and time again.

Yes, but nobody goes to Scripture, with a completely blank mind. Every one views Scripture through some sort of lens. So, in reality, you aren't just getting your ideas just from Scripture and Scripture alone, there is some middle man or step, the whole matter of your lens.

 

[4x4toy]

Not a good answer. Completely fails to address the core issue. The problem is that many have unduly sanctified man-made fundamentalist religion and anti-intellectual ideology about the Bible. The SOP is that anyone, any scholar who dares disagree to the Bible Belt version of the Bible is automatically written off as evil, ignorant, etc. That problem is that many are not open-minded enough to explore other, richer options about how God, the Bible, and nature are interconnected. I don't think God ever intended the Bible to be an accurate geophysical or scientific witness. If God is content was a nonscientific bible, then so should I be and so should you. You should stop trying to impose your standards of what you think the Bible ought to be, onto God.

Well tell me just how smart you are .. Degree

 

[BobRyan]

Paul put it his way. But Jesus put it like this: You must be born again of the spirit of God, and sent us the Holy Spirit, and told us that, not only could we speak with the authority of God - but that if He is with us, it is not we who speak, but the Holy Spirit.

True the Holy Spirit speaks - but notice in Hebrews 3 "The Holy Spirit says" -- when quoting the Psalms -

6 but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house—whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.
7 Therefore, just as the Holy Spirit says,
“Today if you hear His voice,
8 Do not harden your hearts as when they provoked Me,

David prays "create in me a clean heart o God... take not your Holy Spirit from me"

Yet it was still true that God's thoughts are infinitely higher than ours. To this very day.

 

[BobRyan]

Yes, but nobody goes to Scripture, with a completely blank mind. Every one views Scripture through some sort of lens. So, in reality, you aren't just getting your ideas just from Scripture and Scripture alone, there is some middle man or step, the whole matter of your lens.

To some extent - but not to the "attack-the-bible-first" extent that you and Colte have been endorsing.

You yourself admit that your attack on the Bible is not limited to creation week - you go after the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the world wide flood, the miracles of the Bible... pretty much anything and atheist would object to - in the text.

Surely even you have to admit that your position is a bit "extreme" -- even though I would grant you that it is consistent with belief in evolutionism.

 

[Queller]

Erosion along would have leveled all mountains in a 4 billion year timeline.

The incredible shrinking mountains
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1444322/The-incredible-shrinking-mountains.html

Except for the fact that new ones are being thrust up at a measurable rate.

Are the Himalayas still growing and if so, how fast?

 

[BobRyan]

The point was not that plates don't move -- the point is that the mountains on those plates are subject to erosion that would have wiped them out billions of years ago were they truly that old. Because as it turns out "not all mountains are rising" - so the Indian plate smashing into the Eurasian plate is not the only dynamic.

 

[Queller]

nice story.

I live near Balitmore, MD. As I look out my window at 11:12 pm it is indeed dark. No "story" needed, just simple observation.

 

[Queller]

Enoch went directly to heaven - so also did Elijah.

Which is relevant because?

Paul does not say in 1Cor 2 that we have infinite intelligence or that we are as all-knowing as God.

You're absolutely right. ScottA seems to think otherwise.

Context matters.

Yes, it does. Thank you for making my point for me.

 

[Queller]

The coming of Christ, He's death on the cross, resurrection from the dead, ascension, and gift of the Holy Spirit that we may be born again of the spirit of God - as I am a witness.

I'm a witness to those same things as well yet you and I disagree. Where do we go from here?

 

[Queller]

For me the Bible/Gods word decides.

Really, because it seems like you are deciding that you are right and I am wrong.

Already done. As I said you'll see what you want, something you have made clear time and time again.

You have made no attempt to support your claim that I twisted your words. You have simply made the claim.

 

[4x4toy]

I'm a witness to those same things as well yet you and I disagree. Where do we go from here?

Could you reply to my post #450 .. Paul must have went to bed ..

 

[Queller]

The point was not that plates don't move -- the point is that the mountains on those plates are subject to erosion that would have wiped them out billions of years ago were they truly that old.

You have completely missed the point. Many mountain ranges have been completely wiped away. However, others have risen to replace them.

Because as it turns out "not all mountains are rising" - so the Indian plate smashing into the Eurasian plate is not the only dynamic.

No one that understands the science claims that all mountains are rising. Do you have a source for someone making that claim?

 

[BobRyan]

you missed the point - all the mountains would have been wiped out in less than 100M years due to erosion - except for the newer ranges still under recent forces such as the Indian plate example.