Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Genesis tells us that the creation took place in six 24 hour days.
That it does. However, this tells us nothing about the when: did these six days occur within a week 6000 years ago, or over several billion years,starting several billion years ago?Genesis tells us that the creation took place in six 24 hour days.
Genesis tells us that the creation took place in six 24 hour days.
i just dont get it, i have seen alot of documentaries over the past days both about creationism and evolution and i cant see how anyone would believe in creationism.
...
furthermore, if the earth and the humans are only 6000 years old, how can we be 6 billion humans today? if we started with two humans, those two became 4 and those 4 became 8, and so on and so on. including fatal accidents, children born dead, sterility and just dieing from old age. it doesn't take a genius to quickly figure out that it would take alot more than just 6000 years to get to 6 billion humans.
We have indeed a problem to explain why God lets the earth and universe look old to an observer. But this problem goes away when we abandon some of our presuppositions about God.did God creater the world with all those layers that look like they were deposited? If so it raises some very nasty questions. Did God create or allow to be created features that would lead someone looking in good faith to think the world was older than it really is and then hold that good faith reasoning against them? If so what kind of God is that? Just fair and loving?
This would be possible, but would not make sense.And of course if we fall back on God created it that way then one can claim the world is just one day old, God created it all including our memories just 24 hours ago.
This is a novel answer, and I applaud you for it. However, there is one theological quandry: it requires that God is himself imperfect. This is a big hoo-ha for some people, so your answer may find little support.We have indeed a problem to explain why God lets the earth and universe look old to an observer. But this problem goes away when we abandon some of our presuppositions about God.
The Bible does not tell explicitly that God is fair and loving. When you read the stories, you'll notice that He changed over time. In the beginning there is no indication whatsoever that He loved humans. Later, there are hints that he loved some, but certainly not all mankind. Only the sacrifice of His son indicated that He loved all mankind at that time.
So, God could have pre-aged the world for hiding the fact that it was created, and thus giving us the free choice to believe in creation or not. That's not entirely fair, but who says God must be always fair?
Why does it require God being impefect ? Don't see why.This is a novel answer, and I applaud you for it. However, there is one theological quandry: it requires that God is himself imperfect. This is a big hoo-ha for some people, so your answer may find little support.
Because a perfect thing can't change, or else it wouldn't be perfect anymore. That ClearSky posits a changing God implies that her God isn't perfect.Why does it require God being impefect ? Don't see why.
That's correct. God's acts described in the Pentateuch are far from perfect.Because a perfect thing can't change, or else it wouldn't be perfect anymore. That ClearSky posits a changing God implies that her God isn't perfect.
This would be possible, but would not make sense.
What makes sense is the assumption that God created the world in the most economical way. Creating it in its current state 24 hours ago is certainly not economical. Creating a Big Bang and waiting 13.7 billion years is also not economical. The most economical way is creating the world at the time when human civilization started - which was about 4000 BC.
That's the problem with religious people : they all state that human race is the ultimate creation of (their) God. A bit too egocentric for atheists.What makes sense is the assumption that God created the world in the most economical way. Creating it in its current state 24 hours ago is certainly not economical. Creating a Big Bang and waiting 13.7 billion years is also not economical. The most economical way is creating the world at the time when human civilization started - which was about 4000 BC.
With all due respect, it is not theistic evolutionists who are doing this. Creationists are what we call the ones who reject the theory of common descent. Strictly speaking, they're YEC. OEC and the like are the theistic evolutionists, and I do not believe they promote ID for the simply reason that they believe in common descent, which the IDists don't.Alas, this is the only argument Theistic people have to offer.
Remember, they change the name of creationism, to intelligent design, and try and call it science.
Like ScientologyYou cannot effectively deduce scientific evidence from a book written thousands of years ago, and try and call it fact.
That would be like using some science fiction novel to accurately state geological facts, on our own planet.
That is a brilliant phrase. If I had room in my sig, it'd be going there. In fact...The only scientific fact about the bible is, that it was written.
This is the only thing more laughable than the idea of creationism.Like Scientology
If you have a look at the field of science, maybe you notice that there is a science named "math". Mathematicans also pull their science "right out of nothing". They begin with axioms, and conclude theorems from them. No evidence required.Economic? from the perspective of an omnipotent creator? You are just pulling this right out of nothing. Atleast scientist put evidence behind their claim...
With all due respect, our OEC brothers don't believe in theistic evolution either. They believe that God created the world, then waited some billion years, then created animals and man before evolution could save him the work.With all due respect, it is not theistic evolutionists who are doing this. Creationists are what we call the ones who reject the theory of common descent. Strictly speaking, they're YEC. OEC and the like are the theistic evolutionists, and I do not believe they promote ID for the simply reason that they believe in common descent, which the IDists don't.
Mathematics is simply the logic of numbers. Since the 'axioms' of logic are self-evident (albiet unprovable; see Gödel's incompleteness theorem), so too are the axioms of mathematics.If you have a look at the field of science, maybe you notice that there is a science named "math". Mathematicans also pull their science "right out of nothing". They begin with axioms, and conclude theorems from them. No evidence required.
I'm not exactly up to scratch with OEC, so I'll take your word for this. But I thought that the OEC believes that essentially the same as the average scientist (12-13 billion year old universe, 4.5 billion year old Earth, 3.5 billion years of evolution, etc), with the added feature that God influenced events slightly to ensure the evolution of humanity.With all due respect, our OEC brothers don't believe in theistic evolution either. They believe that God created the world, then waited some billion years, then created animals and man before evolution could save him the work.
Eh, not really. If we had answers to all the questions of evolution there wouldn't be the amount of evolution research there is.Evolution is questions that have answers.
I think he means that evolution poses questions that can potentially be answered. Religion, by contrast and in a very real sense, posits answers that cannot be questioned.Eh, not really. If we had answers to all the questions of evolution there wouldn't be the amount of evolution research there is.
If you only want to say that evolution as defined by biologists is an undisputable fact, I agree. But you seem to think it's unfalsifiable and/or a form of faith.
Evolution is the very thing that robs humans of their special place on earth (heliocentricism and other assorted astronomical theories having done away with our special place in the universe). It only gives comfort if you equate it with some kind of progress that inevitably leads to us, which you probably only do if you already believe that humans are special.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?