How many creationists practise what they preach?

[AV1611VET]

Address the actual argument, not the persons who present the arguement.

The only gaps Bible scholars have is between their ears, and they haven't discovered those yet.

I took a calculator and worked out the genealogies once on my own, independent of Bishop Ussher, and came up with a variance of only some 100 years.

That's close enough that I just use his dates for the sake of Occam's razor.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then, by your own "boolean standards," you're not required to believe it.

Op. cit. my previous post.

 

[dad]

It is 'sketchy' because of the gaps in the genealogical record. William Henry Green's assessment, 'Are There Gaps in the Biblical Genealogies?' is not as optimistic as yours. He demonstrates some of the significant gaps in the genealogical record.

Name one already.

Add to this the assessment that the length of the days of creation are not as definitive as young earth creationists want them to be.

Yes they are. Add that.

Long before the theory of evolution, St Augustine of Hippo (died 430) doubted the length of creation days when he stated, '

Dolts lived in many eras.

There are other conservative evangelical scholars who argue for longer days of creation than 24 hours.

So have them post then, or make a case.

Bring it.

 

[Hoghead1]

Yes, Ozpern, Augustine certainly did argue that Genesis was not to be taken literally. He devoted a major work to the subject, titled "Genesis in the Literal Sense." Basically, his argument was that God is wholly outside the realm of time. God does not work through successive movements in time. Hence, God created the world in an instant, poof, and not over the period of six days. The reason for the "days" is that God had to reveal himself so as to accommodate himself to our feeble intellects, which are all time-bound.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, Ozpern, Augustine certainly did argue that Genesis was not to be taken literally. He devoted a major work to the subject, titled "Genesis in the Literal Sense." Basically, his argument was that God is wholly outside the realm of time. God does not work through successive movements in time. Hence, God created the world in an instant, poof, and not over the period of six days. The reason for the "days" is that God had to reveal himself so as to accommodate himself to our feeble intellects, which are all time-bound.

He died and went to aitch, too.

 

[OzSpen]

By "scholars," do you mean the boys at the Jesus Seminar?

They are scholars, but they are not the ones to whom I am referring.

I've provided you with a link to evidence that refutes your view, but you don't seem to be open to accepting that evidence.

 

[OzSpen]

He died and went to aitch, too.

What causes you to think that Augustine went to hell (or Hades)? Please provide the evidence from Augustine's writings.

 

[OzSpen]

First of all, a plain reading of the text doesn't state there are gaps, anywhere. This is probably why pretty much everyone read them as plain, unbroken, gapless genealogies until the evidence showed that they couldn't be literally true (and hence the new idea of "yalad"). That's why there has been clear historic agreement on the date, and hence this being the Jewish year 5776. You have called nearly all of historical Christianity as well as Judaism "dishonest".

Secondly, and just as importantly - positing gaps doesn't help, and still leaves one hopelessly out of step with the evidence. One is still left with either deciding the OT genealogies are symbolic/metaphors vs. denying evidence. The evidence shows that humans have been around for at least 100,000 years, so if there are "gaps" in the 5,776 year chronology, then those "gaps" would have to account for over 90% of the time! So you are saying that the genealogies are 90% gap, with less than 10% of the time mentioned?

It gets worse - the evidence shows that the breeding population of our species was never just two people, and that the flood and many other Biblical stories could never have happened literally. The evidence also shows that there have been no humans for 99.9998% of earth's history - yet if one puts "gaps" in the genealogies to fill up the time (and keep creation week as 1 literal week), then humans appear after just 0.00002% of earth's history - the complete opposite. And the authors suggest that this is supposed to reconcile a literal reading of our scripture with the fact that droves of people are leaving the church due to the denial of scientific reality? Even allowing for longer "days" in creation week doesn't come close to agreement with the evidence - though if you've got some other approach that does help us stay in agreement with the evidence (as theistic evolution already does), then I'm all ears.

In Christ-

Papias

No, it has nothing to do with the OT genealogies being symbolic metaphors. It has to do with God being so wise he didn't give us all of evidence for us to squabble about. We squabble enough with knowing there are gaps in the genealogies.

God's intention was not to provide us with enough evidence for us to determine the exact age of the earth.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Yes, Ozpern, Augustine certainly did argue that Genesis was not to be taken literally. He devoted a major work to the subject, titled "Genesis in the Literal Sense." Basically, his argument was that God is wholly outside the realm of time. God does not work through successive movements in time. Hence, God created the world in an instant, poof, and not over the period of six days. The reason for the "days" is that God had to reveal himself so as to accommodate himself to our feeble intellects, which are all time-bound.

 

[Gene2memE]

Well no, since hydrogen is usually a single elementary proton with, usually, its attached electron.

Big Bang, not Stellar, nucleosynthesis.

 

[dad]

Big Bang, not Stellar, nucleosynthesis.

nice fantasy

 

[dad]

Yes, Ozpern, Augustine certainly did argue that Genesis was not to be taken literally. He devoted a major work to the subject, titled "Genesis in the Literal Sense." Basically, his argument was that God is wholly outside the realm of time. God does not work through successive movements in time. Hence, God created the world in an instant, poof, and not over the period of six days. The reason for the "days" is that God had to reveal himself so as to accommodate himself to our feeble intellects, which are all time-bound.

Gong. The days in Genesis were not for God they were for us! The morning and evenings were for us. While our day may not be binding to God it is still a day and a unit of time that we know. We do not know millions of year days. That is lunacy.

 

[Hoghead1]

You missed my point abut Augustine, Dad. Augustine is arguing God's creative work did not encompass any time at all. Poof, all at once, not one minute this, another minute that, etc. No successiveness, period.

 

[dad]

You missed my point abut Augustine, Dad. Augustine is arguing God's creative work did not encompass any time at all. Poof, all at once, not one minute this, another minute that, etc. No successiveness, period.

The poor sod should have read the bible. Creation week did involve some time. What a numbskull that guy was.

 

[Hoghead1]

Look, Dad, this is precisely the problem I was talking about. Calling St. Augustine names. ridiculing him or any other major figure, is strictly a no-no in serious theological discussion. All it does is show a very ignorant, vulgar mouth on your part. If you had known anything about classical theism, teh classical Christian model of God, you would have seen exactly where he was coming from. I don't agree with Augustine either, but I at least show some respect for him. I attack his metaphysics, not the man.

 

[AV1611VET]

What causes you to think that Augustine went to hell (or Hades)? Please provide the evidence from Augustine's writings.

"Aitch" can mean one of two places, you know.

What made you think I meant he took the elevator down?

 

[AV1611VET]

Look, Dad, this is precisely the problem I was talking about. Calling St. Augustine names. ridiculing him or any other major figure, is strictly a no-no in serious theological discussion. All it does is show a very ignorant, vulgar mouth on your part. If you had known anything about classical theism, teh classical Christian model of God, you would have seen exactly where he was coming from. I don't agree with Augustine either, but I at least show some respect for him. I attack his metaphysics, not the man.

You also chastise those who are Christians.

Can you show me a post where you've said this same thing (or equivalent) to a non-believer who is attacking the integrity of Jesus Christ or His written word?

 

[dad]

Look, Dad, this is precisely the problem I was talking about. Calling St. Augustine names. ridiculing him or any other major figure, is strictly a no-no in serious theological discussion.

I have to point out that someone's over rated opinion that claims there is no time involved in creation week, days and mornings and evenings..is of no value.

All it does is show a very ignorant, vulgar mouth on your part.

Hey you want to stand behind dark and ignorant foolish opinions of men, then you take some heat.

If you had known anything about classical theism, teh classical Christian model of God, you would have seen exactly where he was coming from.

I do see exactly where...a big mouth run amuk, that fooled folks who did not know the bible. Whoopee do.

I don't agree with Augustine either, but I at least show some respect for him. I attack his metaphysics, not the man.

The man I do not know and do not care to know. His claims at least according to you, deserve contempt.

 

[OzSpen]

Gong. The days in Genesis were not for God they were for us! The morning and evenings were for us. While our day may not be binding to God it is still a day and a unit of time that we know. We do not know millions of year days. That is lunacy.

Not according to 2 Peter 3:8 (NIV): 'But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day'.

How long was the 7th day of the creation week? See Genesis 2:2-3.

 

[OzSpen]

"Aitch" can mean one of two places, you know.

What made you think I meant he took the elevator down?

That's a red herring fallacy. Why do you do this?

Let me ask it again: What causes you to think that Augustine went to hell (or Hades)? Please provide the evidence from Augustine's writings.