Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Ken Ham, Ray Comfort and The Young Earth.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hieronymus" data-source="post: 71895900" data-attributes="member: 383855"><p>I forgive, don't worry. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p>In a sequence of days (such as 1st day, 2nd day, 3rd day, 4th day, 5th day, 6th day), there is no time between the days.</p><p>Now if it were not clearly a sequence in Genesis 1, you could wonder if the text by itself leaves room for time in between, but this is not the case.</p><p>Also, it is confirmed several times in Scripture that God did it in 6 days, and resting from his work the 7th day.</p><p>I see no room in Scripture to suggest time in between those days, it consistently reads as a sequence in 1 week.I agree the discussion can get blown out of proportions easily. I'm sometimes guilty of that, i suppose..</p><p>It's not a salvation issue.</p><p>I think the question is where we should draw the line.</p><p>When you allegorise this, then you open the door to allegorise more.</p><p>But on the other hand, the suggested flat earth model as portrayed in the Bible is only credible when you agree this is God's perception, not man's, not ours.</p><p>I guess this could be said too about the creation week, although there is much more emphasis on the creation week, which seems like a reason to take it more seriously and literally (so it seems to me anyway).Yes, that is what i meant.</p><p>I read a quite clear emphasis on the days as sequential days, which start in the evening each time.</p><p>Even the first day starts in darkness by the way.</p><p>But i see your point, i think.</p><p>But it doesn't 'resonate' in my mind with the 7th day, when God rests of his work, when there would be periods of not creating in between the creation days.</p><p>I.m.o. it doesn't read like that.Okay. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />It has to be limited though, otherwise the plants would be without sun for too long, unless God was the light source up until then.</p><p>But the eco system as a whole would not function if there were vast amounts of time between the creation days.We agree. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>But the problem with Old Earth Creationism is that God did apparently not create man in his Image, from the dust of the earth, and did not form Eve from the rib of Adam.</p><p>The problem with OEC-ists is that they feel obliged to subscribe to naturalistic ideas because of the authoritarian position science has assumed in the matter.</p><p>What confounds me is that OEC-ists usually refuse to look into YEC science, and dismiss it as unscientific.</p><p>This must be peer pressure at work, because it's not reasonable.</p><p>It seems to me that OEC-ists refuse to choose between naturalism and supernaturalism, and while they're at it they simply don't believe Scripture anymore or are forced to allegorise a lot of it, throwing proper exegesis out the window.</p><p>They will have to ignore evidence from other fields of knowledge too, about things like the Nephilim and the Flood, even the Exodus.</p><p>Apparently it's not Scripture itself that they can not believe, but rather the fact that science is a human endeavour with usually a naturalistic viewpoint to work from and thus not objective and not necessarily financed, acknowledged and facilitated by people who pursue the truth of the matter.</p><p>But this was my biggest hurdle too.</p><p>I never expected main stream science to be as opinionated / opinionating as it apparently is.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hieronymus, post: 71895900, member: 383855"] I forgive, don't worry. :) In a sequence of days (such as 1st day, 2nd day, 3rd day, 4th day, 5th day, 6th day), there is no time between the days. Now if it were not clearly a sequence in Genesis 1, you could wonder if the text by itself leaves room for time in between, but this is not the case. Also, it is confirmed several times in Scripture that God did it in 6 days, and resting from his work the 7th day. I see no room in Scripture to suggest time in between those days, it consistently reads as a sequence in 1 week.I agree the discussion can get blown out of proportions easily. I'm sometimes guilty of that, i suppose.. It's not a salvation issue. I think the question is where we should draw the line. When you allegorise this, then you open the door to allegorise more. But on the other hand, the suggested flat earth model as portrayed in the Bible is only credible when you agree this is God's perception, not man's, not ours. I guess this could be said too about the creation week, although there is much more emphasis on the creation week, which seems like a reason to take it more seriously and literally (so it seems to me anyway).Yes, that is what i meant. I read a quite clear emphasis on the days as sequential days, which start in the evening each time. Even the first day starts in darkness by the way. But i see your point, i think. But it doesn't 'resonate' in my mind with the 7th day, when God rests of his work, when there would be periods of not creating in between the creation days. I.m.o. it doesn't read like that.Okay. :)It has to be limited though, otherwise the plants would be without sun for too long, unless God was the light source up until then. But the eco system as a whole would not function if there were vast amounts of time between the creation days.We agree. :) But the problem with Old Earth Creationism is that God did apparently not create man in his Image, from the dust of the earth, and did not form Eve from the rib of Adam. The problem with OEC-ists is that they feel obliged to subscribe to naturalistic ideas because of the authoritarian position science has assumed in the matter. What confounds me is that OEC-ists usually refuse to look into YEC science, and dismiss it as unscientific. This must be peer pressure at work, because it's not reasonable. It seems to me that OEC-ists refuse to choose between naturalism and supernaturalism, and while they're at it they simply don't believe Scripture anymore or are forced to allegorise a lot of it, throwing proper exegesis out the window. They will have to ignore evidence from other fields of knowledge too, about things like the Nephilim and the Flood, even the Exodus. Apparently it's not Scripture itself that they can not believe, but rather the fact that science is a human endeavour with usually a naturalistic viewpoint to work from and thus not objective and not necessarily financed, acknowledged and facilitated by people who pursue the truth of the matter. But this was my biggest hurdle too. I never expected main stream science to be as opinionated / opinionating as it apparently is. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Ken Ham, Ray Comfort and The Young Earth.
Top
Bottom