• 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.

Taking Questions on the Creation Week

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,675
52,517
Guam
✟5,130,763.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
For the sake of the new guys here (Welcome!), I'll reopen one of my favorite subjects and take questions on the Creation Week, and try to answer to the best of my ability and understanding.

Fire when ready!
 

FrenchyBearpaw

Take time for granite.
Jun 13, 2011
3,252
79
✟4,283.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
For the sake of the new guys here (Welcome!), I'll reopen one of my favorite subjects and take questions on the Creation Week, and try to answer to the best of my ability and understanding.

Fire when ready!
When did people begin to believe the "Creation Week" was a literal event, and not allegorical?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,675
52,517
Guam
✟5,130,763.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Actually, if you've ever read your Bible, people weren't "created" until day six.
That's true, but angels are people too; and so is the Godhead, a.k.a. First Person, Second Person, Third Person.
 
Upvote 0

FrenchyBearpaw

Take time for granite.
Jun 13, 2011
3,252
79
✟4,283.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
That's true, but angels are people too; and so is the Godhead, a.k.a. First Person, Second Person, Third Person.
You had your chance for some real discussion bro, but you just couldn't resist a smarmy semantic response, could you? Have fun in your own little world.//
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,675
52,517
Guam
✟5,130,763.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
were the sun/moon created on the described day.
Yes -- Day Four, to be exact.
Or was it merely that the firnament cleared up enough for us to be able to see them and thus 'apearing' on the sky from an earth perspective?
I don't believe the firmament was that cloudy.

There are three firmaments mentioned in the Scriptures:

  1. first heaven = atmosphere
  2. second heaven = outer space
  3. third heaven = Heaven proper
appolagies for the lousy typing, its late.
No sorries allowed --
 
Upvote 0

Exiledoomsayer

Only toke me 1 year to work out how to change this
Jan 7, 2010
2,196
64
✟25,237.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Yes -- Day Four, to be exact.

I don't believe the firmament was that cloudy.

There are three firmaments mentioned in the Scriptures:

  1. first heaven = atmosphere
  2. second heaven = outer space
  3. third heaven = Heaven proper
What are the scriptures that say this?
No sorries allowed --
Fine I'm not sorry then
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,675
52,517
Guam
✟5,130,763.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
What are the scriptures that say this?
I don't really want to go outside of Genesis 1 too much in this thread, but for the record:

Notice how Genesis reads:

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

You'll note that in 1:1 we have heaven as singular, but in 2:1 -- after the Creation Week is finished -- we have heaven as plural.

Sidebar: Paul warns about pluralizing words in his epistle to the Galatians.

Galatians 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

So why is 'heaven' singular in 1:1 and plural in 2:1?

Simple -- God created two more 'heavens'.

Genesis 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

Here, we see God shearing off a layer of the earth's water; presumably to send it into space for future use in Noah's time.

Thus the waters below (ocean) and the waters above (canopy or giant ice ball or giant ice cube in orbit) are occupying two different "firmaments" or "heavens".

Finally, we see Paul, who was beaten to death in Lystra (Acts 14), talking about being in "third heaven":

2 Corinthians 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, ( whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth; ) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

And there you have it -- three firmaments or three heavens -- take your pick.
 
Upvote 0
Apr 4, 2011
133
0
Ontario
✟22,755.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Single
Somehow I knew the answers would stop at one of my questions.
The answers do not stop there. I am sure AV was referring to physical life when he stated (quite correctly) that 100% of it was created during Creation Week. Definitions only need to be specified before the seeming stumbling block you have presented to us creationists is cleared away quite easily.

Yes, it is true we cannot conclusively answer for the origin of God, since that takes us into the immortal realm, a place we humans just cannot comprehend. But atheistic evolutionists have yet to explain the origin of the first life. Does it not seem more miraculous that life should have arisen without any intelligent input? Perhaps you would allow for the aliens' responsibility in seeding this planet with life, but then the question is only pushed out further--to the origin of the aliens.
 
Upvote 0

Delphiki

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2010
4,342
162
Ohio
✟5,685.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others

It's not the place for the Theory of Evolution to explain the origin of life, as the theory explains the diversity of life from common descent.

The origin of life can be reasonably explained away as a chemical reaction that is no more miraculous than a baking soda volcano science project, actually. Do we have evidence for it? Not exactly -- that's why abiogenesis is still hypothesis.

The reason why our explanation happens to be a naturalistic one is because any explanation for anything we know thus far about the universe has naturalistic explanations behind them. There's no rational reason to assume the supernatural is responsible for anything or even exists at all, for that matter.

But see, rather than making the assumption that we know it for fact, we continue to study it until we know more about it, and then keep studying it still. Unlike creationism, which is takes an anti-knowledge stance by saying "God did it, that settles it, there's nothing to learn here."
 
Upvote 0

Tinker Grey

Wanderer
Site Supporter
Feb 6, 2002
11,671
6,166
Erewhon
Visit site
✟1,113,782.00
Faith
Atheist

WRT non-physical life: Can you define it such that it includes God but excludes robots?
 
Upvote 0