juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Why? Why did the heavens appear much much later? about at what time?
Upvote
0
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.
No, the beginning of the "heavens and the earth" took place much, much later.
The thing is, I don't think that it's actually true that the atmosphere of the early Earth was opaque. And it's certainly not true that it was still opaque by the time plants came around.We had an opaque atmosphere at one point. It became translucent. It is now largely transparent. All of these things were in the theory I cited. And the only "shoehorn" activity I undertook was to say that the rest of the creation account after "the spirit hovered over the face of the waters" continues on from that viewpoint.
The thing is, I don't think that it's actually true that the atmosphere of the early Earth was opaque. And it's certainly not true that it was still opaque by the time plants came around.
The thing is, I don't think that it's actually true that the atmosphere of the early Earth was opaque. And it's certainly not true that it was still opaque by the time plants came around.
Well, you'd go by a comparison of solar system formation models along with the makeup of the oldest rocks. The chemistry at time of formation, which includes the makeup of the atmosphere, would have affected the opacity.I agree with your second sentence. As for your first, what evidence would there be one way or another? Not a challenge, genuinely wondering. If I'm wrong and therefore the theory I cited is wrong, how would we determine this one way or another? The account says that there was light before the plants came around, so the atmosphere would have been translucent at that point.
So, what do they show?Well, you'd go by a comparison of solar system formation models along with the makeup of the oldest rocks. The chemistry at time of formation, which includes the makeup of the atmosphere, would have affected the opacity.
Regardless of the actual details of the early atmosphere, however, the Bible has plants showing up before the Sun and Moon. That is patently absurd. It also has birds showing up before land animals, which we know didn't happen. It also has organisms being specially created separately, instead of diversifying from a common ancestor.
Bobby Fischer once wrote an article in which he claimed, "The King's Gambit is busted."Well, if you've read any of my posts on this subject, you can tell I am a strong believer in the Big Bang Theory.
I think that it's very similar to evolution in the sense that it's very misunderstood scientific theory (he name itslef and give people wrong ideas of what it is). I'll admit there are a few unknowns about it here and there, but for the most part it's pretty solid.
So what do you guys think about this?
Bobby Fischer once wrote an article in which he claimed, "The King's Gambit is busted."
God wrote an article [Genesis 1] busting the Big Bang, before the Big Bang was ever conceived.
Haven't you ever seen a comparison of the events in Genesis 1 to the events in the Big Bang [ever changing] model (or models) that produce the same results?I know that I'm asking the question of the wrong person to expect a lucid answer from, but how exactly does Genesis 1 "bust" the Big Bang? Some people would say that having an origin to the universe requires an originator.
Haven't you ever seen a comparison of the events in Genesis 1 to the events in the Big Bang [ever becoming more accurate] model (or models) that produce the same results?
You know --- if the Bible was open-ended (like the Periodic Table) is --- even I wouldn't believe It.fix'd
You know --- if the Bible was open-ended (like the Periodic Table) is --- even I wouldn't believe It.
Regardless of the actual details of the early atmosphere, however, the Bible has plants showing up before the Sun and Moon. That is patently absurd.
Oh, He did, huh? And whose telescope are you using? Andromeda's?Yet God has given us a glimpse of how our own solar system formed...
Either that, or He rested (ceased) after the 6th day.Brings new meaning to the statement Jesus made about His father still working. It appears that creation is still taking place.
Hebrews 4:10 said:For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
You know --- if the Bible was open-ended (like the Periodic Table) is --- even I wouldn't believe It.
Please show me a Periodic Table of the Elements, and point out where on that table it says it is incomplete (or other such synonym).The periodic table is not meant to be a complete work. The Bible is meant as a complete work. Thus the order not to take from or add to.
The periodic table is meant to be incomplete. We just needed a way to organize the elements, so the periodic table was made, in full knowledge that there were other elements out there. With this in mind, we adjusted the table so that it could hold new elements created or discovered.
It is not a fair comparison, for the two are completely different in completeness. The Bible is meant to be finished---it's done. The periodic table can still be added to when new elements are found. It doesn't mean anything is changing in science; those new elements were always out there. We simply found them. The only thing that changed was our knowledge of them.
Oh, He did, huh? And whose telescope are you using? Andromeda's?Either that, or He rested (ceased) after the 6th day.
Jadis, I don't care if every other solar system in this universe "formed" itself through natural (actually, I do, but I'm making a point here) --- I don't care if every other solar system in this universe "formed" itself through natural means --- according to the Bible, this solar system didn't.Since I'll go with the belief that you didn't even bother to read the article, I'll give you some details.
The team of American and British scientists used the Very Large Array out in New Mexico along with another radio telescope 50km away. The star in question is 520 light years away, in the constellation Taurus.
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?