Time difference during creation.

[Taffsadar]

In my first post as thread started I stated my intensions to work out the bugs in this.

Heres a tip, scrap the whole idea. It's so messed up that it's pathetic.

"It's better to shut up and have everyone believe your a moron than to speak up and confirm their beliefs"

 

[Data]

Honestly, it seems to me like you are reading too much into the Bible. Apart from that verse, (which to me as well as others, is quite obviously non literal), there is no suggestion or indication of what you said is true.

 

[ikester7579]

Heres a tip, scrap the whole idea. It's so messed up that it's pathetic.

"It's better to shut up and have everyone believe your a moron than to speak up and confirm their beliefs"

And sometimes it's better to stay quite and not speak so that people don't see how immature you are that you would resort to name calling. O by the way, that is a flame which breaks rules at this forum.

 

[ikester7579]

Honestly, it seems to me like you are reading too much into the Bible. Apart from that verse, (which to me as well as others, is quite obviously non literal), there is no suggestion or indication of what you said is true.

So what your saying is that the bible is nothing but simple 2 year old stuff that could not have been complicated material or thought in it? That it is simply understood and what is not understood is just there to make you think? Or maybe a lie?
The God who created the iniverse is not as simple as you might think. For if he was he could not have done all that he has.

 

[ikester7579]

I'm pretty sure that eternity has no time. God created time, therefore he had to be outside of it. The baker doesn't make the cake from inside the pan When you place God inside time, you limit God; not to mention it doesn't fit the physical concepts I just mentioned.

That is not to say that God/Jesus didn't go "prepare a place for us" that has time. Where we are to live immortally may indeed utilize time. Jesus, in His glorified body will be there with us. But God resides outside of time.

Here's another way to look at it from how God's word is written and how it works through time. Some people say that the old testiment does not have anything of value left in it because when Jesus died everything changed. When Jesus died what did change? How we get to heaven and how our sins are forgiven. The rest still applies. To show how some of the new and old testiment coinside and still teach us, I will relay some facts that make what Jesus did more meaniful.
The first sin:Old testiment,
The first sin was commited in the Garden of Eden where the serpent(who was controlled by Satan) questioned The truthfullness Of what God had told Eve. And because the serpent had placed doubt in Eve's mind about what God had said, she sinned.
The shedding of blood for the first sin: New testiment,
The first place the bible records the shedding of Jesus's blood was when he prayed in the garden and sweated great drops of blood. The first blood shed in the garden by Jesus covers the first sin also committed in a garden.

The first curse: Old testiment,
The first curse was placed upon the land as Adam and Eve were cast out of the Garden of Eden. The ground was cursed with thorns and thickets and that man would have to work by the sweat of his brow.
The shedding of blood for the first curse: New testiment,
The crown of thorns that was placed on Jesus's head was made from the same thorns that the ground was cursed of. And when Jesus bled, His blood flowed over his brow from that crown of thorns covering the first curse.

The list goes on but you get the meaning. The bible is complicated or it can be simple. It's how far you want to dig to find what your looking for.

The reason what I wrote above being important about how Jesus shed his blood and in what order it was done in. Is because to have your sins forgiven, it has to be done from the begining of that sin so that the door for sin is not left open through the salvation of Christ. Because Christ is perfect, so has to be the salvation that was given to us by him, even to relate back to the very begining of the first sin or curse. We may not be able to understand the principles of why or how God did things, but this is the reason he is God. To be on the same level of understanding as God would make ourselves God's. But we are not, So we will never fully understand him or his word.

The 1 day = 1,000 years coinsides with the new testiment just as what I explained above. According to biblical time we are in the 6000 year range and not far off the 7,000 year range which will complete the end of what we know. This also leaves time for the 1,000 year reign of Christ which coinsides with the 7th day of creation where God rested after creating.

 

[dlamberth]

I'm pretty sure that eternity has no time. God created time, therefore he had to be outside of it. The baker doesn't make the cake from inside the pan When you place God inside time, you limit God; not to mention it doesn't fit the physical concepts I just mentioned.

I think that in the spiritual realm, there is no time. As soon as one enters the spiritual arena, there is only eternity. It's in the physical realm that time exist.

It's interesting, to me at least, that as physical beings, we can be aware of the physical here and now and at the same time, be aware of the backdrop of eternity. We, as finite beings, can not take in all of eternity. But we can be aware of it.

..

 

[ikester7579]

I think that in the spiritual realm, there is no time. As soon as one enters the spiritual arena, there is only eternity. It's in the physical realm that time exist.

It's interesting, to me at least, that as physical beings, we can be aware of the physical here and now and at the same time, be aware of the backdrop of eternity. We, as finite beings, can not take in all of eternity. But we can be aware of it.

..

If you have a bible program, do a search on the word time and the word eternity. What you find just might surprise you.

 

[Data]

So what your saying is that the bible is nothing but simple 2 year old stuff that could not have been complicated material or thought in it? That it is simply understood and what is not understood is just there to make you think? Or maybe a lie?

When did I say that? You're putting words into my mouth ikester.

The God who created the Universe is not as simple as you might think. For if he was he could not have done all that he has.

But it doesn't make your theory any more true, does it. You could intepret that verse many ways. Your interpretation however is not backed up by anything else, yet other interpretations are. However.. it doesn't also make it wrong either.


Simply because your theory is "complicated", and God is also complicated, doesn't make it true. You can also read anything you want into words. See the Quran threads, and the advanced scientific knowledge that is supposedly inside it if you're interested. It is quite obvious that the "1 day is a thousand years" verse isn't literal, but merely describing how god is unboundless. I see myself saying the same thing. If it is literal, is there any other verses that back it up? No? Does it agree with the rest of the bible, in which god is omnipotent, and unfettered by time or space?.. No? Well, maybe it isn't literal then.

 

[Mike Flynn]

First off let me say that science is right in most of their dating processes(barring a few mistakes here and there). I don't doubt that things on this earth date to be millions or billions of years old, but no one has ever thought that this maybe a by-product of the quick 6 day creation. In other words, the 6 day creation may make somethings look old.If that were the case in what you think should be done, then you would not have come into this thread and tried to push old earth. You could have look at what was said, and said to yourself: I may not agree but since God's word does say 6 days to create then he has the right to believe that. But because you think it's all a lie, you feel it's your duty to try and make it look that way. Why else would you came here to post and say what you have said?

But I never said its a *lie*. Now you are putting words into my mouth. All I am saying is that I believe there is enough evidence both in the Bible and in science to at least grant the *possibility* that the 'days' in creation may not have been literal days. This doesn't violate theology....and it doesn't falsify Genesis...so I am not saying its a lie.

Ikester, you have the right to believe what you want to believe about Genesis 1...I would never deny you this. Also, I have the right to believe what I believe about Genesis 1. And, like you, I have the right to defend my position with my own reasons. Thats what these discussions on this forum are all about...not 'pushing' our beleifs on others, but discussing and debating science and theology. So if someone posts a message saying 'how anyone can possibly interpret the Genesis days as non-literal?'...I will share my answers...just like you can argue those answers. But at the same time I will not bind you to my posistion and stand in judgement over you...its just a discussion, and not a binding one. The tough part is to keep a spirit of humbleness and humility in our discussions so that we don't let the debate matter more than the people involved in that debate.

Let me also say that you clearly have strong convictions on this subject...and I respect and admire that. Please don't take anything I have said as an attack or challenge to your faith...and I will do the same with your words. We can disagree and still have fruitful discussions on theology. In the mean time, I will try not to make any false accusations or character attacks...its so easy to do that...but we both know Christ stands against such things.

 

[ikester7579]

I have notice that when there is a heated debate going that mud slinging from one side is ok. But when the mud is slung back either the person gets mad or they try to make ammends. If they get mad they call people names and use slurs, I have even been cussed at here at the forum. In my growth with God I have learned not to take thing to seriously as far as to get so mad to cross a line like I have done in the past. Though I don't cuss nor would I type a cuss word, I do admire those who can say: This is making me to mad and I just need to cool my jets like Mike Flynn, and I had to do just last night with M. Bliss. Though some as I type this are trying to start something in another thread. I will stick to God's word and the truthfullness of it. Regardless of what someone may say. It is my right and until it becomes against the law I will exercise it.

 

[Jet Black]

Science can neither prove there is or is not a God and no one knows exactly how God does things or how he could create something.

ther important point here is the distinction between how and could. God could create in six days, but did he? The universe itself shows that he didn't, not couldn't. now if he did, then that would be contradictory to what his own creation says, which makes him a liar.

So what is it that you know that the rest of us do not?

I have not said that I do.

The way God created could have made things look old as science says they are.

he could, but did he? and if he did, then why did he make it look like he didn't?

And this is because to prove God is not or to prove God did not create as He claims, you would have to know how he created everything. So can you tell us how he created everything?

the problem is then, with the implications of certain creation methods when combined with what we see.

1) Did God speak things into existence or did they explode or just expand?

does it have to be so literal? could the creation merely be a manifestation of his "voice"

2) How did God achieve this?

however he did. However this is not really the central issue now, because how he did contradicts certain views of how he said he did. this implies things about his character.

3) Why does the bible refer one day as one thousand years?

why does the bible, in the same sentence, refer to a thousand years as a day?

4) Could not God create in 6 days? And if not why not? For he says He did.

possibly he could. the question is, did he? I can smash an egg or I can build a broken egg up atom by atom.... which did I do?

5) With all the evidence the science has to say the earth is billions of years old. But since they do not know how God created or why things seem to be old(which maybe the result of quick creation) how can science say all these things they claim without knowing both sides of the story?

it is simply looking at the universe and asking it what it tells us. The universe tells us it is billions of years old, there is no doubt about this.

 

[Ben_Hur]

If you have a bible program, do a search on the word time and the word eternity. What you find just might surprise you.

If you have a book on theoretica physics, read it. What you find, might surprise you.

The Bible is all truth, but it doesn't contain ALL truth.