1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Jon Stewart and Me

Dobermite Wrote: Feb 19, 2015 1:00 AM
He's a committed Cultural Marxist and a leftwing smear merchant.
One last thing, Fuzzy, I just noticed in one of your posts you said "If Adam was created on day one, and the days were millions of years, how is it Adam didn't die before the creation story was completed?" Its a good question and it could be a game changer if in fact Adam was created on day one of the creation account in Genesis, but in fact he was created on day six, mankind was Gods final creation in the chronological order of Genesis, so it would make no difference if DAYS 1 thru 5 were a million years or 10 billion years.
And that may be true in this instance, I do not discount the possibility, but the rest of the Bible makes it clear that this is not the only possible interpretation, that Gods days and our days are two entirely different things. So while we might be talking about six 24 hour days, and I'm open to that possibility if the evidence suggests a young earth, I am not bound to that interpretation so its not important to me either way. If the earth is billions of years old and that can be proven, in no way does that impact my reading of Genesis, and the same is true if it can ever be proven that the earth is much younger than we suspected. The time line for the chronology of events in Genesis is ambiguous in my view, so the age of the earth makes no difference to me one way or the other. I'm willing to accept whatever the evidence suggests. Lastly Fuzzy, you say if a day is a million years in Genesis, Adam would be dead the day after he was born. First, we're talking only about the six days that are cataloged in the creation account of Genesis, that is God operating on HIS TIME (which is no time at all, as you and I understand time), but days in the Bible for mankind are as we know them, 24 hour days, and that was true for Adam as well, at least after the fall when the biological clock started ticking on his ultimate physical demise.
I also wonder if the element of "time" even existed for Adam & Eve until they fell? Their bodies had to be very different from ours as well, completely resistant to the aging process beyond a certain point and to all manner of sickness and germs, they also had to be impervious to blunt physical trauma. The Bible says that when we die, we believers, we are given perfect heavenly bodies where there is no aging or sickness, and I wonder if these are the bodies Adam & Eve possessed prior to the fall, or some variation of these bodies? But I digress, point being, they were made to live eternally, that much we know, and their nature seems to imply they were not entirely physical in the way you and I understand it today, a lot (as in, everything) changed after the fall, so did time even exist for Adam & Eve when they were created, or were they operating on the same concept of time as God, which is no time at all? I don't know the answer to that question, all I know is, like everything that exists in the spirit realm, and not in the natural, Adam & Eve were created to live eternally. Anyway my point is, while I count myself in the Bible literalist camp, most of the time the scriptures are literal and require no further investigation, but sometimes its deep and requires a great deal of introspection, and IMO nowhere is that highlighted greater than Genesis, Daniel and Revelation. These are some really deep books that require a great deal of Biblical knowledge as a whole, before you can being to put the pieces to these jigsaw puzzles in place. For example, if you don't know that elsewhere in the Bible, DAYS to God are essentially described as having no real meaning, they could mean 24 hour days or they could mean a thousand years, and by extension they could mean a million or a billion years, then no interpretation or introspection is necessary, its six 24 hour days as we know it, end of story.
It should also be noted that in the sequence of events in Genesis, God creates man last, not coincidentally after he puts in place all of the symbiotic relationships (the waters, the plants for oxygen etc.) that are necessary for life. But while he is waiting to create man, it doesn't have to be a literal six days from the time he creates the heavens and the earth. Genesis calls that the first day, and says mankind was created on the sixth day (if I recall?), and in between God creates creates the plants and animals and divides day from night etc., essentially putting everything in place to make the earth habitable for mankind, but there can be a gap of millions or billions of years between days because the account of Genesis operates strictly on Gods time, which is no time at all. The 24 hour day only applies to us, not to God. I would also note that Adam and Eve were created to live eternally, death was brought into the world only after they brought sin into the world, and as I'm sure you know, physical death is a manifestation of spiritual death, thats why God could warn A&E that if they eat the forbidden fruit, ON THAT DAY they will surely die, despite the fact that they DID NOT physically die on that day. They were tossed from Eden and had full lives afterwards, but on the day they sinned they ceased to be the eternal beings they were created to be and essentially sealed their fate that they would one day physically die, because ON THAT DAY they spiritually died. My point is, I am a Bible literalist, but sometimes God and man have very different meanings for certain words and scriptures. So God can say YOU WILL DIE ON THIS DAY, you proceed to do what he told you not too and you do not drop dead, but that doesn't mean you avoided Gods judgement, it doesn't mean you dodged a bullet, it doesn't mean God changed his mind, and it doesn't mean God was exaggerating. It simply means that Gods definition of death and our definition of death are very different things. We humans only know physical death, thats the only death we can actually experience and observe with our five senses, but there is an entirely different definition of death in the spirit realm which encompasses death in the natural realm, but is not exclusive to physical death.
Fuzzy, to answer your question below, there is no contradiction as I see it, there are simply different principles for us and God. We operate under the laws of physics and nature because we are material beings in a material world, while God is spirit who resides in the spirit realm. Although he directs events in the natural realm, that is not his first estate. His first estate, as the Bible makes clear when discussing angels and demons, was an in the spirit realm, and in the spirit realm there is no time & space as we know it, time does not exist, time is a construct of the material world, but it does not apply in the spirit realm where everything is eternal. For example, one is either eternally damned or one has eternal life, but there is no death as we know it, nothing that exists will ever cease to exist, at least that is the depiction the Bible gives us and not coincidentally its a common theme with people who explain their near death experiences, many of them talk about the concept of time no longer existing, and how you just instinctively feel it, you just know time no longer exists, and again, this is consistent with the Bible, this is what the prophets meant when they said a day can be like a thousand years to God, which is to say, time as we know it does not exist for God, it is strictly a product of the material world. So the account of Genesis can have dual meanings where it pertains to God, HIS DAYS and OUR DAYS, which might be the same, but it doesn't have to be the same.
Cool, to be continued, and you have a nice weekend too.
Thanks singularity, thats all I could ask and it shows a real open mind on your part, and for what its worth you sound like a really cool guy. Even when we've disagreed, you've always been cordial and a pleasure to speak with. I hope I've been the same.
Singularity, I would agree with you if someone was using scripture or religious doctrine to answer perplexing questions. That has no place in the science class, and I say that as a Christian. In a religion class or even a history class, fine, I have no objection to comparative religion, I personally think its silly to act like religion doesn't exist when its such a big part of the world we live in, but I can take it or leave it either way, I have no strong feelings about it either way. But, if you are discussing ID strictly from a scientific POV, or challenging Darwinian theory on that basis, that should and must be accepted in science, without that freedom science suffers, just imagine of Einstein were not allowed to challenge Newtonian physics. Challenging the existing orthodoxy must never be discouraged, so long as its being challenged on the basis of science. One can be wrong and you can point out the flaws of his argument, but he should be allowed to make the argument without fear of reprisal.
It might be, fuzzy, I'm not a young earth proponent myself, I subscribe more to the "a day is like a thousand years to God" interpretation of Genesis, which is to say Gods time is not our time, but that aside, I don't discount the possibility of a young earth, unlike the secularists and materialists, I am always open to ALL of the evidence, even if the evidence challenges conventional wisdom or naturalism.
1 - 10 Next