• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Big bang theory?

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
the debate has absolutely nothing to do with the creation myth in the bible, and you calling it the truth is only your own personal interpretation.

it states in the bible that a 24 hour day is a day and the term morning in used. Now if your calling the bible a blatant lie then i agree. But if a small part is a lie the whole thing is.

wait we already know genesis is fiction.

Your disbelief proves nothing.

there is not a considerable debate that the universe was formed 13.7 billion yeasr ago by a singularity. There is no debate at all about this. What caused this to happen is open for debate because they dont know what caused it.

Bold statements to be sure. But completely wrong. Any ToE proponents want to enlighten him?

because they dont know what happened before then doesnt mean we use our imagination and throw ole magic man in as a cause. That will never happen as magic has no place at all in science

I agree. Magic has no place in science. However, the Bible is scientifically accurate, though written thousands of years ago and not a science book.

the hebrews use the word almighty in the bible when they created your god to make the hebrew god more powerfull then the hundreds of pagan gods springing up on every corner.

Worship of the true God, Jehovah, predated the Hebrews.

thats because the hebrew god myth didnt create anything, it was fiction. The hebrews didnt know the first thing about how the universe came to be thats why we have this wild story that doesnt make sense and has been proven a lie.

And yet, the Creation account resonates as truth to millions today. And you are wrong when you say the creation account has been proven to be a lie.

they had to start somewhere now didnt they. if they used the word "hello" you would switch it into what ever meaning you wanted to

No comment.

science already has left the 3000 year old book in the dust.

No, it hasn't.

Now with all that said its great you have a semi open mind to science and your on the right track to accept reality, you can still learn more despite your beliefs so I have no problem with that.

Im not sure you should use your personal opinion to twist the bible to interpret what you want it to say. In my opinion thats the biggest mistake the religious have been doing since the start.

when the bible was written it was written to be read allegorically because they wanted you to pull out the benifits and goodness from the fiction. People get to carried away with it all and when you cross the literal line you left what the multiple unknown authors were trying to get across and the point is lost.

Jesus did not consider the account as allegory, nor the Flood, nor the other events recorded in Genesis. Rather, he taught them as historical events, as indeed they are. You have no valid basis to speak of them otherwise. Lastly, the Bible writers attributed their writings as inspired of God. Dozens of men, living centuries apart, collaborated to create a book no one, NO ONE, has successfully refuted down to our scientific age. Why? Because "All scripture is inspired of God and beneficial." (2 Timothy 3:16,17)
 

PolyHedral

Superabacus Mystic
This the same book that implies that the Earth existed before light, that the Earth existed before the sun, that plants existed before the Sun, and that plants existed before sea life?

All of those are wrong, and quite easily shown to be so.
 
A BRUG (Bro Hug), thanks.
I think the problem we non Hebrew readers have is the translation issues.
Its been described as caging a lion.
Example: "And there was evening and morning-Day one" in our "English bibles". The torah scholars in 1200 AD describe it.. " and there was confusion (forms that mingle = evening) and distinguishing (clarity= morning)." Essentially they were saying disorder to order.
This was said over and over, ...and God...and there was evening and morning.....
As a kid I would scratch my head and say, evening and morning?
Now, to me, it makes better sense, they were saying God was creating our universe first out of nothing (tohu) then formed elements (bohu) and order was created, day after day, chaos to order.

You continue to ignore the fact Genesis clearly states the earth and seed bearing plants on it came before the sun and other stars which is just nuts.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Jesus did not consider the account as allegory

jesus didnt write the OT or the NT. so how would you know??? you dont.

he taught them as historical events, as indeed they are

they are myths and not one is a proven historical event, you sir are a liar.

You have no valid basis to speak of them otherwise

You dont, because you dont have a clue about the historicity of the bible, I on the other hand have done a little research

"All scripture is inspired of God and beneficial

Balony LOL do you really believe yourself? can you go in and look at a mirror and repeat this to yourself with a straight face???? if you can then you dont know the first thing about scripture.

the bible is 3000 year old fiction and you sir cannot prove me wrong
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
This the same book that implies that the Earth existed before light, that the Earth existed before the sun, that plants existed before the Sun, and that plants existed before sea life?

All of those are wrong, and quite easily shown to be so.

And you're reading it, the same way they heard it, several thousand years ago.

With misunderstanding.

Of course they didn't understand.
No telescopes...no microscopes....no science...

There was no way to explain anything......but they did believe.
Genesis is God's claim to being Creator....'I am'.
He wasn't trying to explain anything.
Genesis was not written for that.

So here we are, thousands of years later...with science....
and some people think science is a trump card.
Speak science.... not God.

Still waiting for a photo?
 
Last edited:

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This the same book that implies that the Earth existed before light, that the Earth existed before the sun, that plants existed before the Sun, and that plants existed before sea life?

All of those are wrong, and quite easily shown to be so.

OK. But the Bible doesn't say any of those things.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
You continue to ignore the fact Genesis clearly states the earth and seed bearing plants on it came before the sun and other stars which is just nuts.

No, the Bible doesn't say that at all. Genesis takes the perspective of a person on the surface of the Earth, in explaining the event surrounding the Earth's preparation for life. Genesis 1:1 shows that the heavens and earth were created "In the beginning", long before the creative days of Genesis began.

Before the first creative day, light was prevented from reaching the Earth's surface.
Then, during the first creative day, God allowed diffused light to penetrate earth's atmosphere. During the fourth creative day, the sun, moon, and stars became visible in Earth's atmosphere. As described in w04 1/1 p. 28 "How could God produce light on the first day if the luminaries were not made until the fourth day? The Hebrew word rendered “make” in verse 16 is not the same as the word for “create” used in Genesis chapter 1, verses 1, 21, and 27. “The heavens” that included the luminaries were created long before the “first day” even began. But their light did not reach the surface of the earth. On the first day, “there came to be light” because diffused light penetrated the cloud layers and became visible on the earth. The rotating earth thus began to have alternating day and night. (Genesis 1:1-3, 5) The sources of that light still remained invisible from the earth. During the fourth creative period, however, a notable change took place. The sun, the moon, and the stars were now made “to shine upon the earth.” (Genesis 1:17) “God proceeded to make” them in that they could now be seen from the earth."
 
Originally Posted by DeistPrimate
You continue to ignore the fact Genesis clearly states the earth and seed bearing plants on it came before the sun and other stars which is just nuts.

No, the Bible doesn't say that at all. Genesis takes the perspective of a person on the surface of the Earth, in explaining the event surrounding the Earth's preparation for life. Genesis 1:1 shows that the heavens and earth were created "In the beginning", long before the creative days of Genesis began." Before the first creative day, light was prevented from reaching the Earth's surface.
Then, during the first creative day, God allowed diffused light to penetrate earth's atmosphere. During the fourth creative day, the sun, moon, and stars became visible in Earth's atmosphere.


Nuts again. You're really having to jump through some major mental monkeybars to conclude this.

There were no people there to have that perspective, allegedly the only perspective possible was God's (and perhaps the angels' but in any case it wasn't limited to what could be seen from the earth's surface). So the sun couldn't be seen yet but Big Bang background radiation could? How long was that "day" plants on earth were around before the sunlight they required could reach them?

:facepalm:
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
But it does;

Water can't exist before light, sorry.

Try this...

Picture yourself as God....yes you can....

Now, introduce yourself to a man living several thousand years ago.
During the conversation the topic comes up.....creation.

How do you explain to such a person....
the fusion process of a star?

He doesn't have a clue what those pinpoints of light in the sky...really are.
He doesn't have a clue what atomic structures are.

He would not understand how light is made.
But you want to say...you did it.

Closest item to hydrogen....and within the realm of sight and touch....
would be?....water.

But of course, Genesis cannot be a thorough explanation.
No science has yet been developed.
 

PolyHedral

Superabacus Mystic
Try this...

Picture yourself as God....yes you can....

Now, introduce yourself to a man living several thousand years ago.
During the conversation the topic comes up.....creation.

How do you explain to such a person....
the fusion process of a star?

He doesn't have a clue what those pinpoints of light in the sky...really are.
He doesn't have a clue what atomic structures are.

He would not understand how light is made.
But you want to say...you did it.
Then I, with my arbitrarily large amount of time and infinitely effective ability to communicate, explain it to him.
 

David M

Well-Known Member
No, the Bible doesn't say that at all. Genesis takes the perspective of a person on the surface of the Earth, in explaining the event surrounding the Earth's preparation for life. Genesis 1:1 shows that the heavens and earth were created "In the beginning", long before the creative days of Genesis began.

Before the first creative day, light was prevented from reaching the Earth's surface.
Then, during the first creative day, God allowed diffused light to penetrate earth's atmosphere. During the fourth creative day, the sun, moon, and stars became visible in Earth's atmosphere. As described in w04 1/1 p. 28 "How could God produce light on the first day if the luminaries were not made until the fourth day? The Hebrew word rendered “make” in verse 16 is not the same as the word for “create” used in Genesis chapter 1, verses 1, 21, and 27. “The heavens” that included the luminaries were created long before the “first day” even began. But their light did not reach the surface of the earth. On the first day, “there came to be light” because diffused light penetrated the cloud layers and became visible on the earth. The rotating earth thus began to have alternating day and night. (Genesis 1:1-3, 5) The sources of that light still remained invisible from the earth. During the fourth creative period, however, a notable change took place. The sun, the moon, and the stars were now made “to shine upon the earth.” (Genesis 1:17) “God proceeded to make” them in that they could now be seen from the earth."

In other words you need to make stuff up to correct the obvious mistakes in the bible.

An excuse is an excuse, no matter how hard you try and conceal it.
 

David M

Well-Known Member
Jesus did not consider the account as allegory, nor the Flood, nor the other events recorded in Genesis. Rather, he taught them as historical events, as indeed they are. You have no valid basis to speak of them otherwise. Lastly, the Bible writers attributed their writings as inspired of God. Dozens of men, living centuries apart, collaborated to create a book no one, NO ONE, has successfully refuted down to our scientific age. Why? Because "All scripture is inspired of God and beneficial." (2 Timothy 3:16,17)


And your support for this is what?

Just because he taught then as true does not mean he taught them as historical events.

This simple fact that Genesis teaches that flying things were created on the day before any land animals is enough to successfully refute Genesis as providing an accurate sequence in our scientific age.

And there is the prophecies about the destruction of Tyre as another iron-clad refutation as to biblical accuracy.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Then I, with my arbitrarily large amount of time and infinitely effective ability to communicate, explain it to him.

And Moses would understand?

And when coming down from the mount with all that science....
the people would understand?

Of course you do understand.....don't you?
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Simple question:

What is a creationists understanding of the big bang theory?

Do you man, do we "understand" the big bang ? - that's the first hurdle.
As far as does the big bang negate the idea of God - I don't believe so for a minute.
 

Know it all.

Shaman.
Do you man, do we "understand" the big bang ? - that's the first hurdle.
As far as does the big bang negate the idea of God - I don't believe so for a minute.
Instead of negating the reality of a God - the "Big Bang" is a direct scientific proof of a creation day or creation event which gives huge validity to the opening line of the Bible that says: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" Genesis 1:1

Claiming otherwise is not "scientific" as that would only be stubborn denial.

:sleep:
 

McBell

Unbound
Instead of negating the reality of a God - the "Big Bang" is a direct scientific proof of a creation day or creation event which gives huge validity to the opening line of the Bible that says: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" Genesis 1:1

Claiming otherwise is not "scientific" as that would only be stubborn denial.

:sleep:
What a load of bull ****.
 

PolyHedral

Superabacus Mystic
And Moses would understand?

And when coming down from the mount with all that science....
the people would understand?
Yes.

Instead of negating the reality of a God - the "Big Bang" is a direct scientific proof of a creation day or creation event which gives huge validity to the opening line of the Bible that says: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" Genesis 1:1

Claiming otherwise is not "scientific" as that would only be stubborn denial.

:sleep:
Hmm, it does validate the first line... by blowing the rest of the book out of the water. :D
 
Top