Ajax
Active Member
???????@Ajax I mean do you believe the earth is flat.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
???????@Ajax I mean do you believe the earth is flat.
If the tree of life (which can grant people immortality) was created on day 3 I think they should have mentioned it in Genesis 1... though I guess I don't have a strong argument for that.
It looks like Answers in Genesis (YECs) also say that Adam and Eve were created on day 6....I have re-read Genesis 2 and decided it was probably on day 6 that God planted out Eden, same day that Adam was created.
Citation needed.
It looks like Answers in Genesis (YECs) also say that Adam and Eve were created on day 6....
But then God rested for a day....Contradictions: Eve’s Birth Certificate
Genesis 1 and 2 seem to indicate different times for the creation of Eve. Was Eve created on Day Six or not?answersingenesis.org
Please be serious. Using pseudoscience websites is the same as admitting that you are wrong.Here's one that you will love.
Here is another that ends up as science does, with a not certain conclusion because some scientists disagree.Hazy Early Earth: More Affirmation of Creation Day 4
When I first arrived in Pasadena for postdoctoral research at Caltech, the haze of Los Angeles smog was so thick that it was several weeks before I realized that a range of 6,000-foot high mountains lay just three miles to the north. Now, thanks to air pollution abatement, I see those mountains...reasons.org
Clouds May Hold Key to Why Early Earth Didn’t Freeze Over
Solution to 'young' sun paradox proposed through thinner clouds on early Earth.www.space.com
Basically science does not know for sure about the clouds but the Bible day 1 hypothesis is also what many scientists are saying but probably don't realise that they are confirming the Bible.
You're forgetting the Muslims. It's like saying that that the Psalms are only revered by the Jews while forgetting the Christians.
Nope.Are you now sorry that you're mistaken because it is in fact "most"?
So why the conclusion must be that the literal reading is not true, and not that the whole story is not true?It is to point out that in the creation story the plants (and fruit trees) were created before the Sun, Moon and stars and this conflicts with mainstream science. So it seems that a literal reading of it is not true even though old earth creationists try to make it fit with science.
Perhaps it could mean "For in the creation poem, God made the heavens and the earth, etc, in six days". Though I believe that the whole story is not true.So why the conclusion must be that the literal reading is not true, and not that the whole story is not true?
In the story the days are supposed to be literal, because each one has an evening and a morning.
Also for those who think that the Bible is inerrant, Exodus 20:11 states "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."
You didn't understand the question????????????
That is one reason why the 'days' of creation must refer to a period of time with beginning and an end.It looks like Answers in Genesis (YECs) also say that Adam and Eve were created on day 6....
But then God rested for a day....Contradictions: Eve’s Birth Certificate
Genesis 1 and 2 seem to indicate different times for the creation of Eve. Was Eve created on Day Six or not?answersingenesis.org
Obviously you have that right to believe that the account is not true. That is in part described in the Bible in many different ways.Perhaps it could mean "For in the creation poem, God made the heavens and the earth, etc, in six days". Though I believe that the whole story is not true.
No I didn't, because when you wrote the question, I had not posted anything on this thread. Also I have said many times that I'm agnostic and science orientated. So why should I believe that the earth is flat?You didn't understand the question?????
OK, I just asked. Thanks for that.No I didn't, because when you wrote the question, I had not posted anything on this thread. Also I have said many times that I'm agnostic and science orientated. So why should I believe that the earth is flat?
The question is why don't you believe in a Flat Earth?OK, I just asked. Thanks for that.
. . .and geocentric universe,The question is why don't you believe in a Flat Earth?
No. That's the behavior of the intellectuallly dishonest.
Not everyone is in your box.
No conformation involving science. Your arguing from ignorance' to justify an ancient scripture. Yes, scientist disagree on some things and there are unknowns concerning the origins of the universe, but there are no hazy unknowns concerning the history of our solar system, and the physics of the formation of the planets including the earth,Here's one that you will love.
Here is another that ends up as science does, with a not certain conclusion because some scientists disagree.Hazy Early Earth: More Affirmation of Creation Day 4
When I first arrived in Pasadena for postdoctoral research at Caltech, the haze of Los Angeles smog was so thick that it was several weeks before I realized that a range of 6,000-foot high mountains lay just three miles to the north. Now, thanks to air pollution abatement, I see those mountains...reasons.org
Clouds May Hold Key to Why Early Earth Didn’t Freeze Over
Solution to 'young' sun paradox proposed through thinner clouds on early Earth.www.space.com
Basically science does not know for sure about the clouds but the Bible day 1 hypothesis is also what many scientists are saying but probably don't realise that they are confirming the Bible.
Genesis 22:17, Jeremiah 33:22, and Hebrews 11:12 talk about the number of stars in the sky being roughly the same as the grains of sand on the seashore - which is roughly true even though the naked eye can only see several thousand stars in the sky. Though it also says that this number is the same as the number of descendants that Abraham will have.The simple vastness of the universe is conceptually beyond any interpretation of Genesis.
It is much more practical and honest to consider the scientific perspective of the vastness of the universe in time and space is a witness to the scientific view of the glory of Creation without error on a scale far beyond any interpretation of the Bible.
trueGenesis 22:17, Jeremiah 33:22, and Hebrews 11:12 talk about the number of stars in the sky being roughly the same as the grains of sand on the seashore - which is roughly true even though the naked eye can only see several thousand stars in the sky. Though it also says that this number is the same as the number of descendants that Abraham will have.
Though having lots of stars isn't necessarily vast depending on the size and spacing of the stars.