Evidence for God from Science

Hi Zacchaeus,

I think that Jac and I generally came to a mutual understanding with each other's creation positions. If he were still posting here then I'm sure he'd agree that it is more important understand the interpretative method (hermeneutics) that one uses to interpret Scripture, than it is the resulting creation position that one adopts.

And I'd encourage you and anyone to firstly
1) focus more on what interpretative rules they're following, in their method of interpretation, and less on the creation position that they favour.
Then, after having identified weaknesses in their own interpretation,
2) apply those some interpretative methods to opposing positions.

This provides an as objective as possible manner. It won't let us decide who is correct/wrong, but we should be able to more fairly see the weakness and advantages in each position. What I did in this thread, if you follow the exchanges from the beginning, was to apply a strict historical-grammatical hermeneutic back on YECs, in particular AiG's popularised YEC interpretation.

Some challenges and weaknesses were seen, and Jac while sticking to his own interpretation, also agreed with some weaknesses that the method picked up with AiG's position (i.e., the light being God).

At some point, it seems, everyone reads into the text something that isn't there. Perhaps we can't stop ourselves doing this. But, I dare say that there are actually zero interpretations that are entirely clean when it comes to the creation account.

So again, I think it is important to:
1) understand the weaknesses/advantages of your own position,
2) understand the weaknesses/advantages of other's positions, and then
3) take your pick of which one you prefer.

But your case isn't full proof... You've proofed the scriptures in assertions of questions, just as I have, to help aide in conclusions you've already made. I don't think we've fully addressed one area of any particular question in its entirety. You spouted off, boom, boom, boom, what about this and that, x, Y, z. I've been diligent enough to try and respond each area, you just don't like my answers or understanding. I'm sorry. I have thought about angels, simply not in regards to a 'day' outside of time, distinctly seperate of earth and its creation (in time). I don't see how they correlate. But, by all means please, show me, through the scriptures.

Just saw you kur... My response above is to abelcain.

At some point, it seems, everyone reads into the text something that isn't there. Perhaps we can't stop ourselves doing this. But, I dare say that there are actually zero interpretations that are entirely clean when it comes to the creation account.

Absolutely! And as there IS "wiggle room" in the view of Genesis "days" which Scipture can LOGICALLY but not necessarily TRUTHFULLY support, I think the definitive truth of the matter only lies in the next world. And, that's at least partly because the reality, for US, is that the length of time God took to create the universe and earth and whatever length of time transpired prior to Adam's creation isn't espescially important. That God created all things and man and put them into place IS what is important. How LONG that took should be no more that an interesting debate.

And, a HUGE problem is that many Christians THINK coming to a definitive answer on this day/time issue is far more important than it should be. And so the battles over it go on and on, causing substantial rancor in their wakes. I think the intensity of the raging battles is mostly because of several things:

First, people don't follow, as Kurieuo said, a proper interpretive methodology. That is, they instead start with what they are ALREADY convinced of and then they go looking for Scriptures they cherrypick to support their own pre-conceived position. This is a TERRIBLE method of Bible interpretation!

Second, people are often highly motivated by their preconceived understandings AND also because they believe that they can use Scripture to PROVE them. OR they believe they can use something outside of Scripture (often science) to either validate their Scriptural beliefs or to refute the Scriptural beliefs of others. OR they might think they can use both Scripture and other things outsise of Scripture to PROVE what they are already convinced of. And this is something that, with some issues, can never be done. And Creation time is one of those unprovables.

But the WORST thing anyone can do is to assume that what actually must be wrong is certain portions of Scripture because it doesn't match up well with what they believe THAT other data supposedly PROVES isn't true. And THAT is trusting other things and supposedly established facts over what Scripture teaches. However, obviously, there are some passages of Scripture we may have misinterpreted the correct meaning - which will skew everything. But, as Scripture tells us it is ALL God-given, I think it is exceptionally dangerous to assume that the true problem is with Scripture and not with what we THINK is otherwise proven. That sort of thinking is putting a huge amount of faith in other THINGS over God's Word.

I always start my understanding with faith that SOMEHOW - and I may never understand it, or something might be BEYOND what can PRESENTLY be understood - Scripture is true. Otherwise, I, PERSONALLY, become the determiner of what in Scripture is true and what cannot be. And, so, HOW could I ever know which is WHICH - that is, outside of a wild, hairy, MORTAL guess? Hey, and I'm not very hairy!

Both Isa 1:18 and Isa 41:21 bring out a very strong principle about God's character: he likes to reason with us, and for us to state our case. Other scriptures tell us to plead with him and to pray, etc, talk with him as well too.

In other words, we plead our case and in so doing, how we miss it is revealed just as K pointed out a few frames earlier here. The bible mentions these things too: 1Co 3:3, 1Co 1:11, 1Co 11:18, 2Co 12:20, Gal_5:15, James 3:16, and James 4:1-2

Strife and division in the body of Christ is bad, very bad. I find this evident in the YEC, OEC, GAP debates from all sides. Therefore, God does reason with us in ways we may at first not realize. AIG is an example of this strife and loosing of dissension that divides the body more than most. Salvation is found in the work of Christ on the cross alone that dispenses grace to the rebellious, not at all in how one interprets the creation days.

It is clear from the bible that there is such things as Days in Heaven or God's time. His ways, times, are not our ways and time. His ways are higher than ours. Even the Apostle Peter understood this in 2 Peter 3:8, "..with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." NKJV

That is a metaphor and idiom expression of God's own timeless time. Again in Rev 8:1 there is described a time that there will be silence n heaven for a half hour. How long is time in heaven? Fact is, we simply do not know?

Point of reason is this: God's timing is not ours. God created using his own time table. He created during creation days, not earth days and earth time which came into being on the 4th day of creation.

God does not ask us to toss away our reason or logic - he speaks and reason's with us. Still to this day, the logic of a 24 hour earth long day being the same as the sixth creation day is illogical. Even if Adam was Superman and Eve, Wonder woman. What occurred during that creation day could not be a 24 hour long earth day.

Even the purest of human nature argues against this so please excuse and forgive the brevity of my levity:

Adam and Eve were newlyweds.

So imagine with me for a moment that God assigned Adam the duties of tending and keeping the Garden of Eden, a huge geographic area, as well as naming animals (assessing/naming their characteristics). Then comes the hour he is put to sleep and after that Eve is before him to help out in maintaining the Garden and naming animals.. Bingo Newlyweds...

So you have during the evening hours God crating animals and Adam. During the darkness Adam naming animals as well as tending and keeping a really big garden too.Then he is operated on and Eve appears during, say, dawn. Adam see's Eve and she him... Newlyweds...

Then God says - Now now you two... there is no time for exploration, not enough time today, you both have a Garden to tend and keep plus more beast to name. So Adam go over yonder 10 furlongs and rake the leaves, and you Eve go the opposite direction 4 Furlongs and plant berry bushes. As I bring the animals to you, while you work, you name them too...

So the newlyweds depart...

While Adam is raking leaves and naming critters, he is singing like Elvis Presley while pining away for Eve:



And Eve, while planting berry bushes names a few animals:

Geeze, wish Adam was here, I can't make up my mind what to name this beast or where I should plant this bush...

So in her beast Aussie/New Zeland accent, she spots an animal and assigns its characteristics: That is a Platypus, a Wallaby, Tasmanian Devil, Echidna, Thorny Devil, Tree Kangaroo, Sugar Glider, Koala, Kangaroo, Dingo, Wombat, Quoll, Frilled Neck Lizard. Blue Tongue Lizard....

All the while she is thinking of Adam singing...



Newlyweds and God has them working due to the time constraints because there isn't enough time in the day to get the Garden raked, new bushes planted, animals named, fruit picked, talk and walk with God in the cool of the day.... before the 7th day rest starts... soon after the cool of the day ends...

Main Point:

I hope you all can see the illogical nature the 6th day of creation being a literal 24 hour earth day. Newlyweds just can't, just cannot, get much work done... expect

I know this is a bit ridiculousness example but it does engage reason... and may it cause folks to think and laugh more than argue and create division and strife...

Blessings
-
-
-

It sounds as silly as ridiculous... to each their own.

You act like they were working 24/7 or that they named every animal there ever is, today. That's the unreasonable.

Your assertion is self defeating...
You say there is 'no day' until the sun is created on the 4th day, then there's a day. So one could easily assume days 1-3 are (unknown periods of time) and then day 4-6 are regular days (24 hr periods), but then you attack the 6th day saying well there's too much going on here, God is wrong, I'm right the 6th day just couldn't be a 24hr time period... I find this silly. Who tells God He can't??? Furthermore, logically thinking as you've assessed, I'm going to say knowing the 4th day we have a sun, solar system, that only day 1-3 are in question. It makes more sense now then ever, that 1-3 would align with what we can be certain about day 4-7 and not the other way around where we are uncertain of days.

Here's a thought... If we can't define a day, we cannot say thousands or millions or billions, what we could say is that since there is no 'day' the time could be infinty- yet we know that's not true because we are no longer in creation days.

Even if we were to agree on the more likely, which I too can lean towards, that it is possible, and if possible that God created everything at once, in a blimp, or an instance and then simply seperate creation into days for our comprehension, that those days wouldn't be 'billions' of years. God for one wouldn't need that long, and its just a silly assertion.

Also I ponder the 'awe' effect as a fact when considering my thoughts, that what would be greater, an all mighty powerful God that took billions of years to create everything, and that those billions of yrs represent only 1 day of the 7, or is it more awe struck wonder that He created everything in 6- 24hr periods, resting on the 7th, not that He was tired, but simply ceased work, and because of doing the miraculous we question Him every step of the way? Which 'awe' factor scenario seems more logical, more likely, or plausible???

Zac, I like you, you have fire and spunk for the things of God many do not share. That is refreshing. So please do not take offense but rather consider further a few things further listed below:

I find it interesting how YEC tout defending the literalness of the Genesis creation account yet deny the literalness of...

Gen 2:20 NIV, So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

That indeed will take time - literally take time to do and perform (God carries out his word doesn't he). Then, next add in ...

Gen 2:15 NIV, The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

Genesis 2:8-15 indicates how large the Garden of Eden was and it was really - really big!

Then, we have in Gen 2:21-23 NIV, So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman..."

Next, the Fall in chapter three...

I do find that YEC's in defense of the literalness of the Genesis creation days being a 24 hour earth day do not actually adhere to the literalness they claim to hold so dearly too when it is not convenient. Even when a 24 hour day did not come about until the 4'th day of God's creation time which literally indicates that earth day time is not of the same nature of timeless time of God's creation days... however long or short they really were/are...

I did mention in my last post to excuse and forgive the brevity of my levity in making a point using a funny absurdity to point out truth that a 24 hour earth day is not the best way to measure God's timelessness.

Have you not read: Job 11:7,8, Isa 55:8,9, Romans 11:33...

Can we really afford to be so dogmatic on God's timetable, timing, and creation days?

His creation days are not our ways. They are however long or short God deemed best, not us. With that, I am content and rest in him and his salvation wrought forth by Jesus Christ.

Zac, you are loved and blessed by the Lord, never any hard feelings on my part toward you. Learn to laugh and how to love!

YHWH's Blessings rain upon you my friend!

Numbers 6:24,25,26
-
-
-

B.w. we've had many discussions... Not sure who you keep tabs on, but if me, surely you say I've grown- a lot.

I'm not offended, at least not easily. I get your humour. I'm the funniest guy I know, and funnest.

I agree none of any of this is salvation bearing, but to use as a cop out not to discuss, and discussion is healthy, then there would be no page lol. I'm cool.

Okay, so I obviously needed to reread your post. I see you want me to be consistent in the plain reads of scripture? Correct?

We will use your NIV (I'd argue not the best version)...

Gen 2:20 NIV, So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals. But for Adam no suitable helper was found.

Okay... So here we have live stock (how many?) Birds (how many?) Wild animals (how many)?

You cannot be consistent in thought, surely there's thousands of species today, God back then would have simply needed male and female of each one kind to reproduce? There's millions of people, back then only Adam (and then Eve).

So wait? No marine life, fish, insects- how do we know a whale is a whale then lol??? So ALL couldn't mean ALL there ever was? Not in the literal and not if we're consistent in thought and plain reading of context.

Why did God assemble these groups of animals anyways and have them parade across Adam? Doesn't make too much sense. Skeptics be like how could animals know to go to Adam all at once... Silly rabbit, God said so!!!

Back to plane reason, even more thought provoking... If days= billions of years (which there is no time, so what is a billion?) And God told Adam it wasn't good to be alone and needed a help meet, why would God make Adam wait so long? Especially if it wasn't good- sounds out of character for God.

Besides, when I think like you and many others, my questions are deeper- how did Adam know what thought was, a language was, how to consciously form and process a word, to formulate a name, or sentence, to pronunciate a syntax? Did he proclaim aloud, knowing he could talk or hear, or did he conjure in thought in mind and consciouness to communicate with God what it was he was going to name them? Heck did he know who God really was, or what an animal was? But nobody questions that... But God said He did it and how doesn't really give me an excuse to question Gods method, and a great magician never tells.

Also I ponder the 'awe' effect as a fact when considering my thoughts, that what would be greater, an all mighty powerful God that took billions of years to create everything ...

Which 'awe' factor scenario seems more logical, more likely, or plausible???

OK, are we to judge which amount of time is true by the "awe factor?" Do we really think God feels the need to razzle-dazzle us with a creation week in which he held down the FF button? Um, would we not agree that God NEVER had a beginning and that time for Him is but a tool? He already tells us a day as is a thousand years to him - meaning, time, to God, is irrelevant, it's a mere tool of measurement MOSTLY for MAN to go by. I seriously doubt there are clocks in Heaven! There is an infinite period of - time BEFORE God began creating THIS universe. Are we to think He viewed it impressive to do this in a week as opposed to billions of years? Please tell me precisely WHO exactly God was trying to impress?

And so, God was supposedly in some huge hurry that Creation "week," and yet now He has waited patiently on mankind story and struggles to unfold - for untold thousands of years - many of those before He even created the nation of Israel, which existed how long before Mount Sinai and the Ten Commandments? Do we find it impressive that God has let human misery drag out over untold thousands of years? Even you or I wouldn't have put up with mankind nearly so long (truly, we'd give us about a month, maybe two before we hit the species delete button).

Also, no doubt, God saw His initial Creation as being all "good." Rather, certainly, He enjoyed creating - both the results and the process. As silly as trying to discern things by measuring God's actions against time, why would we think he was in a "hurry" to create, while He's been anything but in a hurry to watch it all fall apart, to enact His plans and glorious remedy? I don't think God plans ANYTHING with His ultimate determinates being time or trying to impress us with how fast He did His magic show (The Creation).

Other than that ... (sorry, it's like a moth to a flame )

But wait, the "awe-factor" is logical.

These are the kinds of discussions I like on here and I've enjoyed my discussion with zacchaeus about this but I must say in defending the Gap Theory I used the word of God to back up my points so that if anybody disagreed with me,they disagreed with what God's word clearly says. I did not add anything or take away from anything it says.Review and see.

I showed by God's word life had existed before God created the plants,fish,animals,etc and Adam and Eve in Genesis 1 and it makes no difference what translation you use.This means the earth is old already.

abelcainsbrother wrote:These are the kinds of discussions I like on here and I've enjoyed my discussion with zacchaeus about this but I must say in defending the Gap Theory I used the word of God to back up my points so that if anybody disagreed with me,they disagreed with what God's word clearly says. I did not add anything or take away from anything it says.Review and see.

I showed by God's word life had existed before God created the plants,fish,animals,etc and Adam and Eve in Genesis 1 and it makes no difference what translation you use.This means the earth is old already.

So,
Your Gap Theory creation interpretation, is equal to scripture. Got it.

I showed by God's word life had existed before God created the plants,fish,animals,etc and Adam and Eve in Genesis 1 and it makes no difference what translation you use.This means the earth is old already.

Abel, that must be a lonely theological planet you live on! If it's so CLEAR, why do next to no major theologians buy it (if ANY)? Here's an idea: Because it's NOT clear! So, it's not a Forbidden Planet you inhabit, but a LONELY one.

S'ok, still love you, man!

Philip wrote:

I showed by God's word life had existed before God created the plants,fish,animals,etc and Adam and Eve in Genesis 1 and it makes no difference what translation you use.This means the earth is old already.

Abel, that must be a lonely theological planet you live on! If it's so CLEAR, why do next to no major theologians buy it (if ANY)? Here's an idea: Because it's NOT clear! So, it's not a Forbidden Planet you inhabit, but a LONELY one.

S'ok, still love you, man!

It says it regardless of the translation,how could they overlook it?I've checked every translation I have so I don't know how it was overlooked,all I know is it clearly says it. God created them after their kinds,this means kinds had existed before.In some translations it says according to their kind,which means the same thing,kinds had already existed for God to do this. Don't get mad at me,I'm just a messenger.Besides I'm showing the earth is old.