Evidence for God from Science

Good points... I'd never really thought about it that much. Yes, my 'extra' understanding comes from elsewhere in the Bible, I think. 'Death' is spiritual because they didn't actually die physically that very day. However, I see no good reason to spiritualize the eating of the fruit, not anymore than I see a reason to think the story of Jonah is unhistorical. But I think that, although only one is right, both viewpoints are alright for a Christian to have.

Turgonian wrote: (Adam and Eve) didn't actually die physically that very day(Genesis 2:17).

I've heard the following explanation of the above "day" that suggests that that "day" was not necessarily a 24-hour day.

Genesis chapter 1 mentions the several days days that were involved in the creation of the heavens and the earth. But in chapter two, all those days are lumped together into one single day...

"This is a history of the heaven and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that God made earth and heaven."

This shows that Bible "day" doesn't necessarily have to always mean a 24-hour day. Some place in the Bible it says a day with God is like one thousand years to mankind.

The point being made is that Adam did physically die within the above '1000-year day' mentioned in Genesis 2:17.

Is this one of those cases where the Bible can be used to prove anything someone wants it to prove?

Don

DonCameron wrote:
This shows that Bible "day" doesn't necessarily have to always mean a 24-hour day. Some place in the Bible it says a day with God is like one thousand years to mankind.

The point being made is that Adam did physically die within the above '1000-year day' mentioned in Genesis 2:17.

Is this one of those cases where the Bible can be used to prove anything someone wants it to prove?

Don

Exactly what is meant to "interpret the Bible" most probably i'd say.
OK but why it says "and there was day and light, nth day" ?? if a day is thousand or milion yrs, why then day and night are needed? realized this a while ago - a problem wit the interepreatacion.
Ok how we know then that a year was reallt a year? same problem.

It's so hard with the interpretation though. What is literal and what is not? creation too and the chronology - order as science says isnt same order as bible. things didnt just "appear" as God "created them"; they had their time in the history along with all the other events...

Hi MMS,

You said, "It's so hard with the interpretation though. What is literal and what is not?"

I agree.

But sometimes the Bible is forced to say something it doesn't actually say. I've heard some 'accuse' the Bible of saying that the earth was created only about 6,000 years ago.

But the way I read Genesis 1 it doesn't say how long ago the earth came into existence (or was created). And so if the scientific evidence proves that the earth is 117 Skillion years old, the Bible doesn't contradict whatever figure they come up with.

It looks to me that the earth was already in existence before the 7 creative "days" began. And so the Bible's creative days have nothing to do with the creation of the physical planet. They have to do with the preparing of it to be inhabited.

The way the Bible use the word "day" it seems possible to me that it isn't necessary to insist that the creative days were only 24 hours long.

Don at http://www.CaptivesOfaConcept.com

DonCameron wrote: But sometimes the Bible is forced to say something it doesn't actually say. I've heard some 'accuse' the Bible of saying that the earth was created only about 6,000 years ago.

How does it? - by adding all the figures of years of when ppl lived and that? hh ya, but doesnt it say that there was some "extra time" in between when everything was created - or except human?

DonCameron wrote: It looks to me that the earth was already in existence before the 7 creative "days" began. And so the Bible's creative days have nothing to do with the creation of the physical planet. They have to do with the preparing of it to be inhabited.

Hm nice idea!! koz it says something about the "earht being void" at the beginning, so that could refer to that. OK but thwn waht is "light"? and why it comes to existence before sun or whatever from the cosmic world was created? I think this could be true, becuase the ppl who wrote Bible - well Gen was by Moses but - they did have no knowledge of any creation of cosmos; so, they may have assumed it's from begining of Earth they should write the Bible. It's alwasy so hard with the beginning times.
BTW what about comparisons with other religions? - what do they believe in terms of creation? simialr or differnt to our Bible?

MMS,

I haven't studied what other religions teach about the time involved in the creation of the earth. But it seems that I have heard some say that the earth is only a few thousand years old. And some believe the creative days were literally 24 hours long.

It does seem that the scientific evidence shows that the time involved in the history of the earth is much longer than a few thousand years.

As far as "the origin of man" (and all other life forms), the Bible's explanation makes more sense to me than evolution's attempt to explain it all.

Don

DonCameron wrote:As far as "the origin of man" (and all other life forms), the Bible's explanation makes more sense to me than evolution's attempt to explain it all.

Yea it does because it is easier to believe for believrs that it was "created" not "evolved" from anything. But i doubt we are to take it literally though. Why would God do it that way? Another interpretation. Or creation of woman - why would it be out of Adam's rib? Other species already had males + females by then i suppose so why human wouldn't? Intrerpreation - because how otherwise could ppl back then understand it?