Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote:

revolutionary wrote:
It doesn't really matter what period length you give the creation story, give yom any length of time you desire, the timeline still doesn't match up with our observable universe..... This is only minds attempting to defend a story that just doesn't make sense merely so it doesn't contradict their own investment in belief.

Rev,
I'm gonna cut you a little slack because you're new here. You really need to understand the OEC interpretation before you start spouting off at the mouth.
Read this article, and you'll see some of what we're talking about:
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... ation.html

We are observing light that is 13 billion years old, yet according to the story you are defending God created the heaven and earth well before he created the stars, not going to even look it up..... Was it the fourth day/period? We already had grass and trees before the stars were created..... Doesn't work my friend!

Again, you're talking from ignorance Rev. Before you make yourself look more foolish, please do yourself a favor and do a search on the home site here:http://www.godandscience.org

You really need to understand what you're arguing against. No OEC I know would say the earth was created before the stars. And the only way that someone can get that from scripture, is through a YEC lens.

So, cut the "you're better than the rest of us" crap, go do some research, and come back when you know what you're talking about. Either that, or take your own advice, and ask questions.

It's just another excuse used to explain something that doesn't work.... The excuse is that the heavens were cleared so that we could see the stars?
This is the problem with belief, if it turns out it doesn't make sense, those who are so invested in defending that belief will simply change or twist it to support them....
Add and subtract, twist and contort.... That is what foolishness looks like!

Revolutionary wrote:

RickD wrote:

revolutionary wrote:
It doesn't really matter what period length you give the creation story, give yom any length of time you desire, the timeline still doesn't match up with our observable universe..... This is only minds attempting to defend a story that just doesn't make sense merely so it doesn't contradict their own investment in belief.

Rev,
I'm gonna cut you a little slack because you're new here. You really need to understand the OEC interpretation before you start spouting off at the mouth.
Read this article, and you'll see some of what we're talking about:
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... ation.html

We are observing light that is 13 billion years old, yet according to the story you are defending God created the heaven and earth well before he created the stars, not going to even look it up..... Was it the fourth day/period? We already had grass and trees before the stars were created..... Doesn't work my friend!

Again, you're talking from ignorance Rev. Before you make yourself look more foolish, please do yourself a favor and do a search on the home site here:http://www.godandscience.org

You really need to understand what you're arguing against. No OEC I know would say the earth was created before the stars. And the only way that someone can get that from scripture, is through a YEC lens.

So, cut the "you're better than the rest of us" crap, go do some research, and come back when you know what you're talking about. Either that, or take your own advice, and ask questions.

It's just another excuse used to explain something that doesn't work.... The excuse is that the heavens were cleared so that we could see the stars?
This is the problem with belief, if it turns out it doesn't make sense, those who are so invested in defending that belief will simply change or twist it to support them....
Add and subtract, twist and contort.... That is what foolishness looks like!

I think you are pulling it too far without understanding what they are saying. take some time to know them. It helps to communicate. Also start a new thread if you have a specific question.

Revolutionary wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I don't think that we can get "perfection" from "In God's IMAGE" as it is written in Genesis.
I don't think that the notion that Adam was perfect is anywhere to be found in Genesis.

Exactly, it still doesn't help the point.... You can't create something imperfectly as a perfect being and not have full knowledge of the outcome.
How then does a perfect being get angry and punish it because it did exactly what he knew it would do?

Suddenly God is demonstrating his own imperfection, because it's rather sadistic!

Is God's creation truly this unintelligent, or is it unintelligent because it is man's own creation in an attempt to explain God?

God gets "angry" when we do what we KNOW to be wrong.
Any parent gets that.
Foreknowledge doesn't diminish the "anger" or "pain" that a parent feels when their child knowingly chooses to do bad.
God gave Adam and Eve a choice, they were aware of the consequences and still they choose to go against God.
As we do to this very day.
God's response?
Grace given freely via Christ.
Because only love and forgiveness can heal.
Does God punish? Yes, He must if He is God ( as parents, we punish also when our children knowingly do what is wrong).
When we bring a child into this world, it is an expression of love ( or should be).
We KNOW that the child will do many wrong things, we know they are not perfect and we know we will have to be there to "pick up the pieces".
None of that matters when a child is an expression of love because the good ALWAYS outweighs the bad.
Humanity is a lot like that too.

neo-x wrote:Rick, I get your point and I am aware of the nuance. So you are saying that exodus 20:11 also uses yom as longer periods of time?

Exodus 20:11:
11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Yes Neo. Notice the 7th day is never bracketed by "evening and morning" in the genesis text. I believe that shows that the 7th day is ongoing.

The 7 days is a pattern. It's not meant as a literal and concrete interpretation. As I'm on my iPhone, I don't have it in front of me, but the ot talks about sabbath weeks, and sabbath years. A servant is to work for six years, then he is to be set free the 7th year. It's a pattern of 6x working, followed by 1x resting. I believe the ot also mentions working the land for 6 years, and the land should rest for the 7th year.(Leviticus 25 I believe)

RickD wrote: Rev,
I'm gonna cut you a little slack because you're new here. You really need to understand the OEC interpretation before you start spouting off at the mouth.
Read this article, and you'll see some of what we're talking about:
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... ation.html

Rick, you do understand that we had trees and grass and all sorts of vegetation growing before God, according to your OEC cleared the heavens so that the light was visible from the earth in order to distinguish seasons.... Did God know before then that trees and grass would need the sunlight to grow or did he just decide that one on the fly?
I wonder how they grew before then, do you think the trees had mouths and were eating bugs before then?

Revolutionary wrote:

RickD wrote: Rev,
I'm gonna cut you a little slack because you're new here. You really need to understand the OEC interpretation before you start spouting off at the mouth.
Read this article, and you'll see some of what we're talking about:
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... ation.html

Rick, you do understand that we had trees and grass and all sorts of vegetation growing before God, according to your OEC cleared the heavens so that the light was visible from the earth in order to distinguish seasons.... Did God know before then that trees and grass would need the sunlight to grow or did he just decide that one on the fly?
I wonder how they grew before then, do you think the trees had mouths and were eating bugs before then?

OEC do NOT view the Genesis account as a chronological history of the universe I don't think.

I know, the trees and grass grew from God's own radiance which shines brighter than any sun!

revolutionary wrote:
It's just another excuse used to explain something that doesn't work.... The excuse is that the heavens were cleared so that we could see the stars?
This is the problem with belief, if it turns out it doesn't make sense, those who are so invested in defending that belief will simply change or twist it to support them....
Add and subtract, twist and contort.... That is what foolishness looks like!

Rev,

If you don't understand something specific, please ask. If I know the answer, I'll explain it.

I don't think that the original writer(s) of Genesis though of doing a "play-by-play" retelling of the creation of the world and the reason I don't think that chronological order was paramount for them was because, well, the Genesis account is NOT in order, ex:

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

and:

14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. 16 God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17 God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19 There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.

Seems like the same event, twice.

Now, It can be argued that it was two different events and that there was a more "theological" meaning in the first verses but all that means is that the writer(s) were more interested in things other than direct chronology.

revolutionary wrote:
Rick, you do understand that we had trees and grass and all sorts of vegetation growing before God, according to your OEC cleared the heavens so that the light was visible from the earth in order to distinguish seasons.... Did God know before then that trees and grass would need the sunlight to grow or did he just decide that one on the fly?
I wonder how they grew before then, do you think the trees had mouths and were eating bugs before then?

And

I know, the trees and grass grew from God's own radiance which shines brighter than any sun!

And

I wonder how they grew before then, do you think the trees had mouths and were eating bugs before then?

Rev,
Last warning. Keep mocking and you're going to be banned.

RickD wrote:

revolutionary wrote:
It doesn't really matter what period length you give the creation story, give yom any length of time you desire, the timeline still doesn't match up with our observable universe..... This is only minds attempting to defend a story that just doesn't make sense merely so it doesn't contradict their own investment in belief.

Rev,
I'm gonna cut you a little slack because you're new here. You really need to understand the OEC interpretation before you start spouting off at the mouth.
Read this article, and you'll see some of what we're talking about:
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... ation.html

We are observing light that is 13 billion years old, yet according to the story you are defending God created the heaven and earth well before he created the stars, not going to even look it up..... Was it the fourth day/period? We already had grass and trees before the stars were created..... Doesn't work my friend!

Again, you're talking from ignorance Rev. Before you make yourself look more foolish, please do yourself a favor and do a search on the home site here:http://www.godandscience.org

You really need to understand what you're arguing against. No OEC I know would say the earth was created before the stars. And the only way that someone can get that from scripture, is through a YEC lens.

So, cut the "you're better than the rest of us" crap, go do some research, and come back when you know what you're talking about. Either that, or take your own advice, and ask questions.

I responded specifically to everything without personal attacks.... This is your independent decision in response.... If you can't handle a different view with grace and personal focus without bias, then you are lacking understanding of what it means to moderate.
Nothing I said was personal, you are the only one injected something personal into it.... That is the only part that is out of line!

Questions and opposing views should only provide opportunity to strengthen resolve in one's own conviction, with an evolved ability to cater it to the one's who would apparently need it the most.

So if this board rewards this type of behavior that is laced with threats of banning, we are in agreement that I need to find an arena that has the strength and conviction to stand up to more progressive views.

Revolutionary wrote: I responded specifically to everything without personal attacks.... This is your independent decision in response.... If you can't handle a different view with grace and personal focus without bias, then you are lacking understanding of what it means to moderate.
Nothing I said was personal, you are the only one injected something personal into it.... That is the only part that is out of line!

Questions and opposing views should only provide opportunity to strengthen resolve in one's own conviction, with an evolved ability to cater it to the one's who would apparently need it the most.

So if this board rewards this type of behavior that is laced with threats of banning, we are in agreement that I need to find an arena that has the strength and conviction to stand up to more progressive views.

No offense, but your posts on this thread and others are coming off as arrogant, condescending, and rude at times.
Things like :

I know, the trees and grass grew from God's own radiance which shines brighter than any sun!

Or calling other posters posts as "foolish", "childish", and so forth is not the way to discuss things.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Revolutionary wrote: I responded specifically to everything without personal attacks.... This is your independent decision in response.... If you can't handle a different view with grace and personal focus without bias, then you are lacking understanding of what it means to moderate.
Nothing I said was personal, you are the only one injected something personal into it.... That is the only part that is out of line!

Questions and opposing views should only provide opportunity to strengthen resolve in one's own conviction, with an evolved ability to cater it to the one's who would apparently need it the most.

So if this board rewards this type of behavior that is laced with threats of banning, we are in agreement that I need to find an arena that has the strength and conviction to stand up to more progressive views.

No offense, but your posts on this thread and others are coming off as arrogant, condescending, and rude at times.
Things like :

I know, the trees and grass grew from God's own radiance which shines brighter than any sun!

Or calling other posters posts as "foolish", "childish", and so forth is not the way to discuss things.

Because I'm not agreeable to what you believe?
That is your projection, not mine!

If I'm lacking in expression, then show a better example in order to help me to grow as that expression..... How is judgement working out?
Foolish? Where?
I'll show you where your moderator used it, directed right at me

Revolutionary wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:

Revolutionary wrote: I responded specifically to everything without personal attacks.... This is your independent decision in response.... If you can't handle a different view with grace and personal focus without bias, then you are lacking understanding of what it means to moderate.
Nothing I said was personal, you are the only one injected something personal into it.... That is the only part that is out of line!

Questions and opposing views should only provide opportunity to strengthen resolve in one's own conviction, with an evolved ability to cater it to the one's who would apparently need it the most.

So if this board rewards this type of behavior that is laced with threats of banning, we are in agreement that I need to find an arena that has the strength and conviction to stand up to more progressive views.

No offense, but your posts on this thread and others are coming off as arrogant, condescending, and rude at times.
Things like :

I know, the trees and grass grew from God's own radiance which shines brighter than any sun!

Or calling other posters posts as "foolish", "childish", and so forth is not the way to discuss things.

Because I'm not agreeable to what you believe?
That is your projection, not mine!

If I'm lacking in expression, then show a better example in order to help me to grow as that expression..... How is judgement working out?

No one is judging you, only your posting style.
I don't view your arguments as "unagreeable" at all, only some of your snide remarks that you make that only belittle your position.
No one is projecting anything when the read a condescending tone into a remark you make that is condescending.

Just be civil and polite and everything will go fine.

Make your case, state your view and it will be respected ( even if not agreed with) and just give "tit for tat" and respect the views of others, even if you don't agree with them.

Revolutionary wrote:

RickD wrote: Rev,
I'm gonna cut you a little slack because you're new here. You really need to understand the OEC interpretation before you start spouting off at the mouth.
Read this article, and you'll see some of what we're talking about:
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth ... ation.html

Rick, you do understand that we had trees and grass and all sorts of vegetation growing before God, according to your OEC cleared the heavens so that the light was visible from the earth in order to distinguish seasons.... Did God know before then that trees and grass would need the sunlight to grow or did he just decide that one on the fly?
I wonder how they grew before then, do you think the trees had mouths and were eating bugs before then?

The Earth in it's early stages (as far as I am aware) would have been covered in a primordial cloud. Vegetation would still have covered the Earth because light would still have filtered through this primordial cloud layer, albeit very dark on the surface. I have seen plants growing in caves etc... they require very little light.

I don't see what the issue is here, seems reasonable to me that once the cloud layer was removed the stars, sun and moon would have been more visible.