Total Posts:80|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Bible Study/Discourse: Genesis

whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:40:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I will start by posting five verses a day, everyone is welcome to share their views (If it is relevant).

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:41:27 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 11:40:33 AM, whatledge wrote:
I will start by posting five verses a day, everyone is welcome to share their views (If it is relevant).

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day.

Source: http://www.biblegateway.com...
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:42:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 11:40:33 AM, whatledge wrote:
I will start by posting five verses a day, everyone is welcome to share their views (If it is relevant).


My view is that you don't clog the forums with bible verses kthxbai
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 11:58:09 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 11:42:48 AM, Mirza wrote:
You should rather start a discussion about something.

Fair enough, I will start by asserting my views on what these verses mean.
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Verse two implies that God hovered over the waters. My view on this verse is that God could have hovered the earth for billions of years, which would make the old earth theory compatible with creationism.

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day.

Now, I have two views regarding verses 3-5. I am going to mainly focus on verse 5. There was evening, and there was morning -- the first day.
1. This implies that either creation was literally 7 days.
Or
2. The vision, in which the author of this verse, took seven days to finish the vision given to him by God.

I believe in theory #2. As it is often said in the bible that God communicated to his prophets through visions and dreams.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 12:01:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Unless your purpose is to invite ridicule, and have what you probably consider sacred to be hauled through sh.., well worse than mud; you are most likely making a mistake.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 12:59:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 12:01:36 PM, innomen wrote:
Unless your purpose is to invite ridicule, and have what you probably consider sacred to be hauled through sh.., well worse than mud; you are most likely making a mistake.

I invite mistakes, as they are my greatest teachers. So try me.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 1:28:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 1:01:17 PM, Mirza wrote:
I have a question for you: Do you believe that Genesis 1 is metaphorical as a whole?

Yes I do. Genesis is more of a collection of stories written by many authors. I view Genesis 1 as metaphorical, in a sense that the main idea of it is true, God did create the universe. I believe that the author of Genesis 1, and was concieved by a vision/dream that took 7 days to complete.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 1:30:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 1:28:14 PM, whatledge wrote:
Yes I do. Genesis is more of a collection of stories written by many authors. I view Genesis 1 as metaphorical, in a sense that the main idea of it is true, God did create the universe. I believe that the author of Genesis 1, and was concieved by a vision/dream that took 7 days to complete.
You simply believe that God created everything, but the description of the process is not to be taken literally? Vegetation being created before the sun etc.?
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 1:31:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 12:57:46 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
Fine, if we're going to have a Biblical study thread then maybe Mirza should start a Qur'anic study thread. :P
I have made many that clear misconceptions etc.

I will probably make one with some posts clearing top 10 (or so) so-called "contradictions" or "scientific errors." They are easily cleared up.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 1:50:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 1:28:14 PM, whatledge wrote:
At 6/5/2010 1:01:17 PM, Mirza wrote:
I have a question for you: Do you believe that Genesis 1 is metaphorical as a whole?

Yes I do. Genesis is more of a collection of stories written by many authors. I view Genesis 1 as metaphorical, in a sense that the main idea of it is true, God did create the universe. I believe that the author of Genesis 1, and was concieved by a vision/dream that took 7 days to complete.

Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

"Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. " - So wait, the Earth was full of water without any Earth?

"And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day. "- So wait, God makes the universe and Earth BEFORE a light source? Seriously, this is scientifically incorrect.

"And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. " - This implies that the sky is in fact a sea. Which is complete BS.

"And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. " - This implies there is one mass of land and one gigantic sea. Which was of course, proven untrue around 1493.

"Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. " - No real qualms here.

" And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. " - LOL, God made the Earth BEFORE the rest of the Universe. This goes against the Big Bang, and is Bull. And seriously, this implies there was oe sun that broke into the present day sun and the moon.

I'll stop here for now.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 2:08:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 1:30:31 PM, Mirza wrote:
At 6/5/2010 1:28:14 PM, whatledge wrote:
Yes I do. Genesis is more of a collection of stories written by many authors. I view Genesis 1 as metaphorical, in a sense that the main idea of it is true, God did create the universe. I believe that the author of Genesis 1, and was concieved by a vision/dream that took 7 days to complete.
You simply believe that God created everything, but the description of the process is not to be taken literally? Vegetation being created before the sun etc.?

I do not take poetry as literal, but this doesn't make poetry meaningless, as there are a metaphorical meanings to it. It is the same concept, I believed that God created the universe, the process I do not know, but the bible is not a science book, there is no need to explain every process and step.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

As God created with words, it is logical to assume that, whoever has the vision heard God's words when he created the heavens and the earth. The writer may have not seen heaven, but heard God create it. Also the "heavens" mentioned int the bible was most likely referring to the skies and/or space.


"Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. " - So wait, the Earth was full of water without any Earth?

God created the heavens (space) and the earth (the planet). God created the planet earth with water, which is evident. And note the word surface.


"And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day. "- So wait, God makes the universe and Earth BEFORE a light source? Seriously, this is scientifically incorrect.

It is theortically incorrect in scientific terms, in terms of creationism, it faces no problems.


"And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. " - This implies that the sky is in fact a sea. Which is complete BS.

I originally wanted to do 5 verses at a time, but we'll continue. The sky contains clouds, which has the ability to rain. The sky, therefore, contains water. The sky is not the sea, that is not what the verse implies.


"And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. " - This implies there is one mass of land and one gigantic sea. Which was of course, proven untrue around 1493.

You have to expand on this one, what was proven around 1493?


"Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. " - No real qualms here.

" And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. " - LOL, God made the Earth BEFORE the rest of the Universe. This goes against the Big Bang, and is Bull. And seriously, this implies there was oe sun that broke into the present day sun and the moon.

The Big Bang is called a theory for a reason, a theory does not negate a theory.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 5:55:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM, whatledge wrote:
Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

As God created with words, it is logical to assume that, whoever has the vision heard God's words when he created the heavens and the earth. The writer may have not seen heaven, but heard God create it. Also the "heavens" mentioned int the bible was most likely referring to the skies and/or space.

Space is not heaven. Maybe it would be too tribal people who knew nothing about the Universe, but it is certainly not heaven.



"Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. " - So wait, the Earth was full of water without any Earth?

God created the heavens (space) and the earth (the planet). God created the planet earth with water, which is evident. And note the word surface.

The Earth was Magma before it was water. And even then, there was water AND earth.



"And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day. "- So wait, God makes the universe and Earth BEFORE a light source? Seriously, this is scientifically incorrect.

It is theortically incorrect in scientific terms, in terms of creationism, it faces no problems.

Creationism =/= Science.

"At the center of this spinning cloud, a small star begin to form. This star grew larger and larger, as it collected more of the dust and gas that were collapsing into it. " - http://www.kidsastronomy.com...

Clearly, a sun existed first. Besides, the earth is attracted to the Sun, where was it before the sun was created?



"And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. " - This implies that the sky is in fact a sea. Which is complete BS.

I originally wanted to do 5 verses at a time, but we'll continue. The sky contains clouds, which has the ability to rain. The sky, therefore, contains water. The sky is not the sea, that is not what the verse implies.

Right, but clouds can exist without precipitation in them, and furthermore, do not dominate the skies.



"And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. " - This implies there is one mass of land and one gigantic sea. Which was of course, proven untrue around 1493.

You have to expand on this one, what was proven around 1493?

The earth was round.



"Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. " - No real qualms here.

" And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. " - LOL, God made the Earth BEFORE the rest of the Universe. This goes against the Big Bang, and is Bull. And seriously, this implies there was oe sun that broke into the present day sun and the moon.

The Big Bang is called a theory for a reason, a theory does not negate a theory.

We can see planets thousands of miles away. Of course, since light travels at speed, albeit how fast it is, it is so many light years away, and we are essentially seeing those planets in the past. So, we are seeing back in time, and much further than 6,000 years mind you.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 5:57:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM, whatledge wrote:
The Big Bang is called a theory for a reason, a theory does not negate a theory.

Learn what theory means in scientific jargon.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 5:58:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 1:28:14 PM, whatledge wrote:
I believe that the author of Genesis 1, and was concieved by a vision/dream that took 7 days to complete.

Based upon?
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 8:59:25 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 5:55:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM, whatledge wrote:
Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

As God created with words, it is logical to assume that, whoever has the vision heard God's words when he created the heavens and the earth. The writer may have not seen heaven, but heard God create it. Also the "heavens" mentioned int the bible was most likely referring to the skies and/or space.

Space is not heaven. Maybe it would be too tribal people who knew nothing about the Universe, but it is certainly not heaven.


You're trying too hard, bro. Seriously? You've never heard anybody call space "the heavens"? I still hear that to his day.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 9:02:38 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 8:59:25 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 6/6/2010 5:55:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM, whatledge wrote:
Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

As God created with words, it is logical to assume that, whoever has the vision heard God's words when he created the heavens and the earth. The writer may have not seen heaven, but heard God create it. Also the "heavens" mentioned int the bible was most likely referring to the skies and/or space.

Space is not heaven. Maybe it would be too tribal people who knew nothing about the Universe, but it is certainly not heaven.


You're trying too hard, bro. Seriously? You've never heard anybody call space "the heavens"? I still hear that to his day.

Heaven implies the residence of God. Space is a place with planets and whatnot. The heavens is clearly a nickname, and not a factual statement.

Or in simpler terms for you:

A hood is a part of a jacket that can be pulled up to cover one's head. A disadvantaged area is one where the majority of people live below the average income of a nation. The Hood is clearly a nickname, and is not a factual statement.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 10:46:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 1:28:14 PM, whatledge wrote:
At 6/5/2010 1:01:17 PM, Mirza wrote:
I have a question for you: Do you believe that Genesis 1 is metaphorical as a whole?

Yes I do. Genesis is more of a collection of stories written by many authors. I view Genesis 1 as metaphorical, in a sense that the main idea of it is true, God did create the universe. I believe that the author of Genesis 1, and was concieved by a vision/dream that took 7 days to complete.

If the vision took seven days to complete, might we expect there to do more detail in genesis, more description of the acts of creation?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 11:48:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 9:02:38 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/6/2010 8:59:25 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 6/6/2010 5:55:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM, whatledge wrote:
Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

As God created with words, it is logical to assume that, whoever has the vision heard God's words when he created the heavens and the earth. The writer may have not seen heaven, but heard God create it. Also the "heavens" mentioned int the bible was most likely referring to the skies and/or space.

Space is not heaven. Maybe it would be too tribal people who knew nothing about the Universe, but it is certainly not heaven.


You're trying too hard, bro. Seriously? You've never heard anybody call space "the heavens"? I still hear that to his day.

Heaven implies the residence of God. Space is a place with planets and whatnot. The heavens is clearly a nickname, and not a factual statement.

Or in simpler terms for you:

A hood is a part of a jacket that can be pulled up to cover one's head. A disadvantaged area is one where the majority of people live below the average income of a nation. The Hood is clearly a nickname, and is not a factual statement.

Heaven is God's place not heavens.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 12:10:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 11:48:29 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 6/6/2010 9:02:38 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/6/2010 8:59:25 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 6/6/2010 5:55:42 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
At 6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM, whatledge wrote:
Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

As God created with words, it is logical to assume that, whoever has the vision heard God's words when he created the heavens and the earth. The writer may have not seen heaven, but heard God create it. Also the "heavens" mentioned int the bible was most likely referring to the skies and/or space.

Space is not heaven. Maybe it would be too tribal people who knew nothing about the Universe, but it is certainly not heaven.


You're trying too hard, bro. Seriously? You've never heard anybody call space "the heavens"? I still hear that to his day.

Heaven implies the residence of God. Space is a place with planets and whatnot. The heavens is clearly a nickname, and not a factual statement.

Or in simpler terms for you:

A hood is a part of a jacket that can be pulled up to cover one's head. A disadvantaged area is one where the majority of people live below the average income of a nation. The Hood is clearly a nickname, and is not a factual statement.

Heaven is God's place not heavens.

Then, God never made Heaven :).
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 12:42:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Space is not heaven. Maybe it would be too tribal people who knew nothing about the Universe, but it is certainly not heaven.

Space May not be heavens to you, but to people back more than 2,000 years ago? They might very well have interpreted space as the "heavens"

The Earth was Magma before it was water. And even then, there was water AND earth.

I agree, the Earth (planet) was created with water and earth (land).

"And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day. "- So wait, God makes the universe and Earth BEFORE a light source? Seriously, this is scientifically incorrect.

It is theortically incorrect in scientific terms, in terms of creationism, it faces no problems.

Creationism =/= Science.

"At the center of this spinning cloud, a small star begin to form. This star grew larger and larger, as it collected more of the dust and gas that were collapsing into it. " - http://www.kidsastronomy.com...

Clearly, a sun existed first. Besides, the earth is attracted to the Sun, where was it before the sun was created?

The Bible does not explain this, so I cannot answer. I might point out again that I believe genesis is a metaphor, which ultimately has the meaning that "God created the universe." The Bible is not a science book, a person with very little scientific knowledge from more than 2,000 years ago, saw a vision, and wrote what he saw to the best of hi abilities. How would you describe something you cannot comprehend? He described his vision to the best of his abilities in Genesis.

Right, but clouds can exist without precipitation in them, and furthermore, do not dominate the skies.

Rain is vital to our survival, the emphasis of water is put to the sky because of that reason.

"Clouds are visible masses of liquid water droplets that are suspended in the atmosphere above the surface of the Earth. They form as a result of condensation of water vapor. Clouds can form near warm and cold fronts, where air flows up the sides of mountains and cools as it rises, and where warm air travels over a colder surface.[1]"

[1] http://weather.lifetips.com...

The earth was round.

Genesis does not say the earth was flat, they merely said there are bodies of land, and bodies of water. Water is also all connected, furthermore the gigantic mass of land could be referring to Pangaea.

Also in Isiah 40:21-22.
"it is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"

The bible implies earth is, in fact, round. Other similar verses: Job 26:7, Job 26:10, keep in mind these verses were wrote far before Copernicus and Galileo.

We can see planets thousands of miles away. Of course, since light travels at speed, albeit how fast it is, it is so many light years away, and we are essentially seeing those planets in the past. So, we are seeing back in time, and much further than 6,000 years mind you.

Mind you, I never claimed the earth was 6,000 years old, and furthermore, because I believe the earth is old, I believe that Genesis is more or less a metaphor.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 1:21:02 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 12:42:12 PM, whatledge wrote:
Space is not heaven. Maybe it would be too tribal people who knew nothing about the Universe, but it is certainly not heaven.

Space May not be heavens to you, but to people back more than 2,000 years ago? They might very well have interpreted space as the "heavens"

There. Right there you have admitted genesis is work by Tribal people, and not God, and what Tribal people 'thought' about the Universe.


The Earth was Magma before it was water. And even then, there was water AND earth.

I agree, the Earth (planet) was created with water and earth (land).

But according to Genesis there was just water. Which means Genesis was wrong.


"And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day. "- So wait, God makes the universe and Earth BEFORE a light source? Seriously, this is scientifically incorrect.

It is theortically incorrect in scientific terms, in terms of creationism, it faces no problems.

Creationism =/= Science.

"At the center of this spinning cloud, a small star begin to form. This star grew larger and larger, as it collected more of the dust and gas that were collapsing into it. " - http://www.kidsastronomy.com...

Clearly, a sun existed first. Besides, the earth is attracted to the Sun, where was it before the sun was created?

The Bible does not explain this, so I cannot answer. I might point out again that I believe genesis is a metaphor, which ultimately has the meaning that "God created the universe." The Bible is not a science book, a person with very little scientific knowledge from more than 2,000 years ago, saw a vision, and wrote what he saw to the best of hi abilities. How would you describe something you cannot comprehend? He described his vision to the best of his abilities in Genesis.

...So wt, one minute you're saying Creationism is in fact a viable theory, and next say that Genesis is a metaphor for God made it? Get your ideas straight.


Right, but clouds can exist without precipitation in them, and furthermore, do not dominate the skies.

Rain is vital to our survival, the emphasis of water is put to the sky because of that reason.

But that doesn't make it an ocean, as is implied in Genesis.


"Clouds are visible masses of liquid water droplets that are suspended in the atmosphere above the surface of the Earth. They form as a result of condensation of water vapor. Clouds can form near warm and cold fronts, where air flows up the sides of mountains and cools as it rises, and where warm air travels over a colder surface.[1]"


[1] http://weather.lifetips.com...

The earth was round.

Genesis does not say the earth was flat, they merely said there are bodies of land, and bodies of water. Water is also all connected, furthermore the gigantic mass of land could be referring to Pangaea.

This is only a bone of contention if you're a 6,000 year old Earth creationist.


Also in Isiah 40:21-22.
"it is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"

The bible implies earth is, in fact, round. Other similar verses: Job 26:7, Job 26:10, keep in mind these verses were wrote far before Copernicus and Galileo.

But the bible mentions the "four corners of the earth". Care to explain that?


We can see planets thousands of miles away. Of course, since light travels at speed, albeit how fast it is, it is so many light years away, and we are essentially seeing those planets in the past. So, we are seeing back in time, and much further than 6,000 years mind you.

Mind you, I never claimed the earth was 6,000 years old, and furthermore, because I believe the earth is old, I believe that Genesis is more or less a metaphor.

Alright, cool.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 1:48:50 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 12:10:17 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Then, God never made Heaven :).

That doesn't follow. You taking idomatic expressions literal is...wierd...

Like this:

At 6/6/2010 1:21:02 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:

But the bible mentions the "four corners of the earth". Care to explain that?


We still say the sun rises and the sun sets. Care to explain that?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 2:28:02 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
There. Right there you have admitted genesis is work by Tribal people, and not God, and what Tribal people 'thought' about the Universe.

I don't know what you mean by Tribal people, but yes the Bible was written by humans, not God. It was not what they "thought" but what they interpreted from the visions God gave the Author (some believe Moses wrote Genesis).

But according to Genesis there was just water. Which means Genesis was wrong.

"Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." Note the word surface of the deep. The bible doesn't say the earth was a spherical ball composed only of water, the "surface of the deep" would mean the land below the water.

...So wt, one minute you're saying Creationism is in fact a viable theory, and next say that Genesis is a metaphor for God made it? Get your ideas straight.

Creationism simply means that the earth was created by God, it does not imply that every word of Genesis must be scrutinized literally. I stated that Genesis was vision given to a prophet, which took 7 days to complete, what he wrote down was what he saw when God created the universe. As he did not understand what he saw due to his lack of knowledge of science and astronomy, he simply described what he saw the best that he could. Hence what was written in metaphor wasn't exactly how it happened, it is a metaphor, with the main idea that the universe was created by God.

But that doesn't make it an ocean, as is implied in Genesis.

"And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day."

The bible nowhere says the sky is the ocean. The sky is the expanse of clouds, which is an expanse of rain (water).

Genesis does not say the earth was flat, they merely said there are bodies of land, and bodies of water. Water is also all connected, furthermore the gigantic mass of land could be referring to Pangaea.

This is only a bone of contention if you're a 6,000 year old Earth creationist.

Pangaea is believed to have existed more than 250 million years ago, I am not a 6,000 year old Earth creationist. As I have said before, all that creationism implies is that the universe was created. You do not have to believe in the 6,000 year theory to be a creationist.

Also in Isiah 40:21-22.
"it is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:"

The bible implies earth is, in fact, round. Other similar verses: Job 26:7, Job 26:10, keep in mind these verses were wrote far before Copernicus and Galileo.

But the bible mentions the "four corners of the earth". Care to explain that?

But 3 verses support round verse against this single verse. And I stress this again, I do not take every word of the Bible literally, I believe there are many metaphors in the bible, the "four corners of the earth" simply can be interpreted as all across the earth. The Bible was composed by many authors, they have different means of expressions. The bible does not preach a flat earth, as Isiah clearly states.
whatledge
Posts: 210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 2:35:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/6/2010 10:46:42 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 6/5/2010 1:28:14 PM, whatledge wrote:
At 6/5/2010 1:01:17 PM, Mirza wrote:
I have a question for you: Do you believe that Genesis 1 is metaphorical as a whole?

Yes I do. Genesis is more of a collection of stories written by many authors. I view Genesis 1 as metaphorical, in a sense that the main idea of it is true, God did create the universe. I believe that the author of Genesis 1, and was concieved by a vision/dream that took 7 days to complete.

If the vision took seven days to complete, might we expect there to do more detail in genesis, more description of the acts of creation?

As God creates with words, that's the acts of creation. If you are looking for every little scientific detail, you chose the wrong book to read, as the bible is not a science book.
nickthengineer
Posts: 251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2010 2:40:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/5/2010 2:47:27 PM, whatledge wrote:
Genesis 1 must be then the most scientifically flawed vision ever then.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. " - This tells us heaven is a physical, observable location. However, apparently it isn't. This also neglects the creation of the universe and all the other planets. Gods also got some 'splaining to if multiple universes exist.

As God created with words, it is logical to assume that, whoever has the vision heard God's words when he created the heavens and the earth. The writer may have not seen heaven, but heard God create it. Also the "heavens" mentioned int the bible was most likely referring to the skies and/or space.


"Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. " - So wait, the Earth was full of water without any Earth?

God created the heavens (space) and the earth (the planet). God created the planet earth with water, which is evident. And note the word surface.


"And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He 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—the first day. "- So wait, God makes the universe and Earth BEFORE a light source? Seriously, this is scientifically incorrect.

It is theortically incorrect in scientific terms, in terms of creationism, it faces no problems.


"And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. " - This implies that the sky is in fact a sea. Which is complete BS.

I originally wanted to do 5 verses at a time, but we'll continue. The sky contains clouds, which has the ability to rain. The sky, therefore, contains water. The sky is not the sea, that is not what the verse implies.

You both have it wrong. God separated the waters so that there would be a "firmament" or "expanse" between the waters. The text later says that God placed the stars in this expanse (Genesis 1:14). Therefore, the expanse that is being described contains both earth's atmosphere and all of outer space. Thus the claim is that there is water at the ends of the universe, not in the sky or the clouds.

"And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good. " - This implies there is one mass of land and one gigantic sea. Which was of course, proven untrue around 1493.

You have to expand on this one, what was proven around 1493?

Uh, scientists have long theorized that all the continents of earth were once one (Pangea), and thus all the oceans were one also (Panthalassa). This passage would agree with the scientific theory. Scientists, Bible believing and non, have theories about how the one continent broke apart into separate continents. Fail.

"Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. " - No real qualms here.

" And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. " - LOL, God made the Earth BEFORE the rest of the Universe. This goes against the Big Bang, and is Bull. And seriously, this implies there was oe sun that broke into the present day sun and the moon.

The Big Bang is called a theory for a reason, a theory does not negate a theory.

Your argument: if it goes against the Big Bang Theory, it's bull. Amazing argument.

And nowhere is it claimed that one light split into two separate lights. Epic monster fail.
I evolved from stupid. (http://www.debate.org...)