CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
1. "When each day of the creation week is summarized, the singular
'day' is modified by a numerical qualifier, 'first day' (v.5),
'second day (v.8), and sequentially continuing to the 'sixth
day' (vv. 13, 19, 24, 31)."
2. "When yôm is qualified by a number, it is almost invariably
used in a literal sense." -
-- The numeric qualifiers suggest a literal day
Exodus 20:8-11
8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Exodus 31:14-17
14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
The subject would not change from literal days to years or some other time period without letting you know.
Isn't it more likely that seven is just a significant number to Jews and Christians? Three is an important number to the Jews, because it symbolizes earth, water and air. Four is important because it symbolizes the directions: North, south, east and west. When you add three and four, you get seven... Which is the most sacred number to the Jews. It is mentioned throughout the Bible, especially in Genesis:
Genesis 21:28 And Abraham set seven ewe lambs of the flock by themselves.
Genesis 29:20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed only a few days to him because of the love he had for her.
Genesis 41:6 Then behold, seven thin heads, blighted by the east wind, sprang up after them.
Genesis 41:18 Suddenly seven cows came up out of the river, fine looking and fat; and they fed in the meadow.
That's just a few from Genesis. Here are some from the New Testament:
Matthew 12:45 Then he goes and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man is worse than the first. So shall it also be with this wicked generation.”
Luke 8:2 and certain women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities—Mary called Magdalene, out of whom had come seven demons,
Revelation 1:4 John, to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne,
Revelation 3:1 “And to the angel of the church in Sardis write, ‘These things says He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars: “I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead.
Revelation 4:5 And from the throne proceeded lightnings, thunderings, and voices. Seven lamps of fire were burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.
Revelation 5:6 And I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent out into all the earth.
As you can see, the number seven is used multiple times in Revelations. Although, the creation account in Genesis uses "day" as if they are actual 24 hour days, that does not mean that they are supposed to be interpreted as literal days, just as most of the Bible is not supposed to be interpreted literally, either.
It is phrased the only way that you could say 6 days.
Seven used to be the highest number that illiterate people could operate with. It is based on common short term memory span. Eight was simply too much.
Genesis is simple and childish story. Made up by a village idiot who simply could't do more than seven...
Seven used to be the highest number that illiterate people could operate with. It is based on common short term memory span. Eight was simply too much.
That isn't something we see in the Bible, though. They included numbers much larger than seven. However, the number seven was sacred not only to the ancient Jews, but the Babylonians as well.
Genesis is simple and childish story. Made up by a village idiot who simply could't do more than seven...
I'm not religious, but I think the problem is that simple minds think of it as a simple story. It is allegorical, just as most religious stories often are. If people were to interpret it correctly, Judaism and Christianity would be far different than what it is today. However, interpreting it literally is dangerous and opens the door for control... Which is how it turned out.
By the way, if you think that seven is the largest number mentioned in Genesis, I suggest you go back and reread it.
I'm not religious, but I think the problem is that simple minds think of it as a simple story. It is allegorical, just as most religious stories often are. If people were to interpret it correctly, Judaism and Christianity would be far different than what it is today. However, interpreting it literally is dangerous and opens the door for control... Which is how it turned out.
By the way, if you think that seven is the largest number mentioned in Genesis, I suggest you go back and reread it.
But Bible was taken as a literal encyclopaedia-like book for more than thousand years, we call it now the Dark Age. Apart of US in almost all of the civilised used-to-be Christian world, bible does not matter, churches closes down, that's why we don't have theocracies like in Middle East.
People who think about them self as Christians, don't pray or go to the Church, they say so because they have Christmas tree in winter and around Easter they bake sheep shaped cake...
The Dark Ages start at the fall of the Roman Empire... Not an emergence of Christian Fundamentalism. Roman leaders believed in the Bible before The Dark Ages started and Europeans believed in the bible after the Dark Ages are considered to be over. Your revision of history, as if you were a character in the book 1984, is invalid. For most of western civilization, the church was the center of literacy and learning.
Dark age was caused bi Christianity, burning libraries, books. Killing non Christians, banning science, death sentence for saying that Earth is not flat, witch hunting. You could get education just and only by becoming priest.
He was tried for heresy, not for science. Burning someone at the stake for not beieving in the trinity is pretty bad, but it is a far cry from "banning science." Why don't you try again.
I think that death sentence for heresy -saying that Earth is no centre of the universe could be qualified as a ban on Astronomy, geography... There were many teachings that would qualify as heresy/sorcery but were regular science. So why would anyone persuade science if publishing a discovery meant death?
What do you think that would happen to a person who figures out simple steam engine?... Trying to advance was pointless, it would kill you.
What the hell are you rambling about? The man was not tried for his scientific views, he was tried for his religious views. If you actually study history half as much as you try to make yourself appear, you would realize the church was the world's biggest promoter of science.
Jordano Bruno same as Galileo said that Earth is not centre of the universe. Galieo "apologised" and got life sentence (house arrest). Bruno stick with the idea and Burned on stake. He was charged with denial of trinity by saying that Earth runs around the sun and the sun is just ordinary star, one of many. If he would apologize etc... he would propbably endup with house arrest...
Both Bruno and Galileo were working with Nicolaus Copernicus' theory. Nothing happened to him, though. It's kind of strange that they punished the students and not the teacher.
But Bible was taken as a literal encyclopaedia-like book for more than thousand years, we call it now the Dark Age.
And much of the Dark Ages weren't until about a thousand years after Jesus and about two thousand years after Old Testament. The further back you go, the more people you find who interpreted it allegorically. Plus, there were many famous Jewish and Christian scholars of the Middle Ages who said that much of the Bible, especially Genesis, was to be interpreted allegorically.
A literal interpretation can be used as a tool for control... And that's what apparently happened. It worked especially well with the large pagan population that converted with Rome. When the most powerful empire converts, and adopts the wrong interpretation, that tends to spread.
People who think about them self as Christians, don't pray or go to the Church, they say so because they have Christmas tree in winter and around Easter they bake sheep shaped cake...
We are talking about genesis and there is no word in it that could indicate that Genesis suppose to be taken as a BS story. There is no way how it could be understand as "non true". It is very descriptive, creation step by step...
We are talking about genesis and there is no word in it that could indicate that Genesis suppose to be taken as a BS story.
I never said it was a BS story... Just that it was an allegory.
There is no way how it could be understand as "non true". It is very descriptive, creation step by step...
So is the story of Abraham, which is featured in Genesis, but like Galatians 4:24 says: Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
I find that extremely unlikely...............................................................................................................................
Notice it says "And the evening and the morning were the first day."
"And the evening and the morning were the second day."
"And the evening and the morning were the third day."
"And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."
"And the evening and the morning were the fifth day."
"And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."
It gives a specific reference to time. Evening and Morning a 24 hour period of time.
it is strictly defined as the light portion of a light/dark cycle as the earth rotated underneath a directional light source, producing day and night. It is also true that whenever "day" is modified by a number, like second day or six days, it can only mean a true solar day. There are no exceptions in Hebrew. Any uncertainty is resolved in the Ten Commandments as God commands us to work six days and rest one day just as He worked on the six creation days and rested on day seven (Exodus 20:11).
The use of a number with the word "day" is very illuminating. This combination occurs 357 times outside of Genesis 1. The combination is used in four different ways, but each time it is used, it must mean 24-hour periods of time. If the combinations had been intended to mean long periods of time, both the texts and contexts then become meaningless
the meaning of the word "day" with a number always means a 24-hour period of time outside of Genesis 1, then it should also mean a 24-hour period of time inside Genesis 1. The words that Moses used to communicate what God did during creation are very significant. If Moses had meant to signify that the "days" were more than 24 hours in length, he could easily have done so. If we are to understand what Moses wrote, then the language he used must be understood in its normal meaning. The normal meaning is that of 24-hour periods of time.
Everyone knows that evolutionists and creationists dispute how the universe began. And regardless of which side of the battle line you’re on, most people harbor strong feelings about the issue of origins . . . Yet there are a host of important questions at the core of the battle that relatively few in either camp have bothered to ask—much less answer:
Why is the issue of origins so universally controversial?
How can creationists support biblical claims that so obviously seem to contradict modern science?
Whose side of the argument does scientific evidence support?
What roles should science and the Bible play in a person’s beliefs about the physical universe?
With the curiosity of a student and the precision of a veteran Bible teacher, John MacArthur takes you to the heart of the battle in his study The Battle for the Beginning. Based on an in-depth examination of Genesis chapter 1, The Battle for the Beginning takes you on an instructive, fascinating journey into the Bible’s own claims about creation, evolution, and the vital issues at stake http://www.gty.org/products/Audio-Series/255/The-Battle-for-the-Beginning
I don't hate you... And you post more information than I do? Is this some sort of information post-off? I could easily copy text from other sites, if that is what you mean.
Oh yeah? You can't out-post me! I type about 20 WPM. I still look at the keyboard when I type... Which means, ultra-focus! I can switch between my right index finger and my left index finger. I'm a posting machine... Try me.
Sigh...you do realize that the Bible was first written in Hebrew, not English right? The word day in Hebrew, yom, has several definitions. Among these is an unspecified amount of time.
It supposes to be the "Word of god" where I assume that the expectation that it is a literal truth comes with it.
While I do believe Genesis is literal if the correct vocab is used, are you really going to lump Psalms and Proverbs into the literal category as well?
When the world's most powerful nation converts to a misinterpreted version of a religion, those misinterpretations spread. That eventually leads to the majority of the world thinking they understand something that they really don't.
So, you can't prove that it wasn't supposed to be interpreted allegorically? Well, thanks for clearing that up.
The Bible also says that wisdom and patience are females... But everyone knows that the personification of traits was just a literary tool. The deeper messages are what are supposed to be understood, not the literal interpretations. Early Christians and Jews taught the creation story as an allegory. A literal interpretation is more recent. Who do you think understands the stories better... People living during the time when those stories were being introduced, or the people who came thousands of years later?
You're basically saying, "I'm ignorant of religion, history and Eastern tradition... But that doesn't matter, because I am right no matter what!" Awesome... Anyways, you can take a look at these:
"In Jewish religious thought Genesis is not regarded as meant for a literal reading, and Jewish tradition has not usually read it so."
"When, therefore, Moses says, "God completed his works on the sixth day," we must understand that he is speaking not of a number of days, but that he takes six as a perfect number. Since it is the first number which is equal in its parts, in the half, and the third and sixth parts, and since it is produced by the multiplication of two unequal factors, two and three. And the numbers two and three exceed the incorporeality which exists in the unit; because the number two is an image of matter being divided into two parts and dissected like matter. And the number three is an image of a solid body, because a solid can be divided according to a threefold division."
Again bullshit, they are just trying to make the story look less retarded. They think that magical creation in six days is too silly, so let them think that "day" does not mean "day"... which failed.
So no let make-up something about the number six...
Again bullshit, they are just trying to make the story look less retarded.
Well, there's really no use trying to convince you anymore, anyways. If I can't get you to understand the concept of time, then I definitely won't make any progress with you on the Bible.
They think that magical creation in six days is too silly, so let them think that "day" does not mean "day"... which failed.
Good grief, you're a stubborn fool. You don't know jack-shit about this topic, and I find it hard to believe that you even read what I posted. Prove to me that it was not supposed to be interpreted allegorically! The Bible even mentions how people were starting to believe the fables and genealogies (which occurred in Genesis, hence the name) that they created:
1 Timothy 1:4 nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith.
Titus 1:14 not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.
The Bible even predicts the time when people would start interpreting the allegorical texts literally: 2 Timothy 4:4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.
So no let make-up something about the number six...
How do you know they were making it up? It is ancient commentary. Six days wasn't far-fetched to the ancients, they had no knowledge of a billion year old Earth, or dinosaurs, or evolution... Yet they were still saying that the creation story was allegorical.
It is pathetic as it even can be.
What? Your decision to remain ignorant of the topic? Yes, I agree.
Good grief, you're a stubborn fool. You don't know jack-shit about this topic, and I find it hard to believe that you even read what I posted. Prove to me that it was not supposed to be interpreted allegorically! The Bible even mentions how people were starting to believe the fables and genealogies (which occurred in Genesis, hence the name) that they created:
Six days in for [YOM] [number] [DAY TIME] means just and only 24h day. End of story. Your opinion does not matter.,
1 Timothy 1:4 nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith.
---
Titus 1:14 not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.
Cut out of context
How do you know they were making it up?8
You are making stuff up.
8Yet they were still saying that the creation story was allegorical.
For us is Genesis complete bullcrap. However for those primitives who made up that story, six days looked realistic which is why they have used 6*24h day.
What? Your decision to remain ignorant of the topic? Yes, I agree.
There is literally nothing to be ignorant about. It is a simple story made up by primitives. There is no reason to think that it is not literal, for them it looked real. For them was Earth flat disk floating on water with sun orbiting it. Sickness was curse, flood was punishment from local god.... There is no doubt that Genesis is meant to be literal. It is not random story it has exact order of creation, with timing and description how thins happen.
You are the one who tries to twist words, cut stuff out of context...
Six days in for [YOM] [number] [DAY TIME] means just and only 24h day. End of story. Your opinion does not matter.,
You got that argument from creationist websites. Of course they are going to interpret it literally. The days can still be figurative, though... That is how an allegory works. Do I really need to explain to you what an allegory is?
Cut out of context
Oh, yeah? What did those verses really mean, then?
How do you know they were making it up?8
How do I know that they were fables? Because it is obvious. You refuse to do any research outside of biased creationist websites.
For us is Genesis complete bullcrap. However for those primitives who made up that story, six days looked realistic which is why they have used 624h day.
Then why didn't they consider them to be literal days?
There is literally nothing to be ignorant about. It is a simple story made up by primitives.
There you go... Ignorance.*
There is no reason to think that it is not literal, for them it looked real.
There are plenty of reasons. You could at least look up the shit yourself, since you choose to ignore what I have supplied.
There is no doubt that Genesis is meant to be literal. It is not random story it has exact order of creation, with timing and description how thins happen.
Alright, dude... Go ahead and keep thinking that.
You are the one who tries to twist words, cut stuff out of context...
I have cut nothing out of context. You just like to say that I did as if you've actually looked into it. You're just too stubborn to admit that you don't know shit.
We can determine how yom should be interpreted in Genesis 1:5-2:2 simply by examining the context in which we find the word and then comparing its context with how we see its usage elsewhere in Scripture. By doing this we let Scripture interpret itself. The Hebrew word yom is used 2301 times in the Old Testament. Outside of Genesis 1, yom plus a number (used 410 times) always indicates an ordinary day, i.e., a 24-hour period. The words “evening” and “morning” together (38 times) always indicate an ordinary day. Yom + “evening” or “morning” (23 times) always indicates an ordinary day. Yom + “night” (52 times) always indicates an ordinary day.
Outside of Genesis 1, yom plus a number (used 410 times) always indicates an ordinary day, i.e., a 24-hour period.
Do you realize how incredibly useless that argument is? People who interpret the Bible literally would consider all of the other passages to be literal, as well. You get all of your arguments from Young-Earth creationists, as if they are good authority on the subject. Give me a break! Maybe you should take a look at the other sides arguments, before you make up your mind.
The words “evening” and “morning” together (38 times) always indicate an ordinary day.
Show me those verses.
Yom + “evening” or “morning” (23 times) always indicates an ordinary day.
An argument they pulled from their ass. How do they know that the verses they are comparing them to are not allegorical, as well?
You shouldn't use that site as a source. I always suggest that people don't, because it is biased and flawed.
If you can't come up with your own arguments, with your own opinions, with your own "knowledge," then you should just quit and go make some more accounts (You are Helix, right?).
You have lost many argument ago. You are not even arguing. All sources said that six days means six days. Just because you don't like it will not change.
Well, I obviously am. What do you call this? You just can't prove anything, nor do you understand the topic, so you decided to go ahead and just declare that you won. That's fantastic.
All sources said that six days means six days.
ALL? That is probably the most ridiculous thing you have said so far... And you've said a lot of ridiculous things.
"In traditional jewish theology and in the early Christian church, it was not taught that the the creation story was an account of seven literal days. In fact, at that time most Christian and Jewish teachers felt that to entertain such a question was to miss the point of the Genesis account entirely."
"It was the common thought in the early church years that the story of creation had been separated into multiple days and a compounding sequence because there was a need for order to aid in its understanding. The proper interpretation of the creation story revolved around what was taught and symbolized, rather than battling between literal and allegorical canaille."
"It was't until the 1500s when the Protestant Reformation took place, that the emphasis for scripture interpretations became focused upon literacy. It was at this time that Martin Luther expounded the idea of earth being created in six literal days and God resting on a literal seventh"
Of course, you'll probably say that those people are full of shit, and are trying to make Genesis seem less stupid, in which case I would point out how you probably didn't read the quotes I listed. Show me an article that says Genesis must be interpreted literally from someone other than a Young-Earth creationist.
Just because you don't like it will not change.
What? Your opinion? Well, that sucks... But if you want to continue being stubborn and defending something you know nothing about, be my guest. If you are so confident that you are right, then you should be able to prove to me that it should be interpreted literally.
So you argument is now what? "I have found 4 webs that fits to my view?" If I post 10 articles about Genesis is being literal, will I win?.
Your previous "argument" that "different people, did wit different religions in different times something different..." looked that you in least try...
So you argument is now what? "I have found 4 webs that fits to my view?" If I post 10 articles about Genesis is being literal, will I win?.
I listed links because you made the ridiculous comment that ALL sources say that it is supposed to be interpreted literally.
Go ahead and find me ten links from non-creationists saying that the Bible should be interpreted literally.
Your previous "argument" that "different people, did wit different religions in different times something different..." looked that you in least try...
It is somewhat ambiguous, but this verse may have been one that led Jews and Christians to assume that the sun orbited the Earth:
Joshua 10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day.
Time exists in rightful placement. Ever heard of the velocity equation? V = D/T? It says velocity equals distance over time. Time is a mathematical construct that we have given our own measures. If time was only an illusion then things cannnot decay or change, but things do over a period of time.
Is the current moment either past or future? What exists is what is occuring at this moment. Every milisecond is another moment. Will the clock continue? Yes. Will the earth keep rotating? Yes. But in a single moment, both the earth and the clock are still, however, with each moment we see something different from the prior moment, which is a moment that no longer exists... Or you could argue that everything exists all at once.
"The distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion"
Many Physicists will disagree with this notion you are presenting me. Time is an integral component in the known universe. The linear concept of time helps us come up with theories such as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Time isn't an absolute quantity (since time varies depending on the conceptual placement in the universe. Time is necessary structure within everything. Without time you have nothing. The equation I gave you earlier uses time to find out velocity. Any equation regarding space time requires time as a component if speed is the measure. Movement requires a flow of time.
Time is an integral component in the known universe. The linear concept of time helps us come up with theories such as the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Have you ever thought that time may not be the best way to describe it? Think of it in terms of change, not time.
Any equation regarding space time requires time as a component if speed is the measure. Movement requires a flow of time.
Without movement and change, we would not have the notion of time. So what is time? It is not seperate from movement or change. It is merely a measurement of it. Plus, you can't move within a single moment. You change from one moment to the next. It is just a sequence of nows. Also, movement is just going from one point to another. But we need gaps between points for that to occur. In other words, space. We cannot have space without solid, or solid without space. So time being a measurement of movement, and movement, or distance rather, being a measurement of space, and space being nothing, which allows us to see something, then ultimately, time is a measurement of nothing. Does nothing exist? Not really. Nothing is only the lack of something.
So, God could measure days before the sun was created? Also, what reason would an eternal being have for measuring time? It's a man made measurement, and overall, an illusory thing.
Time measurement is not dependent on sun. It says six days of creation, if time here would not matter it could have been a simple order. Without separating it to days.
Our entire notion of time is based on the earth's rotations around the sun. How could there have been evening and day the first three days, if the sun and the moon were not created until the fourth day?
It says six days of creation, if time here would not matter it could have been a simple order. Without separating it to days.
It could be that it was put in terms that people of that time could understand. Like I said, the number seven was significant to the Babylonians, as well... And much of the Torah was written during the Babylonian Exile.
Our entire notion of time is based on the earth's rotations around the sun. How could there have been evening and day the first three days, if the sun and the moon were not created until the fourth day?
Because it is a poorly written story. That's why. Time measurement is not dependent on amount of light around the clock.
It could be that it was put in terms that people of that time could understand. Like I said, the number seven was significant to the Babylonians, as well... And much of the Torah was written during the Babylonian Exile.
Over and over again. Author used 24 hour days for a reason. He actually had to add to the "yom" additional words to make it 24h day only. and he did it several times in row, so there is clear intention...
measurement has nothing to do with rotation of Earth. It is mechanical system or electronics. Second is standardized unit. Earth slows and speeds down in quite random pattern. Atomic clocks that standardize the second, used decay of radioactive elements. Nothing to do with light, day, night, rotation of Earth or pixies.
measurement has nothing to do with rotation of Earth.
Time measurement does. If the sun did not exist, we would not have a 24 hour clock.
It is mechanical system or electronics.
What do you think the purpose of that system is? Come on, man! How do you expect me to think that you have any idea about religion if you don't even know how we measure time?
Earth slows and speeds down in quite random pattern. Atomic clocks that standardize the second, used decay of radioactive elements.
Which could not occur without the sun. However, our 24 hour clock is based off of the earth's rotations... And we're arguing about ancient civilizations, who without a doubt measured time according to the sun. There is a reason people can look at the sun and determine that when it is straight overhead, it is noon.
Time measurement does. If the sun did not exist, we would not have a 24 hour clock.
This is conclusive proof that have never attended science classes in your junior high.
What do you think the purpose of that system is? Come on, man! How do you expect me to think that you have any idea about religion if you don't even know how we measure time?
The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
Which could not occur without the sun. However, our 24 hour clock is based off of the earth's rotations... And we're arguing about ancient civilizations, who without a doubt measured time according to the sun. There is a reason people can look at the sun and determine that when it is straight overhead, it is noon.
Which is a proof that Genesis was made up by primitives who did not know how stuff works.
This is conclusive proof that have never attended science classes in your junior high.
Dude, where is the sun located at noon? Straight overhead, right? How about at 1:00? Our clocks are designed relative to the sun.
The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom.
You just copied and pasted that from the internet. You didn't even quote it, as if it is your own words. You don't even understand what you are defending. You may measure time differently, but most people, especially ancient Jews, don't... So, your argument is useless.
Why do you think that the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service is responsible for maintaining global time standards?
Which is a proof that Genesis was made up by primitives who did not know how stuff works.
They may not have known how the universe worked, but that doesn't discard the argument that Genesis chapter one is allegorical. You think that because some creationist said that Yom + a number + evening/day is referring to a literal 24 hour period, then it must be. Where do you think they got that idea from? They pulled it out of their ass. There is no Hebrew text, religious or not, that says that yom + a number + evening/day must be interpreted literally. The people who actually speak the language say that it isn't supposed to be interpreted literally... Do you speak Hebrew? Does Ken Ham speak Hebrew? No... So, your argument is based on other ignorant arguments.
That verse is just comparing God's view of the world in a sense of humans view of the world. I'm sure he didn't really mean 1,000 years. Most likely the author just wanted to say that a day to God is beyond a lifetime.
Possibly. I think it can be open to interpretation, especially if the Bible is supposed to be the word of God, then using the word day in Genesis may apply to that verse.
If God wished to indicate such a measure implications would have been given and would be due presently. It is common place for a deity to simply execute planetary framework in days.
Have you ever noticed how common the number seven is? Seven days, seven continents, seven seas, seven world wonders, seven spikes on the Statue of Liberty's crown, seven dwarves (lol)... Lucky number seven, I guess!
It is based on the fact that average untrained person can hold six to seven information in their short term memory.
Completely illiterate people can usually "count" to no more that to seven because they do not understand numbers properly, the way numbers mean to be understood. Seven was for them the ultimate number that they could somehow so so work with, highest number that still meant something. Saying 40 or 31 million meant nothing.
Also for example number twelve (dozen) was used by illiterate people in Mesopotamia, as a tool the used counting bones in fingers on a single hand. By combining two hand they could go up to 144 (12*12)...
It is based on the fact that average untrained person can hold six to seven information in their short term memory.
Genesis 5:4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters.
Genesis 5:10 After he begot Cainan, Enosh lived eight hundred and fifteen years, and had sons and daughters.
Genesis 5:17 So all the days of Mahalalel were eight hundred and ninety-five years; and he died.
As you can see, there were numbers much larger than seven in Genesis.
Completely illiterate people can usually "count" to no more that to seven because they do not understand numbers properly, the way numbers mean to be understood.
The people who wrote the Bible were not illiterate, and obviously anyone who was reading the Bible was not illiterate... So, what's your point?
Seven was for them the ultimate number that they could somehow so so work with, highest number that still meant something. Saying 40 or 31 million meant nothing.
So, explain why they mention numbers up to the thousands.
No, but convincing people of this who have believed the 24 hour day thing is very hard to do. I tried to convince my youth pastor once and he thinks I've gone off the deep end now...now each time he teaches on creation, I silently in my head dispute every single point he makes.
Ha! That's the problem. Too many people interpret the Bible literally. Like with Satan and hell. The Jews added Satan into the Bible, and they even said that he is just a metaphor, not an actual being. And the Catholic church announced that after studying the Bible and Christian texts for centuries, they have come to the conclusion that hell is also a metaphor, which I think that is even more obvious than Satan being a metaphor. However, people still teach those things as real. Scaring people into thinking that leaving Christianity will result in them being condemned to eternal suffering.
I dunno, I never really trusted Catholics when it came to the Bible. In my opinion they are very iffy when it comes to getting the public's opinion on there side; they just say what they think everybody will like.
Well, if Satan is just a metaphor... And Satan is supposedly the ruler of hell, then I think it is fair to say that hell is probably a metaphor, as well.
I think it Satan is suppose to mean adversary to man. According to jews, it is the inclination to do evil in man's eyes but jesus actually put something different to the story, stating that Satan is the father of lies, that he fell from heaven, and is adversary to the Devil. In conclusion, I do believe that the term can actually mean both things.
In my opinion, Satan seems to be the negative tempting inner voice in all of us. Hell would be the state of not knowing God. Jesus said that the kingdom of God is in all of us, but I think he meant that it was something that needed to be found, and it is found when people completely leave the hell that they have created for themselves.
I think that the reason Old Testament and New Testament connect, is because Jesus had to work with a Jewish crowd, but it is clear that his message is much different than that of the Jews before him.
I agree but at the same time I disagree. Satan can be man's inward struggle and we can make a hell for ourselves, which is total detachment from God Romans 1:26. At the same time, he can also be an individual and Hell is a literal thing. I also believe that the Old testament only taught what was necessary for the Jews to know- at that point in time it was unnecessary for them to be aware of any spiriitual war taking place. The physical rules they followed would justify them, because that was all that was required. But when Jesus came, he took the message of the law and gave a deeper meaning to it, showing us much more things than we already knew, including the existence of an actual hell and what not.
I agree but at the same time I disagree. Satan can be man's inward struggle and we can make a hell for ourselves, which is total detachment from God Romans 1:26.
Romans 1:26? Isn't that verse referring to homosexuality?
At the same time, he can also be an individual and Hell is a literal thing.
If you interpret it that way. I just don't think it was originally meant to be thought of in that way, though.
The physical rules they followed would justify them, because that was all that was required. But when Jesus came, he took the message of the law and gave a deeper meaning to it, showing us much more things than we already knew, including the existence of an actual hell and what not.
I think the Christian teachings were corrupted. Some of the earliest Christian texts teach a completely different message than what was included in New Testament. I think that the Bible was tweaked in a way to support a political agenda. This meant portraying hell in a different light. Prior to Judaism and Christianity, the underworld was taught as a real place, ruled by a deity... But those were polytheistic religions. Christianity and Judaism are monotheistic, so it makes sense that they would teach that hell is not a literal place. The fact that traditional Christianity brings people in with love and keeps them in with fear, should be clear evidence that it was interpreted in such a way to increase control over people. Once people come to believe in hell and unforgivable sin, then the government can create laws in their favor, and not receive any complaints from the people.
No Romans 1:26 speaks of God just handing us over to our sinful thoughts, even though sexual immorality (beastiality and homosexuality and all that jazz) was used as an example.
It is a frame of mind that can physically affect you... But I do not think it is a literal lake of fire ruled by Satan where the "evil" go to be tortured for eternity.
What is evil? For someone to be evil, they are lacking goodness. People who are evil are usually filled with hate. So, what is hate? Hate is the lack of love. To hate something is to want it to go away, where as to love something is to want it to stay. Someone who is loving is someone who is good. Hate only spawns more hate. Should someone who is lacking love be treated with hate? Do you throw out an empty cup, or do you refill it? How would you get a homeless person to no longer be homeless? You certainly would not take his possessions away or prevent him from getting off the streets. You would give him money, or better yet, give him a job so that he can earn money. This is the same with hell. Is it right for God to punish people who are lacking something? If God is love, as is often said, then evil people are just lacking God... But they could easily acquire him after they die, do you not agree?
In my opinion, hell is the state of mind that most of society is currently in. However, it may be that it is a state of mind that can carry over to the next life, but I doubt it is an eternal prison we cannot escape, because it is pretty clear that we are the ones holding the key. The reason we are in this hell is because of materialism. Atheists tend to be very materialistic because they refuse to think spiritually. However, most traditional Christians are extremely materialistic, as well. They practically worship the Cross and the image of Jesus. The church sucks the money right out of people. They see everyone as individuals. They consider the Bible holier than the messages within, and they interpret most of the Bible literally, which has led to incredible ignorance and hate amongst the religious community.
We can look at Genesis and The Fall, to see just how misinterpreted the Bible seems to be by traditional Christians. Most think of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil as a tree that actually gave knowledge of good and evil, as if they are two separate things, but if we were to look at the original Hebrew text, we would see that the tree was referred to as the Tree of Knowledge of Everything. That sounds fantastic, right? Well, no... Because what the story is trying to explain is the introduction of the ego, or in other words, the introduction of materialism. That is why Adam and Eve were ashamed to be naked. They suddenly had a sense of self. Isn't it interesting that nudity came to be considered a sin, even though God didn't care? Gaining the knowledge of everything is an illusion, because there is only one thing. Everything is one. Everything came from a single point and then grew. Think of it like a seed. A seed grows to be a tree, and then from the tree, leaves, flowers, berries and more seeds grow... But all of that is still the tree. Everything is us, including God. The Holy spirit is to say the whole spirit. This is why Jesus is the father, the son, and the Holy spirit... Because we are too.
John 10:33-34 The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”
Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”’?
According to the ancient Jewish philosopher Philo, Adam represents mind, Eve represents sense perception, and the Serpent represents pleasure. Adam eating the forbidden fruit was a loss of virtue. The Garden of Eden represents virtue.
If you apply that interpretation to traditional Christian understanding, then that makes Satan a metaphor for pleasure, as well. Satan being the ruler of hell, we see that hell is merely a state of materialistic pleasure and ungodliness, but it can be reversed.
Such things man will never know to be true or false, as such... We are to yet uncover what mysteries lie beneath the truth of reality, this is what is making beautiful our existence I am thinking.
That doesn't mean it should be interpreted literally! When Jesus said he was a door, do you think he meant that he was an actual door?
I know your knowledge of what you just said extends only to an article you read by Ken Ham... Which is not very impressive. If you think it is right for people to continue misinterpreting the Bible, then keep defending them! We know that literal interpretations of Biblical texts has led to war and corruption... And we know that Christians had a different outlook when their religion first arose, but they were cut off and their messages reinterpreted once their texts got into the hands of corrupt leaders and idiots.
No since God is a being beyond capable understanding therefore his actions span beyond time we are capable of knowing and thus invalidates our own understanding of 'day'.
The Bible was written by Jews during their enslavement in Egypt therefore they still have some basis on what they write in their texts. Not all of them are insane.
The Bible was written by Jews during their enslavement in Egypt therefore they still have some basis on what they write in their texts.
The Bible consists of both Old and New Testament. New testament was after Jesus. I think you are referring to the Torah, which was actually probably written during their enslavement in Babylon. Those five books are attributed to Moses, who led the Jews out of Egypt... So, if he really did write the Torah (which I doubt he did, since most scholars agree that the writings within it span six centuries), then he most likely wrote it after they left Egypt. How else would you explain all the events that occurred after they left Egypt being included in the Bible?
I referred to the Torah since it was the one that contains the Genesis, the book where the moderator was referring to. I believe that the Torah was not written by Moses alone, I believe it was the Israelites who were with him that completed the task. He was attributed to the Torah because he was the Israelites` savior from Egypt which would probably explain his prominence in the chapters.
I referred to the Torah since it was the one that contains the Genesis, the book where the moderator was referring to.
Yeah, I'm the moderator lol.
I believe that the Torah was not written by Moses alone
I agree. It might not have even been written by Moses at all. His infancy story is the same as the Mesopotamian king Sargon. I think the Jews picked up a lot of laws and legends during the Babylonian Exile.
He was attributed to the Torah because he was the Israelites` savior from Egypt which would probably explain his prominence in the chapters.
Well, the Bible made up a few characters, that's no secret. Job was one, and Paul said that the story of Abraham and his sons was an allegory, so those characters were most likely made up, as well. I'm sure Noah was made up, considering the resemblance to that story and the one in the Epic of Gilgamesh, another Babylonian fable. However, I don't think people are supposed to interpret most of the Bible literally, anyways.
The universe is 13.7 (or 13.8) billion years old. Estimation: 14 billion. Divide 14 by 2. You get 7. 7 God Days may be the equivalent of 2 billion years.