GodsPhysicist

Are there ANY Christians out there that do NOT believe in a literal "6 days of creation?"

6 days of creation vs. scientific results poll...   25 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you believe in a literal 6 days of creation?

  2. 2. After reading the article, do you still believe in a literal 6 days of creation?


Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

50 posts in this topic

Carbon dating has been proven to be unreliable past a certain point with the way they've been doing it.

 

It's unreliable past 20,000 years...which is longer than most creationists are willing to allow for. Here's an article rebutting some creationist claims about C-14 dating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>< I don't really want to read another article. At least give me one that's entertaining! Hahaha. All I'm saying is, if scientists are generally claiming millions of years, then we have to admit they're going to be wrong about a lot of other things too. For instance, fossil fuels don't necessarily come from primarily dinosaurs, rather old fish and other dead animals. But they tell us it's from million year old dinosaurs. There's a lot of things most scientists think are true that simply are not, because they are blinded by the fact that God is here in present form and all they are seeing is the 2D world around us and need a "faith to dig into" to make them feel secure. Even some creation believing scientists like my uncle think the earth is millions of years old. I just don't see the purpose of all that. Why would God let the earth sit here for years? It doesn't make any sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot believe in a literal six-day creation. If that were the case, then I should also believe the earth is immovable and doesn't revolve around the sun, because that's what the Bible "literally" says, too.

Science is the observation of created things, and God created all things. Therefore, I trust science.

God says this in Job. I just posted some if this on my Facebook the other day because I looked up at the stars and thought of this verse. It's a beautiful depiction of how God cares for each and every part of earth in such a sweet way.

Job 38New Living Translation (NLT)

The Lord Challenges Job

38 Then the Lord answered Job from the whirlwind:

2 “Who is this that questions my wisdom

with such ignorant words?

3 Brace yourself like a man,

because I have some questions for you,

and you must answer them.

4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?

Tell me, if you know so much.

5 Who determined its dimensions

and stretched out the surveying line?

6 What supports its foundations,

and who laid its cornerstone

7 as the morning stars sang together

and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?

8 “Who kept the sea inside its boundaries

as it burst from the womb,

9 and as I clothed it with clouds

and wrapped it in thick darkness?

10 For I locked it behind barred gates,

limiting its shores.

11 I said, ‘This far and no farther will you come.

Here your proud waves must stop!’

12 “Have you ever commanded the morning to appear

and caused the dawn to rise in the east?

13 Have you made daylight spread to the ends of the earth,

to bring an end to the night’s wickedness?

14 As the light approaches,

the earth takes shape like clay pressed beneath a seal;

it is robed in brilliant colors.

15 The light disturbs the wicked

and stops the arm that is raised in violence.

16 “Have you explored the springs from which the seas come?

Have you explored their depths?

17 Do you know where the gates of death are located?

Have you seen the gates of utter gloom?

18 Do you realize the extent of the earth?

Tell me about it if you know!

19 “Where does light come from,

and where does darkness go?

20 Can you take each to its home?

Do you know how to get there?

21 But of course you know all this!

For you were born before it was all created,

and you are so very experienced!

22 “Have you visited the storehouses of the snow

or seen the storehouses of hail?

23 (I have reserved them as weapons for the time of trouble,

for the day of battle and war.)

24 Where is the path to the source of light?

Where is the home of the east wind?

25 “Who created a channel for the torrents of rain?

Who laid out the path for the lightning?

26 Who makes the rain fall on barren land,

in a desert where no one lives?

27 Who sends rain to satisfy the parched ground

and make the tender grass spring up?

28 “Does the rain have a father?

Who gives birth to the dew?

29 Who is the mother of the ice?

Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens?

30 For the water turns to ice as hard as rock,

and the surface of the water freezes.

31 “Can you direct the movement of the stars—

binding the cluster of the Pleiades

or loosening the cords of Orion?

32 Can you direct the constellations through the seasons

or guide the Bear with her cubs across the heavens?

33 Do you know the laws of the universe?

Can you use them to regulate the earth?

34 “Can you shout to the clouds

and make it rain?

35 Can you make lightning appear

and cause it to strike as you direct?

36 Who gives intuition to the heart

and instinct to the mind?

37 Who is wise enough to count all the clouds?

Who can tilt the water jars of heaven

38 when the parched ground is dry

and the soil has hardened into clods?

39 “Can you stalk prey for a lioness

and satisfy the young lions’ appetites

40 as they lie in their dens

or crouch in the thicket?

41 Who provides food for the ravens

when their young cry out to God

and wander about in hunger?

Footnotes:

38:7 Hebrew the sons of God.

38:14 Or its features stand out like folds in a robe.

But also, there are verses that say:

Isaiah 40:22-26

22 God sits high above the round ball of earth. The people look like mere ants. He stretches out the skies like a canvas - yes, like a tent canvas to live under. 23 He ignores what all the princes say and do. The rulers of the earth count for nothing. 24 Princes and rulers don't amount to much. Like seeds barely rooted, just sprouted, They shrivel when God blows on them. Like flecks of chaff, they're gone with the wind. 25 "So - who is like me? Who holds a candle to me?" says The Holy. 26 Look at the night skies: Who do you think made all this? Who marches this army of stars out each night, counts them off, calls each by name - so magnificent! so powerful! - and never overlooks a single one?

So God sees the heavens both from our perspective, (the first verses) but also from the second above the earth because God is everywhere. So we have to stretch that as well with what you are saying to saying nothing moves unless God wants it. Yes there is orbit, but God doesn't let anything get out of orbit. As with these other verses, I couldn't make the night sky move even if I wanted to. Only God is big enough for that. In Revelation it mentions how God will also make the "stars fall" and black out the sun and moon. But we have to see the whole picture. We have to stretch our imagination to see the full picture. :) I absolutely love the first section of verses.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a Christian who does not believe in a literal 6 days of creation. I also do not see a conflict between scientific consensus on evolution and my personal Christian faith.

 

A large part of that is because of the book Finding Darwin's God, in which a biologist and devout Catholic Kenneth Miller describes in great detail the evidence for evolution and disproves scientific arguments for several creationist theories, but then also talks about how this proof of evidence is not only compatible with his Catholic faith, but also enhances it.

 

I also can't help but notice the parallels between this conflict and hundreds of years ago when Galileo was excommunicated from the Catholic Church because he proved that the Earth went around the Sun. It was believed that because there are passages of the Bible that could be interpreted as meaning the Sun goes around the Earth, it must mean that the science is wrong. Nowadays, you will be hard pressed to find a Christian who believes that the Sun goes around the Earth, much less that it is in conflict with faith.

 

Today we see the same sort of religion vs. science argument that happened during Galileo's time. Is it possible that in hundreds of years, people will see faith and evolution as compatible the same way that we do with the Earth going around the Sun?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a Christian who does not believe in a literal 6 days of creation. I also do not see a conflict between scientific consensus on evolution and my personal Christian faith.

 

A large part of that is because of the book Finding Darwin's God, in which a biologist and devout Catholic Kenneth Miller describes in great detail the evidence for evolution and disproves scientific arguments for several creationist theories, but then also talks about how this proof of evidence is not only compatible with his Catholic faith, but also enhances it.

 

I also can't help but notice the parallels between this conflict and hundreds of years ago when Galileo was excommunicated from the Catholic Church because he proved that the Earth went around the Sun. It was believed that because there are passages of the Bible that could be interpreted as meaning the Sun goes around the Earth, it must mean that the science is wrong. Nowadays, you will be hard pressed to find a Christian who believes that the Sun goes around the Earth, much less that it is in conflict with faith.

 

Today we see the same sort of religion vs. science argument that happened during Galileo's time. Is it possible that in hundreds of years, people will see faith and evolution as compatible the same way that we do with the Earth going around the Sun?

 

Galileo was excommunicated by his own people for another reason, for showing that Jupiter had 4 bodies orbiting it that were not visible until he looked through his own telescope that he proved was a reliable data-taking device for science (and not just for Arabian entertainment).  You are thinking of Copernicus as credited for a heliocentric universe (although it depends on the frame of reference, and that the universe is understood to be much much bigger now, heh).  Other than that, I appreciate yet one more (as well as the other posters) fellow science-friendly christian with some thoughtful points that have basis in fact.  Thanks for steppin' up and sharing.  It is meaningful and appreciated.  There are plenty of folks in the mainstream church who have cheerleaders for literal creationism.  I just wanted us to cheer for each other, and that written, with factual premise.  Though we scientists don't get everything right, peer review between us corrects this very quickly.  Hell, it would benefit the world to know how much more violently peer review can throw out dubius results.  The world, ironically is kinder about bad results but expectedly worse with good results than scientists are.

 

Galileo's church buddies turned on him because the church thought it had the right to be the sole authority on celestial matters because it wanted to declare better than anyone what an accurate date of Easter was.  Unfortunately, the problem was that science takes nothing on authority, and they missed a huge opportunity for one of their own people to enhance what they already knew about the heavens.

 

It was nothing more than PRIDE that caused the church to excommunicate, because it didn't want to have to say: "SORRY, we were wrong about the heavens."  They should have just declared: "People! God has revealed MORE about His Great Universe to us today!  And, He Shared it with one of our OWN!  Glory to God in the Highest!"  They wanted to believe anything that was divinely inspired (like they thought heavenly knowledge was) could not be improved.  How naive.  Moses didn't have ANY bible to refer to, yet he kept on with God's Work.  Neither did many after him described in the bible too.  This means that the Scriptures were improved over time.  The same can be said for science.  I better include though, that science isn't even in the bible, so I don't even know where the conflict is coming from, and that so passionately defended to the letter when it is never written about in the first place...

 

Today we DO accept a heliocentric force pulling planets around the sun.  No matter what scripture is cited on the issue, no one is dumb enough anymore to interpret it incorrectly.  My point is, a few of us actually do know that the universe is at least 13.7 BILLION* years old, and the earth is at most 4.55 BILLION* years old.  When nuclear power becomes mainstream and ubiquitous in our future cultures, no one could afford being dumb enough to deny the half-life of uranium-238 (not just an extremely irrelevant carbon-14) just like as in the case of the accepted dominant heliocentric gravitational force in the solar system.  You are absolutely right that the same thing will happen with cosmic timescales just as it did with heliocentric interpretations.  MY BEEF on the issue, is that it delays the inevitable progress we WILL MAKE ANYWAY in a world that is dominated by scientific advancement.  AND FURTHERMORE, in the end, bible readers will stop interpreting the bible incorrectly in the future on this issue, just as in many issues passed !!!  I don't see a need to be so ostracized from the mainstream church for knowing better.  I also don't see the need to make finding a wife so meaninglessly difficult when I need both a science and god-fearing wife.  Unfortunately, no one seems to return the favor from womankind that is available for marriage.  So far, I have only seen MEN reply that they are not literal creationists.  I need a woman who can do the same, please.  How about it ladies; where are you?

 

People are perfectly free to believe in what might be contained in the scriptures. Just interpret it correctly for crissakes.  Oh, and for the love of God, most of the time I hear about people complaining about scientific results, they DON'T EVEN GET THEM RIGHT!!!  I heard from this guy, or that guy, OMG!!!  That's STILL authority.  Science is NOT about authority, it is about inquiry.  The problem is that most people are willing to believe total strangers they will never meet that complain about a science they don't even understand in favor of a real scientist like ME who they know better.  That's just insulting. The worst part is, I follow Christ at the SAME TIME!!!  WOW, that's supposed to be a double BONUS!!!  Why has it become a double PENALTY???

 

I sympathize with Galileo.  At least I am not under house arrest or getting my head chopped off tomorrow.  My only penalty is waiting far too long to find a woman who can think critically about this stuff to get the RIGHT ANSWERS, not just believe whatever she wants.  I put my life on hold for the Christ, that means I forfeit even my BELIEFS for Him too.  I might have the right in the United States to believe whatever I want, but I FORFEIT my life for what GOD WANTS.  That includes my beliefs.  Hell, in the United States, I am perfectly free to commit adultery, really.  However, I choose to wait for marriage because I forfeit my life to Jesus...

 

I know what I will do next.  In addition to the shout-out for ladies in-particular, I will just cash in on vindication when I go to meet Jesus.  I will probably have many long evenings over wine with Galileo and other science christians who went through the same thing in a great eternity with a God that inspired all of us to do a good job in the LABORatory (yes, we scientists work hard; it would be nice to get a "thank you" instead of a bunch of religious complaints)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>< I don't really want to read another article. At least give me one that's entertaining! Hahaha. All I'm saying is, if scientists are generally claiming millions of years, then we have to admit they're going to be wrong about a lot of other things too. For instance, fossil fuels don't necessarily come from primarily dinosaurs, rather old fish and other dead animals. But they tell us it's from million year old dinosaurs. There's a lot of things most scientists think are true that simply are not, because they are blinded by the fact that God is here in present form and all they are seeing is the 2D world around us and need a "faith to dig into" to make them feel secure. Even some creation believing scientists like my uncle think the earth is millions of years old. I just don't see the purpose of all that. Why would God let the earth sit here for years? It doesn't make any sense.

 

-"if scientists are generally claiming millions of years, then we have to admit they're going to be wrong about a lot of other things too." Actually it's billions. But why do you say that means they're wrong? Have you studied the science behind the conclusions of an old earth and universe? You brought up carbon dating but that's just one of many dating methods and, like Steadfast said, can only accurately be used for relatively young objects.

 

-I've never heard a scientist or teacher say that fossil fuels come primarily from dinosaurs. Fossil fuels come from pretty much any organic material under the right conditions, and any scientist would say so. On the U.S. Dept. of Energy's website the section on fossil fuels literally starts with, "Contrary to what many people believe, fossil fuels are not the remains of dead dinosaurs."

 

-Have you ever had an in-depth discussion with your uncle about why he believes in an old universe? What I wouldn't give to have an actual scientist in my family..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Galileo was excommunicated by his own people for another reason, for showing that Jupiter had 4 bodies orbiting it that were not visible until he looked through his own telescope that he proved was a reliable data-taking device for science (and not just for Arabian entertainment).  You are thinking of Copernicus as credited for a heliocentric universe (although it depends on the frame of reference, and that the universe is understood to be much much bigger now, heh).  Other than that, I appreciate yet one more (as well as the other posters) fellow science-friendly christian with some thoughtful points that have basis in fact.  Thanks for steppin' up and sharing.  It is meaningful and appreciated.  There are plenty of folks in the mainstream church who have cheerleaders for literal creationism.  I just wanted us to cheer for each other, and that written, with factual premise.  Though we scientists don't get everything right, peer review between us corrects this very quickly.  Hell, it would benefit the world to know how much more violently peer review can throw out dubius results.  The world, ironically is kinder about bad results but expectedly worse with good results than scientists are.

 

Galileo's church buddies turned on him because the church thought it had the right to be the sole authority on celestial matters because it wanted to declare better than anyone what an accurate date of Easter was.  Unfortunately, the problem was that science takes nothing on authority, and they missed a huge opportunity for one of their own people to enhance what they already knew about the heavens.

 

It was nothing more than PRIDE that caused the church to excommunicate, because it didn't want to have to say: "SORRY, we were wrong about the heavens."  They should have just declared: "People! God has revealed MORE about His Great Universe to us today!  And, He Shared it with one of our OWN!  Glory to God in the Highest!"  They wanted to believe anything that was divinely inspired (like they thought heavenly knowledge was) could not be improved.  How naive.  Moses didn't have ANY bible to refer to, yet he kept on with God's Work.  Neither did many after him described in the bible too.  This means that the Scriptures were improved over time.  The same can be said for science.  I better include though, that science isn't even in the bible, so I don't even know where the conflict is coming from, and that so passionately defended to the letter when it is never written about in the first place...

 

Today we DO accept a heliocentric force pulling planets around the sun.  No matter what scripture is cited on the issue, no one is dumb enough anymore to interpret it incorrectly.  My point is, a few of us actually do know that the universe is at least 13.7 BILLION* years old, and the earth is at most 4.55 BILLION* years old.  When nuclear power becomes mainstream and ubiquitous in our future cultures, no one could afford being dumb enough to deny the half-life of uranium-238 (not just an extremely irrelevant carbon-14) just like as in the case of the accepted dominant heliocentric gravitational force in the solar system.  You are absolutely right that the same thing will happen with cosmic timescales just as it did with heliocentric interpretations.  MY BEEF on the issue, is that it delays the inevitable progress we WILL MAKE ANYWAY in a world that is dominated by scientific advancement.  AND FURTHERMORE, in the end, bible readers will stop interpreting the bible incorrectly in the future on this issue, just as in many issues passed !!!  I don't see a need to be so ostracized from the mainstream church for knowing better.  I also don't see the need to make finding a wife so meaninglessly difficult when I need both a science and god-fearing wife.  Unfortunately, no one seems to return the favor from womankind that is available for marriage.  So far, I have only seen MEN reply that they are not literal creationists.  I need a woman who can do the same, please.  How about it ladies; where are you?

 

People are perfectly free to believe in what might be contained in the scriptures. Just interpret it correctly for crissakes.  Oh, and for the love of God, most of the time I hear about people complaining about scientific results, they DON'T EVEN GET THEM RIGHT!!!  I heard from this guy, or that guy, OMG!!!  That's STILL authority.  Science is NOT about authority, it is about inquiry.  The problem is that most people are willing to believe total strangers they will never meet that complain about a science they don't even understand in favor of a real scientist like ME who they know better.  That's just insulting. The worst part is, I follow Christ at the SAME TIME!!!  WOW, that's supposed to be a double BONUS!!!  Why has it become a double PENALTY???

 

I sympathize with Galileo.  At least I am not under house arrest or getting my head chopped off tomorrow.  My only penalty is waiting far too long to find a woman who can think critically about this stuff to get the RIGHT ANSWERS, not just believe whatever she wants.  I put my life on hold for the Christ, that means I forfeit even my BELIEFS for Him too.  I might have the right in the United States to believe whatever I want, but I FORFEIT my life for what GOD WANTS.  That includes my beliefs.  Hell, in the United States, I am perfectly free to commit adultery, really.  However, I choose to wait for marriage because I forfeit my life to Jesus...

 

I know what I will do next.  In addition to the shout-out for ladies in-particular, I will just cash in on vindication when I go to meet Jesus.  I will probably have many long evenings over wine with Galileo and other science christians who went through the same thing in a great eternity with a God that inspired all of us to do a good job in the LABORatory (yes, we scientists work hard; it would be nice to get a "thank you" instead of a bunch of religious complaints)...

Right but as Christians, shouldn't our goal be a unified front? Shouldn't we all be trying to come together to help one another? To compare notes and faith-inspiring messages and have our aim be at the truth? It just seems like you're trying to ostracize everyone instead of stand on level ground (even if they aren't of the same viewpoint) when I think we should be having common ground to try to fuse bridges together like with this discussion for instance to help one another SO THAT if I am wrong or if you are wrong, at least our end goal is truth.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right but as Christians, shouldn't our goal be a unified front? Shouldn't we all be trying to come together to help one another? To compare notes and faith-inspiring messages and have our aim be at the truth? It just seems like you're trying to ostracize everyone instead of stand on level ground (even if they aren't of the same viewpoint) when I think we should be having common ground to try to fuse bridges together like with this discussion for instance to help one another SO THAT if I am wrong or if you are wrong, at least our end goal is truth.

 

The right answers are not up for elections or votes.  The right answers are not a matter of opinion.  If we should unite, it should be over the right answers.  The discussion so many biblicans want to have is nothing more than a patient wait for us to let you figure it out on your own.  We really are trying to tell you.  If people are united on the wrong answers, then some demographic is inevitably going to be left out or hurt.  Stop doing that to your fellow intellectuals in the church by learning to validate their contributions to improving it.  Take the examples from Jesus' Time with us in the gospels.  He met with people who were left out of the temple because the temple refused to accomodate them.  We intellectuals are the new left out people, yet we make the very contributions that make life easier in the world.  The most unification happens when people not only accept the right answers, but understand why they are correct.  This is where the intellectual can help the church the most...

 

I can put to the test whether or not you are sincere about actually having a discussion that gets people united for the right reasons and the right answers.  Matthew commented on some of your responses that weren't correct.  He was right about every single point he mentioned.  I hinted at it in my post, but I didn't call you out.  I simply placed stars on the corrections.  The test question is: "Has anything Matthew corrected you on caused you to change your mind about how you view the universe?"

 

If you can tell me "yes," then I will know you are sincere about having an "honest discussion."  An honest discussion leaves open the possibility that you mind will be changed even if you don't like it in the presence of new information you gather.  Even if you say "No," because you don't understand, that's still okay as long as you ask how we know that it is indeed correct.

 

However, as someone with a hell of a lot of teaching experience, I already know that if you have already decided to believe anything you want to no matter what I teach you, I will be wasting my time.  There is no point if you have already made up your mind that scientists have no place in the church...

 

We scientists are the ones that have been ostrasized, honey.  There are simply too few of us to find sanctuary in the church.  We need reinforcements for people who aren't necessarily scientists.  A popularity contest is insufficient for fairness and accurate rigor.  Also, I think it would be useful for you to also explore the difference between pontification and debate.  I am not sure we are having the same conversation.  Pontification is a PROtest of opinion, and debate is a CONtest of fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Galileo was excommunicated by his own people [...]

 

Galileo's church buddies turned on him because the church thought it had the right to be the sole authority on celestial matters because it wanted to declare better than anyone what an accurate date of Easter was.  Unfortunately, the problem was that science takes nothing on authority, and they missed a huge opportunity for one of their own people to enhance what they already knew about the heavens.

 

It was nothing more than PRIDE that caused the church to excommunicate, because it didn't want to have to say: "SORRY, we were wrong about the heavens."  They should have just declared: "People! God has revealed MORE about His Great Universe to us today!  And, He Shared it with one of our OWN!  Glory to God in the Highest!"  They wanted to believe anything that was divinely inspired (like they thought heavenly knowledge was) could not be improved.  How naive.  Moses didn't have ANY bible to refer to, yet he kept on with God's Work.  Neither did many after him described in the bible too.  This means that the Scriptures were improved over time.  The same can be said for science.  I better include though, that science isn't even in the bible, so I don't even know where the conflict is coming from, and that so passionately defended to the letter when it is never written about in the first place...

 

Dude, the Church didn't excommunicate Galileo because they wanted to be "the sole source of authority on celestial matters". In fact the Church didn't excommunicate Galileo at all.

 

Copernicus and Kepler both wrote about the heliocentric solar system before Galileo did, and they were both well-received by the Church (Copernicus even dedicated his book De Revolutionibus orbium coelestium to Pope Paul III with his permission).

 

Galileo got in trouble because he couldn't prove his theory as being anything more than a theory (he couldn't answer the strongest argument against it at the time about the parallax shifts in the stars), but he adamantly proclaimed it as being true. Even then, he'd almost certainly have been okay, but then he started insisting that he'd proved the Bible wasn't true, since it uses phrases like "the sun stood still", and so on. A lot of Bible scholars at the time took offence to that, and assumed, probably pretty fairly, "Well, he's claiming his theory is definitely true (even though he doesn't have evidence to back it all up) and that it proves the Bible is false. Sounds like he's trying to preach heresy." Pretty soon, the whole thing got controversial, with a lot of people believing that the heliocentric model of the solar system was heretical.

 

So Galileo met with Pope Paul V, who basically didn't want any part in the debate, and just passed the case on to the Holy Office, who questioned him and told him, "Look, your theory isn't backed up by science, or by the majority of scientists, and you're trying to tell people that your theory is definitely true and therefore that the Bible is false, so we're condemning your theory as heretical and you're not allowed to teach it any more." Galileo agreed to this, but then he asked if he would be allowed to carry on exploring and discussing the theory as long as he didn't try to claim it was definitely true, and was told that would be fine. Basically, the Church authorities ended up trying to distance themselves from taking an official position on his theory.

 

Things were going well until 1623, when Galileo went to the new Pope, Pope Urban VIII (an old friend) and asked his advice about getting a work published on his theory. Urban advised him, "Okay, well I really strongly advise you to present both sides of the argument and look at arguments for and against." Galileo did indeed decide to do just that - and he published it in the form of a dialogue between two characters, where the Pope's position was advocated by "Simplicio", a character who was portrayed as being pretty foolish. It's said that Urban was genuinely hurt by this portrayal, and felt like his friend had betrayed him. Galileo effectively lost one of his biggest supporters. He then made things worse by launching attacks on Jesuit astronomers, the Jesuits also being some of his biggest supporters.

 

He got brought before the Inquisition, who pointed out that he'd broken his agreement about not promoting his theory, and that they believed he was trying to promote heresy. Eventually, Galileo renounced his position on the theory. He wasn't excommunicated, he wasn't tortured, he was put under house arrest in a nice apartment and then with friends, he was allowed to publish another book, he was allowed to travel to a doctor when he got sick, he was buried in consecrated ground in a church, and he was actually a pretty faithful Catholic for the rest of his life. And even Pope John Paul II held an investigation into the Galileo case, and decided the Church hadn't treated Galileo fairly enough.

 

xxx

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-"if scientists are generally claiming millions of years, then we have to admit they're going to be wrong about a lot of other things too." Actually it's billions. But why do you say that means they're wrong? Have you studied the science behind the conclusions of an old earth and universe? You brought up carbon dating but that's just one of many dating methods and, like Steadfast said, can only accurately be used for relatively young objects.

-I've never heard a scientist or teacher say that fossil fuels come primarily from dinosaurs. Fossil fuels come from pretty much any organic material under the right conditions, and any scientist would say so. On the U.S. Dept. of Energy's website the section on fossil fuels literally starts with, "Contrary to what many people believe, fossil fuels are not the remains of dead dinosaurs."

-Have you ever had an in-depth discussion with your uncle about why he believes in an old universe? What I wouldn't give to have an actual scientist in my family..

1. I say they're wrong because the bible suggests a 6,000 year old earth assuming the earth and heavens were made in 6 days. I don't need to study any of that and use science to get an estimate when I have the bible telling me when it was made and other stories that follow. I put my faith in the bible and God, not in man or science.

2. Let's just forget the fossil fuels. Like you said it's "widely believed." But if we can agree they don't come primarily from dinosaurs then alright.

3. I did actually. I can give you his number. Ha, He sort of mauled me over on the phone and didnt really kindly discuss things. Hugh Ross convinced him but I guess it just goes to show even if you have biblical knowledge you can still be persuaded without a full heart and vigor for God. We were talking about all of this stuff you and I are talking about, and I invited him to my bible study because I told him I didn't have the knowledge he had so it's not really a "fair" discussion but that there might be someone at my church who could contribute better points than I could and me and everyone at the church would benefit and he declined to go. I looked up the doctor and pastor he got this idea from about an old world/universe and watched a debate between him (Hugh ross) and another guy (Jason Lisle) on creation it was crazy. It also led me to hit up our youth pastor and a couple other people on the topic. One point the pastor mentioned was with issues like this, they're terrible because people are just changing what the bible literally says and if people are going to misinterpret that, and they don't believe what the bible LITERALLY says it's like "Okay, then what are we talking about?" If we don't agree that what the bible says is law, then were not going to agree. If the bible isn't your foundation, you don't know what you're talking about.

It reminded me of talking to a Mormon (let's call him Hank). It's like for me, I can see this main path. But when I heard Hank talking about little things, it's like Satan is twisting small little facts. He leeches onto any small crevice he can get in and drills a screw in that's gets bigger and bigger as it goes in, and it's like he's taken you so far down this dark little detour and you don't see it and can't see your way out and I'm in the light on the main road like "Hello! Come back!!! Why are you scrounging around in the forest?!"

For example, I told Hank "Why do you guys add a book to the bible?" "Oh, the bible just means you can't add words to the bible within it's passages, not if it's a whole additional book." WHAT?!?!?! Are we reading the same bible?!?! It's just like with what everyone's saying here. God literally says the night ended, the day ended, after each event. Night according to the viewpoint from the earth. A 24 hour full day. My uncle was trying to tell me it's one of four meanings in Hebrew, (day, year, long period of time, etc) and in the discussion the Dr Lisle was saying every other phrasing where God speaks of days He uses the same phrasing as he does in the beginning (vs years or unknown times in other sections). But like I said, God is not the author of confusion, so why would he make it so confusing? My uncle said that in the beginning, Moses? Only had 1,000 words to write the bible. So you're telling me, God didn't predict and anticipate all that? And allllll this we're talking about? He made it clear so we would know, but like I said Satan deceives. If He is taking this away from you, beware of other things you might be unclear on as well and ask God for clarity and discernment. I'm sure God knew what He was doing when He wrote the book, he made creation and He knows people are going to misconstrue what He is trying to say, which again since God is not the author of confusion, He made it clear.

"God called the light 'day' and the darkness 'night.' And evening passed and morning came, marking the first day." (Genesis 1:5)

God says himself that He is not the author of confusion.

My uncle says he's read the bible 30+ times but I don't see him following every area of the bible. I don't see him fresh for God or innocent and heartfelt in his exchanges on Christ. There's no use going on this wild goose chase of going back and forth with facts I have to look up and refute and refute the person it could literally go on all day. My pastor also told me that in Hebrews, it mentions that death didn't come into the world until Adam and Eve ate the fruit, so that kills his argument about plants and fish being here for awhile. Haha

In any case, I would ask us all to pray about all these issues. I am learning new things because of this so it's good, I have pretty good info on the bible, but I am far out of my league on all the scientific topics. But that's just it. I don't need to be an expert to understand God. God makes it easy for us. God loves and cares about us and wants the best for us.

If we are all honest, NONE of us know what happened because we weren't there. Which is why we (hopefully) have faith enough to trust the bible at it's word. 7 days to model our week after.

On a side note, I'm actually a Chritsian more or less because of my uncle which is why all of this is so near and dear to my heart and is kind of a rude awakening. I always thought of my uncle as a strong Christian foundational man (and I know he is strong in other areas) but it made me realize I was putting too much faith in that whole thing and if God didn't use my uncle He could have easily used another means. So if nothing else, it helped me shift some of my faith over to God in a section I never realized it was tied in. My uncle became a Christian then my mom lived with him for awhile and she accepted The Lord and raise my household in church.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The right answers are not up for elections or votes. The right answers are not a matter of opinion. If we should unite, it should be over the right answers. The discussion so many biblicans want to have is nothing more than a patient wait for us to let you figure it out on your own. We really are trying to tell you. If people are united on the wrong answers, then some demographic is inevitably going to be left out or hurt. Stop doing that to your fellow intellectuals in the church by learning to validate their contributions to improving it. Take the examples from Jesus' Time with us in the gospels. He met with people who were left out of the temple because the temple refused to accomodate them. We intellectuals are the new left out people, yet we make the very contributions that make life easier in the world. The most unification happens when people not only accept the right answers, but understand why they are correct. This is where the intellectual can help the church the most...

I can put to the test whether or not you are sincere about actually having a discussion that gets people united for the right reasons and the right answers. Matthew commented on some of your responses that weren't correct. He was right about every single point he mentioned. I hinted at it in my post, but I didn't call you out. I simply placed stars on the corrections. The test question is: "Has anything Matthew corrected you on caused you to change your mind about how you view the universe?"

If you can tell me "yes," then I will know you are sincere about having an "honest discussion." An honest discussion leaves open the possibility that you mind will be changed even if you don't like it in the presence of new information you gather. Even if you say "No," because you don't understand, that's still okay as long as you ask how we know that it is indeed correct.

However, as someone with a hell of a lot of teaching experience, I already know that if you have already decided to believe anything you want to no matter what I teach you, I will be wasting my time. There is no point if you have already made up your mind that scientists have no place in the church...

We scientists are the ones that have been ostrasized, honey. There are simply too few of us to find sanctuary in the church. We need reinforcements for people who aren't necessarily scientists. A popularity contest is insufficient for fairness and accurate rigor. Also, I think it would be useful for you to also explore the difference between pontification and debate. I am not sure we are having the same conversation. Pontification is a PROtest of opinion, and debate is a CONtest of fact.

But you do have to admit that science is largely secular, and that it's possible the mainstream is crushing you guys as Christians and "pushing" you to believe what they as scientists believe in as a faith. I love science I believe a lot of it but some of the things need to be put in check.

I replied to Matthew. He didn't really have any points to discuss. I believe in the bible. If were not going to talk about that then what more is there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God says himself that He is not the author of confusion.

 

It would seem to me to be the ultimate in confusing for a deity to set up the world in 6 days 6,000 years ago, and then create tons of evidence indicating that it actually happened over billions of years (with modern humans only being present for the last 100,000 or so). 

 

Scientists don't base their work on faith. They base it on the scientific method. In my experience with scientists, they don't feel a need to have a "faith to dig into to make them feel secure" as you said, but rather they thrive on collecting new facts and coming up with new ideas, while marveling at how much we still need to learn. Which probably has something to do with why scientists are so irreligious as a whole...I feel like it's religion, not science, that claims to have a faith that will give you all the answers.

 

If you don't want to study science, and prefer to accept the Bible as absolute truth, then that is your choice. Personally, I've read and studied the Bible. To me, it was just a book of stories. That isn't intended as a diss on your personal faith, it's just the truth of how I perceive it. And there's just nothing that could make me leave behind mountains of scientific facts, studies, theories, for one book of stories.

 

It seems unlikely that anyone's mind is going to be changed here.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am afraid I contributed to getting completely off-topic for yet a second time by indulging in the comments of others that don't support the original intention.  Here is the original intention again:

 

Please introduce yourself here if you are a christian who does NOT believe in a literal 6-days creation.

 

No more flooding with replies "if scientists only read more more thing I write, they would believe a literal 6 days with us."  That's enough.  You have plenty of that in congregations across the United States.  No more.  I can't afford to have this thread flood the potential responses I might get from the people I am looking for.

 

I am really just looking for "my people."  They are science-friendly folks who don't believe in a literal 6 days of creation who also love Jesus very much.  I would like to know specifically how many WOMEN are compatible with this point-of-view, because I will receive the greatest support as a waiter that way.  If, in fact, the only waiters I can find that love Jesus so far are mostly congregated on this site.  While that is great support for friendship, it is not enough support for hope that marriage will ever be a reality for me.  I need someone who understands what Jesus Has Done for me as a scientist, otherwise I am not really getting the true support that I need here.

 

The real support I need here is knowing that I am not waiting forever.  If all women who are waiting for marriage also exclusively believe in a literal 6-days of creation, I will never be married.  It is as simple as that.  That means, I am wasting my time looking for support on the site.  I need the hope that women exist as both science-friendly and god-fearing at the same time.  The scarcity of this pool of women is the single greatest contributor to me waiting for marriage this long into my life.

 

Now that I've gone out-on-a-limb enough, you will know exactly how to hit me where it hurts.  So, I will leave my wide, brightly-colored target out as an option for people to fire upon it.  In doing so, I will use it as a test to see if people are truly interested in supporting my decision to wait while holding out for a wife who truly understands how to do both science and faith at once.  If I find that people fire upon it, then I will know that it is time to find support elsewhere.

 

Now that I have written all this, you know why it loops back to waiting for marriage.  It is because I want to know if I am really waiting for nothing.  While there is nothing wrong with people unable to handle science and religion at the same time, I find that a wife requires a little more compatibility.

 

My new quickly-budding career has me able to chat with people about faith in Jesus even if they don't believe in Him.  I will be able to receive more support there outside the church if I cannot find anyone within it.  This isn't necessarily bad, I will be sharing Jesus with people who want to know about Him.

 

My new quickly-budding career has me able to chat with people about faith in Jesus even if they don't believe in Him.  I will be able to receive more support there outside the church if I cannot find anyone within it.  This isn't necessarily bad, I will be sharing Jesus with people who want to know about Him.  However, the possibility of finding support here on the site might become futile if I get more support elsewhere.  I don't like wasting my time, so I like to know ahead-of-time what in life is worth pursuing further.

 

All I want to know is that the possibility exists that I can find a virgin wife that believes in Jesus, and yet understands His Plan for my life as a scientist.  I am not using it to "weed out" a wife exclusively on this site, per se.  I just want to know that people like this exist at all.  If they don't that will be useful to know too, and will give me closure in becoming celibate-for-life.  I cannot share my entire body with a science-anxious wife someday if the body that Jesus worked so hard to provide me with is very much a scientist's body...

 

I hope my calmer reply is not taken as a dodge of most recent replies, and I hope my explanation and motivation for asking about this at all is now very clear.  There really was a point that related to waiting until marriage, and it is very personal and dear to my heart.  I risk vulnerability here because taking these emotional risk tests who my friends really are...

 

It seems unlikely that anyone's mind is going to be changed here.

 

Yup, absolutely right.  Dale Carnegie wrote that "When one is convinced against one's own will, one is of the same opinion still."  I forgot that.  I cannot solve any of this here.  I must be crazy; even Jesus couldn't convince the teachers of the law (His Own people) that He Will have always been the Messiah, so I don't know why I think I can do any better than He Can as a mere mortal, heh.  It takes me longer to figure these things out than most.  We went from a shout-out to visiting heliocentrism (an already solved problem we are needlessly re-living, and it will go on and on no matter what people write here if we are not careful).  Let's return to the shout-out for the search for non-literal creationists, or people who simply don't take creationism literally at all and yet still love Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My patience with the mainstream christian church is running thin.  I think everyone is entitled to finding people they care about without having to "lose their soul" in the process.  I shouldn't have to believe in a literal 6 days of creation to mingle with my fellow believers in Christ when He Has done so much work in preparing me to know better about how the world really got started.  As a physicist and a follower of the Christ, I find it is not even possible to even have the same conversation about these things with literal creationists, it is simply an exercise in how many people will expect me to discuss certain things on preconceived terms.  In order to have true scientific inquiry, one must be willing to change one's mind in the presence of new information when prompted.

 

Let me just spare the noise that I can already hear rumbling from 2000-year-old imminent unscientific ideas, and just cancel that stampede.  I want to ask a question in the face of new information I will present below.  I don't want a debate, because I think it will be literally mistaken for a pontification.  Therefore I will ask a question or a follow up with only a yes or no answer, and this will be treated as a poll.

 

The main question is: "Do you believe in a literal 6 days of creation?"

 

If the answer is "Yes," I invite you to read the following theological article below:

 

http://www.wisdomintorah.com/wp-content/uploads/Creation-as-Temple-Building-and-Work-as-Liturgy-in-Genesis-1-31.pdf

 

After reading the following theological article above, have you changed your mind?

 

Personally I find this very important, because I cannot find a single christian who has enough of a compatible point-of-view to have a meaningful conversation with about what God has done in my life.  As a fellow waiter-until-marriage, its already rare anough to find a lady that can follow Christ enough to maintain her celibacy before marriage.  Even more so, I cannot afford to find a lady who might have done so, only to have an incredibly disrespectful take on how the cosmos got started in total contradiction to everything we have observed in so mny different but yet compatible branches of the sciences.  I thought my expectations of christians had been reasonable, but I find I cannot compete with the religious stongholds of the mainstream christian church who cares about nothing more than deliberately holding sciences back just to authoritatively save face in the presence of new information...

 

Please!  There has GOT to be a christian out there that doesn't expect me to apologize for being a true physicist who loves Jesus.  This issue is dear to my heart, and is a huge reason why I have to remain celibate this long into my life.  I simply cannot find a respect for science and faith in Jesus sufficient enough in christian ladies.  Frankly, it is rather a waste-of-time for me to remain with the site if people refuse to understand how damaging literal creationism really is to me personally, and how damaging it is to the world.  It politically holds back education progress and has people now making decisions based on what they BELIEVE instead of what they KNOW.  Hell, why doesn't everyone just yell at Jesus for making me a physicist who shames your beloved pastor for getting everything wrong on these issues?

 

I guess this is just my last resort to probe for any understanding I can find.  This stuff has simply been going on too long into the 21st century for me to put up with it any longer if that's what the poll reveals.  I hope that there are some people who get it, but, if not, I must leave you in despair...

I absolutely don't believe in a literal 6day creation event for many reasons , one of them being that the bible itself doesn't say God created it all in 6 days . The word used in genesis that is translated to day in English is yom,and yom can mean either literal day or indefinite time period , so don't feel like ur alone brother ,there are many other to us that don't believe in a literal 6 days ;)

I believe that God left that open for us to find out , but our salvation isn't dependent on how you or the earth is anyways , it's all about it Christ

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I say they're wrong because the bible suggests a 6,000 year old earth assuming the earth and heavens were made in 6 days. I don't need to study any of that and use science to get an estimate when I have the bible telling me when it was made and other stories that follow. I put my faith in the bible and God, not in man or science.

2. Let's just forget the fossil fuels. Like you said it's "widely believed." But if we can agree they don't come primarily from dinosaurs then alright.

3. I did actually. I can give you his number. Ha, He sort of mauled me over on the phone and didnt really kindly discuss things. Hugh Ross convinced him but I guess it just goes to show even if you have biblical knowledge you can still be persuaded without a full heart and vigor for God. We were talking about all of this stuff you and I are talking about, and I invited him to my bible study because I told him I didn't have the knowledge he had so it's not really a "fair" discussion but that there might be someone at my church who could contribute better points than I could and me and everyone at the church would benefit and he declined to go. I looked up the doctor and pastor he got this idea from about an old world/universe and watched a debate between him (Hugh ross) and another guy (Jason Lisle) on creation it was crazy. It also led me to hit up our youth pastor and a couple other people on the topic. One point the pastor mentioned was with issues like this, they're terrible because people are just changing what the bible literally says and if people are going to misinterpret that, and they don't believe what the bible LITERALLY says it's like "Okay, then what are we talking about?" If we don't agree that what the bible says is law, then were not going to agree. If the bible isn't your foundation, you don't know what you're talking about.

It reminded me of talking to a Mormon (let's call him Hank). It's like for me, I can see this main path. But when I heard Hank talking about little things, it's like Satan is twisting small little facts. He leeches onto any small crevice he can get in and drills a screw in that's gets bigger and bigger as it goes in, and it's like he's taken you so far down this dark little detour and you don't see it and can't see your way out and I'm in the light on the main road like "Hello! Come back!!! Why are you scrounging around in the forest?!"

For example, I told Hank "Why do you guys add a book to the bible?" "Oh, the bible just means you can't add words to the bible within it's passages, not if it's a whole additional book." WHAT?!?!?! Are we reading the same bible?!?! It's just like with what everyone's saying here. God literally says the night ended, the day ended, after each event. Night according to the viewpoint from the earth. A 24 hour full day. My uncle was trying to tell me it's one of four meanings in Hebrew, (day, year, long period of time, etc) and in the discussion the Dr Lisle was saying every other phrasing where God speaks of days He uses the same phrasing as he does in the beginning (vs years or unknown times in other sections). But like I said, God is not the author of confusion, so why would he make it so confusing? My uncle said that in the beginning, Moses? Only had 1,000 words to write the bible. So you're telling me, God didn't predict and anticipate all that? And allllll this we're talking about? He made it clear so we would know, but like I said Satan deceives. If He is taking this away from you, beware of other things you might be unclear on as well and ask God for clarity and discernment. I'm sure God knew what He was doing when He wrote the book, he made creation and He knows people are going to misconstrue what He is trying to say, which again since God is not the author of confusion, He made it clear.

"God called the light 'day' and the darkness 'night.' And evening passed and morning came, marking the first day." (Genesis 1:5)

God says himself that He is not the author of confusion.

My uncle says he's read the bible 30+ times but I don't see him following every area of the bible. I don't see him fresh for God or innocent and heartfelt in his exchanges on Christ. There's no use going on this wild goose chase of going back and forth with facts I have to look up and refute and refute the person it could literally go on all day. My pastor also told me that in Hebrews, it mentions that death didn't come into the world until Adam and Eve ate the fruit, so that kills his argument about plants and fish being here for awhile. Haha

In any case, I would ask us all to pray about all these issues. I am learning new things because of this so it's good, I have pretty good info on the bible, but I am far out of my league on all the scientific topics. But that's just it. I don't need to be an expert to understand God. God makes it easy for us. God loves and cares about us and wants the best for us.

If we are all honest, NONE of us know what happened because we weren't there. Which is why we (hopefully) have faith enough to trust the bible at it's word. 7 days to model our week after.

On a side note, I'm actually a Chritsian more or less because of my uncle which is why all of this is so near and dear to my heart and is kind of a rude awakening. I always thought of my uncle as a strong Christian foundational man (and I know he is strong in other areas) but it made me realize I was putting too much faith in that whole thing and if God didn't use my uncle He could have easily used another means. So if nothing else, it helped me shift some of my faith over to God in a section I never realized it was tied in. My uncle became a Christian then my mom lived with him for awhile and she accepted The Lord and raise my household in church.

Lovely,actually the bible doesn't say a literal 6days , it says a literal 6days to n the English version of the bible , in the Hebrew version the word used for day yom can mean either a literal day or indefinite time period , so in actuality we are free to find Lois the evidence to wherever it will lead us.young earth creationism came about in the 18th century , the earliest Christian theologians argued about this issue for hundreds of years

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lovely,actually the bible doesn't say a literal 6days , it says a literal 6days to n the English version of the bible , in the Hebrew version the word used for day yom can mean either a literal day or indefinite time period , so in actuality we are free to find Lois the evidence to wherever it will lead us.young earth creationism came about in the 18th century , the earliest Christian theologians argued about this issue for hundreds of years

Its one of four meanings in Hebrew, (day, year, long period of time, etc) and in the discussion the Dr Lisle was saying every other phrasing where God speaks of days He uses the same phrasing as he does in the beginning (vs years or unknown times in other sections).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop flooding this thread with pontification, either FOR 6-days of creation or NOT.  It is cutting into the potential introductions from people who don't believe in the literal 6-days of creation.  The point is to MEET them, not to argue with them.

 

Go open another thread if you want to pontificate.  It has already been established that no one will change their minds, and the poll suggests that because the beliefs here are independent of the theological paper provided.  This means it is pointless.

 

The title of the thread is clear: Are there any christians out there that do not believe in a literal 6-days of creation?  I want to meet them.  If that's not you, don't flood the chat with unrelated stuff.  Go to your local congregation and agree with all the people you want there.  You won't change anything here...

 

Are there ANY MORE christians that don't believe in a literal 6-days of creation?  I would like to meet you...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its one of four meanings in Hebrew, (day, year, long period of time, etc) and in the discussion the Dr Lisle was saying every other phrasing where God speaks of days He uses the same phrasing as he does in the beginning (vs years or unknown times in other sections).

Let's say he does , that could also mean as doctor Hugh Ross has said that he could also be speaking of indefinite time periods , and science agrees perfectly with it .my god is the God of the universe and science is also part of his creation.god is also the God of science as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science if flawed, because man kind can never understand the phenomenon of God without first understanding him. The bible says that all of creation stands as witness to God's greatness. How can we expect for nature to reveal it's secrets without listening to what it's actually saying? Take carbon dating, for instance. Science says that the decay of carbon atoms can date an object (a fossil for instance), but why do we trust their interpretation? There is really no way to corroborate the statement, because we can't go  back in time to verify. We then base all other findings on the "irrefutable" fossil records, but science has a habit of coming back around and admitting that previous findings were incorrect but assuring the public that this time they've gotten it right. That being said, I believe that science serves as evidence of God's greatness, not as an opponent of it. It is only mankind's limited understanding that makes them cling to the tangible even though it proves the existence of the intangible. The scripture that says that a thousand years is as a day to God is prove of the shifting nature of time in regards to God. I don't necessarily take it as a verbatim description of God's timeline, but It reminds us that God is the master of time, not the other way around. In this instance, I don't necessarily believe that it took six of our earth days for God to make creation. Though he very well could have, I think that the bible paints a picture of a God who respects times and seasons, and wouldn't slap something together without taking time to craft the objects and their history together. Ultimately, I'm not sure it really matters to me.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is doomed.  I hope you guys are proud of yourselves.  No matter how many times I say that this thread was originally intended to find christians who don't believe in a literal 6-days, people still pontificate without end and revisit the same arguments over and over.  We are revisiting not only old problems we have already solved, we are revisiting old things we have already established in the thread alone.  I think I will open a new thread and hope that it isn't merged...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I promise GP I won't get tempted to get into debating it like I did now , sometimes I'm my own worst enemy , but u can count me in as an old earth creationist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a Christian, but I don't believe that creation was in 6 literal days.  But there is a lot of things I have my own view on, which makes it really hard for me to find a church I would feel comfortable in.  So I just imitate Jesus the best I can by showing love for others and treating them as I want to be treated.  No one has all the answers, and the main way to follow Christ is so love for others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I think the verse: "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." says it all. It basically tells us that God lives outside of time and that it is an irrelevant matter for Him.

 

I don't that one day has to mean 24 hours (that is something that we as humans have then turned it into) but a cycle of something. Now for us, this means the cycle of the sun rising and setting or lightness and darkness. But to God, who created the world in six 'days' this is just the cycle of Him creating the world. He created something, then moved one (cycle ends) and finished creating it, then moved on (another cycle ends) until six 'days' were over and He rested.

 

So no, I do not believe in a literal six days. 

 

P.S. I don't really have a problem with people who do believe in it if that's what they are led to believe. But I do think that there are some narrow-minded people out there who should maybe be a little bit more open to having their opinion changed. After all, the Bible is full of allegories and metaphors and parables that are not meant to be taken literally but to have some thought put into them instead and serve as a lesson. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think taking a lot of things in the bible literally would be borderline insanity

especially genesis 

 

 

the bible is a giant metaphor mixed with history in specific chapters which over the many years could have easily been mistranslated or even manipulated on purpose at this point

 

genesis is one of the most vague books in it, and so is revelations, the perfect setup for a curious human who needlessly longs for the answers of the beginning and the end , maybe that is what makes it so interesting

 

we don't even know who really wrote it

we are assuming Moses and even he wasn't there at the beginning , so he must have got his info from either God telling him or from past documents from his time

and we all should know by now how imperfect humans are (not the best at playing telephone for 5 minutes, nevermind over 1000s of years)

heck the bible itself has a reoccurring theme that humans are imperfect

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionprof/2014/11/the-bible-tldr-version.html    see here XD

 

time is also  a manmade concept, whose days are we going by?

a day on venus is 116 days and 18 hours on earth

a day could mean anything especially to an omnipotent being

 

we don't even know if we have all of the bible, there could be some book out there in the dirt still that completely revolutionizes the bible, at the same time there could be a book out there which completely destroys the bible

there could be a book next to genesis which clarifies everything, now wouldn't that be convenient?

 

there is way to many things to think about before ''going literal''

 

 

that being said, the bible was also WAY AHEAD of its time in science , which is the most interesting part to me

http://www.eternal-productions.org/101science.html

 

a lot of these are interpretation , but a lot of these are spot on

its really good food for thought

 

 

interpretation is also so huge of a difference

i mean just listen to this guys view of David and Goliath and now you have to think, oh man, if i was wrong on that how bad did i screw up with the rest of the bible

 

people who take the bible literally at face value are probably the same people who think satan is in charge of hell

and that nonsense is everywhere now

 

we need more knowledge and creativity and theories to grow more, just like any other theory in science

but the big bang/evolutionist theories hijacking the word ''science'' as their claims annoys me , because it is just as big a faith based religion full of holes as anything we come up with.  

 

            Theism  <-Science->  Athiesm

if anyone takes anything out of my rant, take this , Making your opinion ''Science'' is one of the most annoying things a person can do

 

 

also

GL OP, being a christian physicist will cause you to be conflicted with constantly by both sides

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now