Biblical Time keeping

[wingnut-]

Everyone remained a herbivore until after the flood, not the fall.  That information is incorrect.

 

 

Genesis 9  And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. ² The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. ³ Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. ⁴ Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. ⁵ Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man’s brother I will require the life of man.

[Proof]

Sigh..... Okay, I'm willing to let the dino part go.. That was just a side thought anyway....  Back on point....

[The_Patriot21]

problem with that line of logic, is its taking that verse completly out of context it is 2 peter 3:8-9. Peter wasn't even talking about the creation account. It is actually a simile, talking about something else entirely, and it doesn't actually mean that a day IS a thousand years to God. The point is the frailty of mortal man to God, not that a day is longer to God. It has absolutly nothing to do with the creation account.

 

If you look at the actual genesis account at the context, its very, very literal. First off, keep in mind that Genesis was written in hebrew. In hebrew, the hebrew word for day is Yom. Yom is used in the Bible and other hebrew text both literally, and figuretively (in abrahams day, would be a figurative useage) while every time the word yom was preceded by a number, it meant a literal, 24 hour day. This is never questioned anywhere in any hebrew writing, except for the creation account. Keep that in mind.

 

If that wasnt enough, the verses say "the evening and the morning were the first day" In ancient hebrew times, days wernt measured morning to evening, like today, but evening to morning. In hebrew writings, anytime the words "and the evening and the morning" were used, it was always used to mean a literal, 24 hour day. 

 

Now, if telling us twice in one verse wasnt enough to tell us it was a literal 24 hour day, God tells us a third time, in exodus 20:11/ For in 6 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. Now, the plural word for day in hebrew is yomin. Again, it can be used figuratively and literally in hebrew script, depending on context. Every time in ancient hebrew text where the word Yomin is preceded by a number, it is taken to mean literal, consecutive, 24 hour days. The only place this is ever questioned, is exodus 20:11. And then, you notice it finishes off the verse with the word yom again-preceded by a number.

 

Why are these words taken properly, in context everywhere but one spot? there is nothing in scripture, to suggest that they be taken figuratively. nothing at all. Nowhere. You cannot get millions of years, from scripture, its not in there. 

 

Some say Gods ways are above us, and we just don't understand scripture. While Gods ways are above ours-this is a false argument. Scripture was given to us for OUR benefit, not His. It was written to us. It makes sense that He would write it in a way that we can understand. So, let me ask you-if you were to read genesis, without any pre-conceived ideas about the age of the earth, what would your understanding be?

 

Keep in mind that God is perfect, all-powerful, capable of doing anything. Man, is by nature, flawed, imperfect, and wrong about a great many things. Since man is flawed, then naturally, mans science is capable of being flawed as well. The real question is, are we going to take mankinds ideas about science-which, by the very nature of human kind, is capable of being flawed, or are we going to take Gods ideas-which are impossible to be flawed.

[udx]

many carnivores eat mankind to. . .just to be technical. The entire problem, with getting evolution into the Bible is death. before the fall, everything was perfect-if it was not, it would not be classifed as "good" by God. The entire theory of evolution, evolves around death. If there was death before the fall, then how could it be good? the two theories are not capable of being intermixed.

Not true, Death is essential for ecological systems to function properly, and it is very good indeed. You would be running into a lot of problem if death and decay doesn't occur in nature. I believe death and the ecological cycle was created from the start, because God stop creating on 7th day, it would take an awful lot of creating to change everything to include the ecological cycle if it wasn't built in to start with. The whole notion of no death pre-fall only applies to mankind. All the verses talking about death entering the world through mankind's sin was talking about humans, and with the focus of spiritual death too.

[missmuffet]

 

I do not know and neither does anyone else unless you liked in that time.

God knows. And God told us. So we know. end of story.

 

In God's creation of time what did He say? Genesis 1:31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

 

End of story.

[The_Patriot21]

Thankyou bo, you just made my point. I do believe I explained that in a earlier post.

 

UDX, you are proving my point, you are  forcing mankinds knowledge into the Bible and it does not work, and you are in direct contradiction of scripture. 100%. Death is NEVER painted as being good in the Bible, nor was it part of Gods design. In fact, it was the punishment for eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil-Genesis 2:17 "but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die"

 

You can argue that its a spiritual death, and that part is right, but its also a physical death. Before the fall, death was not part of the ecosystem. It was not needed. Neither was entropy. Life was perfect, death is not perfect. To call death "good" is not only wrong, it directly contradicts Gods word-and is only an example of mankind trying to fit our own warped ideas into Gods perfect word.

[udx]

Thankyou bo, you just made my point. I do believe I explained that in a earlier post.

 

UDX, you are proving my point, you are  forcing mankinds knowledge into the Bible and it does not work, and you are in direct contradiction of scripture. 100%. Death is NEVER painted as being good in the Bible, nor was it part of Gods design. In fact, it was the punishment for eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil-Genesis 2:17 "but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die"

 

You can argue that its a spiritual death, and that part is right, but its also a physical death. Before the fall, death was not part of the ecosystem. It was not needed. Neither was entropy. Life was perfect, death is not perfect. To call death "good" is not only wrong, it directly contradicts Gods word-and is only an example of mankind trying to fit our own warped ideas into Gods perfect word.

Not really, no where it says that man were created immortal. There wouldn't be need for tree of life if man were immortal to start with and made to become mortal.

[The_Patriot21]

Thats a bit of a stretch. and I think you know it. If you wont take genesis 2 for evidence, how about Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned. Paul basically laid it out for you in black and white-before sin, there was no death. If thats not clear enough, Paul emphasizes it again in 1 corinthians 15:21-22 For since by man, came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in adam, all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

 

Death was not around before the fall, and as you can see, plainly, it is viewed as a bad thing-a bad thing that Christ came to save us from. That theme is repeated throughout the new testament, if death was a good thing, then there would be no need for Christ to save us from it. If you are going to argue long age of the earth is in the Bible-then argue it, but don't use this argument, because it is clearly in violation with scripture, and the very reason Christ died for us. If your only way of making millions of years and evolution fit with the Bible, is to contradict scripture, then I urge you to reconsider your view on science-because that is probably the worst argument I have heard yet.

[Kan]

 

 

Not really, no where it says that man were created immortal. There wouldn't be need for tree of life if man were immortal to start with and made to become mortal.

 

 

A person buys a new car and runs out of fuel, so they take it back to the dealer for a refund because it no longer works.

After solving the problem the dealer explained that if you fuel it up, it will run right across the country over a dozen times.

"I don't know about that" said the buyer, "Without fuel it is broken down, I want a car that doesn't break down if you don't fuel it."

"It's not breaking down at all" said the dealer, "You just have to fuel it."

[The_Patriot21]

I somehow fail to see the comparison. Jesus didn't die to refuel us, Jesus died to save us because we are broke.