Arjuous Posted July 25, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 90 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/22/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted July 25, 2006 (edited) Attitude is something I have plenty of these days..... to my discredit.... Anyway, a question for you: A while ago in this thread, I gave my opinion of what I thought could have been possible concerning the earth's history before the events of the Biblical creation. It's not so much a part of a gap theory (which usually entertain the possibility of stuff happening in between the "days" recorded in Gen 1), but more like a "There could have been lots of stuff going on in the world for many years (to include the era of the dinosaurs) and suddenly it was all but wiped out in an event or series of events which left the world quite 'void' and 'without form' and then some space of time elapsed before God chose to re-establish the world with mankind as it's keeper for His own purposes and that's where the Bible picks up from" theory. Or hypothesis, as the case may be. I have absolutely no evidence of why I think this could be the case, but it's just something I am open to and willing to entertain. Ever read any papers on the matter? I'm having a tough time picking up something like that on Google due to the length of my theory's title. t. Good Question, The problem is that before you begin analyzing this, you must address whether the bible is literal from the mouth of the Christian God, as fundamentalist Christians believe, or if it is, like many others of the time, allegorical religious literature, as historians believe. But even if we assume another premise, that it is a 'message' from God that must be somehow 'known in your heart' (which is purely subjective) to understand it, that would accept the premise that, more than likely, God set in motion the 'natural' forces of the universe and the earth, and a 'day' is a subjective term. I think those that wish to reasonably debate this would agree with that premise, by which I mean day doesn't really mean 24 hours and, therefor, the bible is not literal. A further problem exists when you examine what the existence of dinosaurs, which is fact, does when it is imposed onto the Christian idea. If dinosaurs existed, the 5th day is actually hundreds of millions of years long. This is from the New International Version, which is a fairly accurate translation, in Genesis 1:20, on the 5th day, the first mention of animals is used. "And God said, 'Let the water teem with living creatures and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky.'" Aside from the obvious notion that it is very difficult to explain how flying animals evolved before land animals (which they didn't), this places the creation of sea creatures somewhere around 600 million years ago with the appearance of jellyfish, sponges, and other mulicellular organisms. The emergence of land animals, which Genesis places on the 6th day, ("And the Lord said, 'Let the land produce living creatures according to their kind'") can be placed around 450 million years ago with Myriapoda, one of the first of the arthropods to move onto land. Man, who was created on the 6th day, doesn't get created until around 27 thousand years ago with the emergence of the genus Homo. That makes the 6th day equivalent to approximately 450,027,000.00 years long, but the 5th day only approximately 150 million years long. What is most important to recognize is that the length of the 'days' as God wrote them differs greatly, by literally billions of years in some cases. Even more important than that, is the fact of 4 (some massive) extinctions all on the 5th day, which is not spoken of at all in the bible. In fact, it asserts the opposite. At the end of the fifth day but before the creation of land animals (Genesis 1:25 [And it was so, "God made the wild animals according to their kinds, livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that more along the ground to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.") There's no mention of any dissatisfaction, or motive to start over again. And even if you grant him the benefit of the doubt, that he set the universe in motion and let the mass extinctions happen as they may, why not describe it this way? why the charade? Did or does God think we won't understand? Of course the real answer is that people who had no idea of these occurences wrote the bible, not God, and THAT is why it isn't in there. Edited July 25, 2006 by Arjuous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Posted July 25, 2006 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 25 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 583 Content Per Day: 0.09 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/07/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/14/1962 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Ever read any papers on the matter? I'm having a tough time picking up something like that on Google due to the length of my theory's title. Here's two: http://www.creationdays.dk/withoutformandvoid/1.html http://www.kjvbible.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted July 25, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 276 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 7,474 Content Per Day: 0.96 Reputation: 51 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/25/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/31/1966 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Thanks for the answers and links, everyone. It's going to take a while to properly digest some of the links. Plus, I just got home and I'm a little bloated from supper- so, a nap is the first priority of the night...... I'll be back to comment on some of the stuff. The only real point to insert right now is that I'm not really a "Gap Guy" in the common sense of the phrase. In other words, I think the 6 days mentioned in Genesis are literal, 24 hour days and not with any millions or billions of years in between what the Bible calls "days". That said, I entertain the idea that there was a rich history in the life on earth before those 6 days. I have no idea how old the earth is, or how long it sat desolate, void, and formless after an earlier period of life (animals? fish? reptiles? weird looking humanoids?) or what caused the destruction to make it void for what ever length of time before God came to the time of the 6 days of creation. I don't think rocks and trees and fossils and stuff were made to look old to fool us by God, nor do I believe that God will reveal any of these answers to us before the time of His choosing, mostly because it's not important enough to sway us one way or the other in our trust in Him. I believe that we have enough revealed to us through His Word to make an informed decision about Him and His plan for salvation. I simply find this stuff interesting and wonder if there is any evidence to support what I think could be plausible about life on earth before the literal 6 day creation as described in the Bible. In other words, there's no need to fight about what others may post here concerning the matter. Simply post what you think may be evidence, and I'll check it out, but please don't tear anyone down for what they may post if you don't agree with it. Or, you could always opt to go back to the original poster's topic and not let me hijack the thread in the first place.... Thanks! t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arjuous Posted July 26, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 90 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/22/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted July 26, 2006 Nowhere is it proven that evolution is FACT! It is theory only, and not proven in the least. Gravity is "only a theory". Educate yourself. Gravity is both a theory and a law, just like evolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted July 26, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted July 26, 2006 Nowhere is it proven that evolution is FACT! It is theory only, and not proven in the least. Gravity is "only a theory". Educate yourself. Gravity is both a theory and a law, just like evolution. Evolution is absolutely not a law! You are deluded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lnj Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 Nowhere is it proven that evolution is FACT! It is theory only, and not proven in the least. Gravity is "only a theory". Educate yourself. GRAVITY IS FACT. GOD MADE IT!!LNJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arjuous Posted July 26, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 90 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/22/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted July 26, 2006 Evolution is absolutely not a law! You are deluded. I'm afriad you're the delusional one, and I can prove it. Evolution is both a fact and a theory. First of all, what is a theory? A theory, in the scientific sense, is not a guess or a hypothesis. A hypothesis in science is more like an educated guess. A theory, however, is a conceptual framework that we use to make sense of conclusions and other observations that have already been made. A scientific theory requires a huge weight of evidence that already exists and has been accepted, scientifically, before it can be conceptualized. How can the theory of evolution be fact as well? When we speak of evolution as fact, we are not talking about the theoretical framework, but something else. Evolution actually means "change." When we speak of it scientifically, it means the 'change in allele frequency over time,' which is constantly occurring, and is indisputable. Look it up. Evolution is no more able to be disputed than the fact of gravity, the fact of human disease, the fact of chemical reactions taking place... And it is no different than the other established scientific theories of gravitational theory in physics, germ theory also in biology, and atopic theory in physics and chemistry. Just as these are accepted by science and the public. Evolution is accepted by science, and should be accepted by the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floatingaxe Posted July 26, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 62 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 9,613 Content Per Day: 1.45 Reputation: 656 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/11/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1952 Share Posted July 26, 2006 Excuse me, but what is science? To me, science is the observable hand of God! He created everything and we observe it and study it, and we call it science! When one worships science and gives it godlike status, then that is delusional! God laughs! So do I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lnj Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 Are you actually asserting that people walked with dinosaurs? That is ABSOLUTELY LAUGHABLE. Arjuous, There a fossils of dinosaurs, evidence of these creatures having once lived. Where's the fossil evidence for the "missing" link? I'm still waiting.....LNJ I don't understand how it's relevant to man walking with dinosaurs, but if you're disputing evolution, you're disputing scientific law and theory. Evolution is fact. Arjuous, How can evolution be fact when evolutionists have not unearthed the "golden egg", the missing link between ape and man? If it's fact, I've never seen the evidence.....and don't dig up some tired old ape skull and claim it's a skull from ancient man. That joke has gotten old real fast. ....LNJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arjuous Posted July 26, 2006 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 90 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/22/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted July 26, 2006 Did you even read what I wrote? The ape skull wasn't required to prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts