Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Unacknowledged Accuracy of Genesis 1
jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 25 of 302 (352272)
09-25-2006 11:31 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by danny
09-25-2006 11:23 PM


Re: Religion and Truth and Dogma
There are SIMILARITIES between Genesis 1 and conventional wisdom on universal evolution.
Sorry, but that is a total pointless statement.
The errors in Genesis 1 are sufficient to show that it has no scientific basis at all.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by danny, posted 09-25-2006 11:23 PM danny has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 35 of 302 (352365)
09-26-2006 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by subbie
09-26-2006 7:51 AM


Re: Illogic in genesis.
You need to consider that the understanding of how we see, that light travels from source to object, then bounces back to the eye is a fairly recent discovery. As late as 300 BC Euclid still believed that vision worked by rays going from the eye to the object. This was in spite of his work on light in Optica where he accurately described the fact that light travels in a straight line and the law of reflection.
The connection between dark and light and the sun and moon really wasn't apparent to the writers of the period. Each item was separate and unique and they were not seen as part of a system.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by subbie, posted 09-26-2006 7:51 AM subbie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by MangyTiger, posted 09-26-2006 5:18 PM jar has not replied
 Message 40 by doctrbill, posted 09-27-2006 12:38 PM jar has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 52 of 302 (355896)
10-11-2006 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Nimrod
10-03-2006 2:29 AM


Re: LOL talk about being out of touch.
I have no idea what quotes can be mined showing that ancient people "were ignorant of sources of light" , but my suggestion is to simply reach out and touch basic reality.
The simple fact that they saw the moon as a source of light is sufficient to prove that they were ignorant of the source of light.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Nimrod, posted 10-03-2006 2:29 AM Nimrod has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 144 of 302 (408103)
06-30-2007 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by Gigawatts
06-30-2007 3:16 PM


Re: keeping things on track
Hi Giga and welcome.
The subject is the Creation Myth from Genesis 1 and that is simply wrong, false, refuted, incorrect, absurd and teaching stuff like that is to simply impose a Cult of Ignorance on our children.
Those who try to pretend that the Creation Myths in Genesis are literally true is, in the words of over 10,000 US Christian Clergy, "is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children."
If you truly believe the Bible is the Word of God, it is time to stop preaching the lies that are Biblical Creationism.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Gigawatts, posted 06-30-2007 3:16 PM Gigawatts has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by IamJoseph, posted 06-30-2007 11:28 PM jar has replied
 Message 166 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 7:22 AM jar has not replied
 Message 167 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 7:26 AM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 148 of 302 (408156)
06-30-2007 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by IamJoseph
06-30-2007 11:28 PM


Re: keeping things on track
All of Genesis 1 is myth. It is a poetic and allegorical attempt to explain relationships.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by IamJoseph, posted 06-30-2007 11:28 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by IamJoseph, posted 07-01-2007 12:25 AM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 150 of 302 (408165)
07-01-2007 12:29 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by IamJoseph
07-01-2007 12:25 AM


Re: keeping things on track
The calendar is not a myth, nor are the list of chronological species and the paleontological names sited therein.
Do any of you even read the Bible?
There is no calendar in Genesis 1. The order and nature of creation in Genesis 1 is incorrect, both physically and biologically.
Genesis 1 is simply myth.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by IamJoseph, posted 07-01-2007 12:25 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by IamJoseph, posted 07-01-2007 12:41 AM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 153 of 302 (408169)
07-01-2007 12:52 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by IamJoseph
07-01-2007 12:41 AM


The topic is Genesis 1.
The calendar is in Genesis, following after ch 1.
Even if true, it is irrelevant to the Genesis Creation Myth in Genesis 1.
The order of creation and/or the universe is correct and a most comprehensive listing.
Uhhhhhhh, No, actually. It is incorrect.
You cannot have an Earth before a sun. The moon does not provide light. The earth was never covered with water. Vegetation did not first appear on land. The first plants were neither seed bearing nor fruit. It is impossible for there have to have been vegetation before the sun.
I could keep on, but even just one of the items is enough to falsify the Creation story found in Genesis 1.
It is just a myth.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by IamJoseph, posted 07-01-2007 12:41 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by IamJoseph, posted 07-01-2007 1:03 AM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 179 of 302 (408231)
07-01-2007 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by IamJoseph
07-01-2007 1:03 AM


Re: The topic is Genesis 1.
You are practicing Theology by the "It is true if I can make up some excuse" method I see.
Sorry, that does not work here at EvC.
Too bad even for you they don't work reasonably or logically either.
The aspect of vegetation is a good point, but you are incorrect here. Genesis does not say vegetation grew, but that the earth was 'static' before luminosity ('Now nothing grew....then a mist appeared and the rains fell'/Gen).
Sorry but that is just another false statement.
Here is a link to Genesis 1 so that you and others can actually read it.
There is no mist. There are no rains. Day and Night are created before the Sun and moon. The Earth is created before the Sun and Moon.
Even if you want to play the silly "Luminosity" card, plants don't grow without the Luminosity and Genesis 1 has grass growing on Day three while the Sun (or the silly Luminosity gambit) is not until Day four.
Again, seed bearing plants and fruit were NOT the first plants and grass was actually a very late comer, one of the last type of plants to exist.
Genesis 1 is simply a Creation Myth.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by IamJoseph, posted 07-01-2007 1:03 AM IamJoseph has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 180 of 302 (408233)
07-01-2007 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by Gigawatts
07-01-2007 7:26 AM


Re: keeping things on track
Also, just out of curiosity, where does the following quote come from: "is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children." Over 10,000 US Christian Clergy said that?
From the Clergy Project.
If that is the case, then I would submit that they are not Christians. Those who would label themselves as Christians and only pick and choose what they'd like to literally believe from the Bible completely destroy the only foundations of their faith. I cannot base my personal religion on a book which I believe to be fiction. THAT is absurd.
Too bad because, as in the case of Genesis 1, the Bible is factually and provably wrong.
Also, you wrote: "If you truly believe the Bible is the Word of God, it is time to stop preaching the lies that are Biblical Creationism." - I'm sorry, but if I truly believe the Bible is the word of God (which I do), how could anything "Biblical" (from the Bible...word of God) be lies? If I accepted a religion where it's common knowledge that my one and only God lies on a regular basis, I'd be in trouble.
Because the Bible is NOT written by God, there is not even such a thing as "The Bible" but rather many different Canons.
These issues come up here regularly, and this thread is narrowly focused on just Genesis 1. But I am sure you can find many threads here dealing with the other issues.
The Facts are, Genesis 1 is simply a myth and while important from a theological perspective, it is not factually correct.
Genesis 1 is NOT about Creation except from the perspective of relationships.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 7:26 AM Gigawatts has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 2:26 PM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 182 of 302 (408270)
07-01-2007 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by Gigawatts
07-01-2007 2:26 PM


Re: keeping things on track
As for me, I will continue to accept the validity of Genesis 1 and it's literal translation long before I ever adopt a belief that something as infinitely complex as the universe we live in created itself out of nothing.
But no one says anything like that except the Biblical Creationists. The problem is that Genesis 1 is absolutely factually wrong.
Of course, I realize that just because you referenced something from the Clergy Project, doesn't mean that you accept what they believe.
Of course I accept what they say. It happens to be true.
I was under the impression that there is only one truth, something inherently concrete sans exceptions.
Again, there are lots of threads on just that subject here but this doesn't happen to be one. If you think that you can support some "one truth" then by all means propose a thread on it and let's see if you can support it.
I will still maintain, however, in this one chapter there is no room for the existence of macro-evolution as the "Christian Clergy" would have you believe from the link you provided.
Macro evolution is yet another subject, again one where there are many threads available for you to explore.
The subject here is whether or not Genesis 1 is accurate, and unfortunately, from a scientific or historical perspective, it is totally false.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 2:26 PM Gigawatts has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 2:46 PM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 186 of 302 (408279)
07-01-2007 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by Gigawatts
07-01-2007 2:46 PM


short side track
Did you mean to say that Biblical creationists are the only ones who claim macro-evolution is a belief that the universe created itself out of nothing? Am I just being too blunt with my description of the theory or is there something I'm missing? How would you describe it?
No, Biblical Creationists are the only ones that think something like the Universe came from nothing. Macro-evolution is just another case of the ignorance of Biblical Creationists about what the Theory of Evolution actually says. It's off topic here but it is really not a major issue.
Remember, ignorance is not a serious fault if you do something about it. The folk I linked you too, myself and many other folk, are every much a serious Christians, serious about Christianity, serious about our belief in GOD and Jesus as anyone else.
The problem with Genesis 1 is that it gets major factors wrong. It is important theologically but not historically or factually.
The important question is to ask why the redactors that put the Pentateuch together included two mutually exclusive tales. They were intelligent, yet they included these contradictory tales, and went even further and placed the younger of the two tales before the older one.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 2:46 PM Gigawatts has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 3:34 PM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 189 of 302 (408287)
07-01-2007 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Gigawatts
07-01-2007 3:34 PM


Re: short side track
I am a Creationist as is every Christian. But right now, the Big Bang as it is called (incorrectly by the way) is the best explanation for what is observed. The various creation tales found in Genesis are factually wrong. It jess ain't how it happened.
I do believe that all we learn from Science including the study of Abiogenesis (the origin of life), Evolution (the origin of species) and Cosmology (the study of the origins of the Universe) are the "How GOD did it" answers.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 3:34 PM Gigawatts has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 4:11 PM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 192 of 302 (408309)
07-01-2007 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Gigawatts
07-01-2007 4:11 PM


Back towards Genesis 1.
I'm just not sold on the falsehood of Genesis.
That's fine, but it is also irrelevant. The creation myths in Genesis are wrong and the Genesis 1 Creation myth is absolutely factually wrong.
For example, it has plants appearing on land first (false) and grasses as one of the first plants (false by a long, long, long period) and fruits and seeded plants as the first plants (again totally false).
Obviously, none of us were there at the beginning of time (be that 6000 years or billions of years ago), but as far as I can tell the modern science that is supposed to disprove Genesis 1 has too many holes in it.
Again, totally irrelevant. The fact is that we can determine things that happened in the past even though we were not witnesses. We can test different theories against the evidence and see which stand up to examination. The fact is that Science changes as we learn more, while the Biblical Creation Myths are as wrong today as they were yesterday, as they were 3000 years ago. They will never be right.
We can test them just as we do the Theory of Evolution (as one example) and they simply do not stand up to examination.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Gigawatts, posted 07-01-2007 4:11 PM Gigawatts has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 204 of 302 (408395)
07-02-2007 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 197 by IamJoseph
07-02-2007 1:33 AM


because the question posed was really stupid
Now that's strange. If one asks what is the most pivotal difference between darwin's and genesis' versions of evolution, I could'nt think of anything more relevent that cross-specie and within-specie grads, respectively. I'd be hard pressed to come up with a Q which better aligns with this thread's heading too!
Why not cut to the chase scene - and deal with the Q posed - that would assist in which is more accurate - darwin or genesis?
The problem was that it was a really stupid question that also showed just how ignorant you are about what the Theory of Evolution says. It was also one of those total strawmen that Biblical Creations love to make.
No one but Biblical Creationists claims that a critter of one species gives birth to a critter of another species. In addition, with a few well known exceptions, most DNA transfer is within species.
But none of that has anything to do with the Creation Myth found in Genesis 1.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by IamJoseph, posted 07-02-2007 1:33 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by IamJoseph, posted 07-02-2007 9:52 PM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 395 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 211 of 302 (408461)
07-02-2007 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by IamJoseph
07-02-2007 9:52 PM


Re: because the question posed was really stupid
This is not how the world at large reads it, and they are correct.
I cannot help others ignorance.
Except that genesis specifically forbids cross-specie, and also gives the reason why it is superflous with reproduction, adaptation and hereditary data (dna) transfer!
Are you saying that "kind" as found in Genesis 1 is the same as "Species"?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by IamJoseph, posted 07-02-2007 9:52 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by IamJoseph, posted 07-02-2007 11:03 PM jar has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024