Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Which religion's creation story should be taught?
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 186 of 331 (584138)
09-30-2010 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by bluescat48
08-08-2010 5:08 PM


Re: Banning religious symbols is freedom of religion?
Dear bluescat48,
Allowing something to sit on public display is not ‘making’ a law.
Sorry, please, try again,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by bluescat48, posted 08-08-2010 5:08 PM bluescat48 has not replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 190 of 331 (584165)
09-30-2010 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by jar
08-08-2010 5:15 PM


Teaching Creation myths!?
Dear Jar,
Although I agree with you that a course in Comparative religion or Sacred Studies should be part of a basic education. The Question was:
If we are to teach creation in public schools, which creation story should we teach? Do we teach Genesis? If so which version of Genesis? Do we teach the story of the Norse gods carving the world from the bones of giants? Or the Hindu belief that the world is God's dream? Heck, even Christians don't agree on a literal six-day creation less than 10'000 years ago or Genesis as metaphor for divinely inspired evolution...
I say evolution belongs in the science classroom and creation belongs in comparative religion...
{MexicanHotChocolate’s Message #1}
I believe what MexicanHotChocolate was asking is ‘should any of the creation stories/myths be specifically taught in science classes as scientifically plausible?’
Thank you for your interest,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by jar, posted 08-08-2010 5:15 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by hooah212002, posted 09-30-2010 5:10 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 194 by jar, posted 09-30-2010 5:56 PM JRTjr has not replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 192 of 331 (584176)
09-30-2010 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by hooah212002
08-10-2010 4:26 PM


Re: Banning religious symbols is freedom of religion?
Dear Hooah212002,
Thank you for your participation. I will try to remember to not use color when responding to you. You may also find it helpful to copy and past my posts to your favorite word processor to read it more clearly.
Hooah212002 writes:
Do you even know what atheism is?????? I'll tell you what it is NOT: a religion.
Atheism: noun
1. the doctrine or belief that there is no god.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Origin: 1580—90; < Gk the ( os ) godless + -ism
JRTjr writes:
Religion, according to ‘Dictionary.Com’ is:
2. A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3. The body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.
6. Something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
(Dictionary.com Unabridged. Based on the Random House Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2010.)
So, despite your unfounded assertions, according to Dictionary.com ‘Atheism’ is belief which is the vary definition of ‘religion’.
Thank you again for your input,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by hooah212002, posted 08-10-2010 4:26 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by hooah212002, posted 09-30-2010 5:34 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 197 by bluescat48, posted 10-01-2010 12:26 PM JRTjr has not replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 195 of 331 (584324)
10-01-2010 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 160 by bluescat48
08-10-2010 5:40 PM


The Universe(s) !?!?!?!?
Dear Bluescat48,
Bluescat48 writes:
what else is there besides the universe. By definition, universe is everything.
Universe:
—noun
1. the totality of known or supposed objects and phenomena throughout space; the cosmos; macrocosm.
(Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2010.)
n 1. astronomy the aggregate of all existing matter, energy, and space. (Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition 2009 William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 HarperCollins Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009)
Multi-verse:
n astronomy the aggregate of all existing matter, of which the universe is but a tiny fragment (Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition 2009 William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 HarperCollins Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009)
If you know anything about Quantum Scientific theory, you would know that Science now tells use that the four dimensions of what we call our ‘Universe’ is not all that there is.
Scientists are now theorizing that there may be many, if not an infinite number of, universes. {May I point out here the Bible states emphatically that there is something beyond this known universe.}
Thank you, again, for your input,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by bluescat48, posted 08-10-2010 5:40 PM bluescat48 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by Coragyps, posted 10-01-2010 11:41 AM JRTjr has not replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 198 of 331 (584352)
10-01-2010 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by jar
08-10-2010 6:11 PM


Atheism!?!?
Dear Jar,
Great to hear from you again.
Jar writes:
To claim that there is some "fervently held belief that this universe is all that is" or even "a belief that this universe is all that is" are in themselves simply misrepresentations of atheism.
First, they are simply word salad, strawman creations that have no meaning in reality and serve only as an attempt misdirect the audience attention while you try to palm the pea and change the subject.
Jar, you make me sound as if I am a master manipulator, capable of dazzling crowds, a magician of unparalleled power and prowess.
Thanks! ;-}
But; before my head gets to big, let me remind everyone of what I have stated in my posts before.
I am a High School dropout who has spent about ten years working security. I do not think I have managed to turn anyone who has responded to my post to my side of the argument so I must not be the great manipulator you claim me to be.
Also, let me point out here that I am not the one that has strayed from the main subject. I would love to get back to weather or not ‘Old Earth Creationism’ should be taught in science class; however, I am simply trying to give a reasonable response to the people whom have commented about what I have stated.
As for what Atheists believe or do not believe; I am only going by what they themselves have stated.
Example:
Richard Lewontin writes:
We {Atheists} have a prior commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover that materialism is absolute for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door. (I Don’t have enough Faith to be an Atheist,123. Quoted from Billions an Billions of Demons, The New York Review of Books, January 9, 1997, 31.) {emphasis mine}
So, if you want to stick to the main topic; that is fine with me.
Enjoy your input Jar,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by jar, posted 08-10-2010 6:11 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Theodoric, posted 10-01-2010 12:51 PM JRTjr has not replied
 Message 200 by jar, posted 10-01-2010 12:58 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 201 by Omnivorous, posted 10-01-2010 1:14 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 202 by bluegenes, posted 10-01-2010 1:33 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 203 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-01-2010 1:40 PM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 205 of 331 (584371)
10-01-2010 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Dr Adequate
08-10-2010 7:37 PM


The religion of Atheism !?!?!?
Dear Dr Adequate,
Dr Adequate writes:
for the purposes of the First Amendment atheism is indeed counted as a religion; which is why, for example, an atheist public school teacher would not be allowed teach students that there is no God, nor could a school board packed with atheists make it compulsory for all teachers so to teach.
Do you want to change that in the name of free exercise?
Thank you for, at least partially, acknowledging that Atheism is a religion.
However, your have two myths here:
First is the myth that the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America requires that all government entities be completely religiously neutral. I.E. they cannot express any religious opinions at all.
There is a difference between a government official stating. I do not believe in a god that created the universe and making it a law that only ‘Young Earth Creationism’ be taught in public schools.
The First Amendment does not stop a public official from stating his own religiously held belief nor does it allow the government to force one religiously held belief on everyone.
Again, freedom of religion, not from religion.
Secondly is the myth that atheism is not taught in public schools; it is, under the guise of science; Macro-Evolution has been disproved as a scientifically plausible explanation for the existence, and proliferation of life; however, it is still taught as if it were ‘Fact1’ in science classes. The only reason that it is taught as if it were a fact, is because the atheists can not stomach anything that may even suggest that there may be a god; and they have craftily framed their religiously held beliefs in the language and mystique of science.
As far as what should be taught in public schools; ‘Facts’ should be taught in science classes, ‘Comparative religions’ in Social Studies, Etc.
Thank you for your time and interest,
JRTjr
1. Fact:
—noun
1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact.
2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact.
3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.

(Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2010.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-10-2010 7:37 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Coragyps, posted 10-01-2010 2:12 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 207 by jar, posted 10-01-2010 2:17 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 208 by Coyote, posted 10-01-2010 2:25 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 209 by Omnivorous, posted 10-01-2010 2:47 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 211 by Nij, posted 10-01-2010 9:15 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 212 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-01-2010 9:25 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 213 by Strongbow, posted 10-08-2010 9:39 AM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 214 of 331 (588532)
10-26-2010 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by purpledawn
08-11-2010 6:49 AM


Avoiding Your Question??
Dear Purpledawn,
Purpledawn writes:
You're avoiding the question. I didn't ask how to identify a Christian, I asked what constitutes the exercise of the Christian religion.
I am not avoiding your question; I’m just not giving you a ‘two cent’ answer that gives you what, you think, is grounds for denying these public displays.
I’m identifying ‘what a Christian is’ to help me define what it is to ‘exercise the Christian religion’.
Purpledawn writes:
As I said in Message 129: A Bible sitting in a display case is not an exercise of the Christian Religion. So removing the Bible does not prevent a Christian from performing their religion.
If that is so then the Supreme Court has no grounds to demand the removal of a Bible sitting in a display case
See, the Supreme Court seams to think that having these displays constitutes the exercise of the Christian religion. Since they use (or should I say misuse) the First Amendment to explain why they are forcibly removing these icons of Americas history.
Now, to your main point:
Purpledawn writes:
A court house should be neutral zone. The individuals inside the building are not hindered from worshiping or not worshiping as they please or speaking of their religion or lack of religion.
A court house should be neutral zone.
A Court House should be adorned as the citizens of the community or state wish it to be adorned. There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution that gives the Federal Government the right to say how the buildings and grounds of local governments may or may not be used.
If you actually go back into this counties history you’ll probably find out that for an extremely long time a large portion of our court houses not only double as schools but as the local Church as well.
Also, I guess you have forgotten that, until recently, when a witness was sworn in at any court proceedings, in any court in this land, they placed their right hand on a Bible and swore to tell the Truth, the hole Truth, and nothing but the Truth. Not only that, but the end of that oath was So help me God.
The individuals inside the building are not hindered from worshiping or not worshiping as they please or speaking of their religion or lack of religion.
If I go to a Court House, and am speaking to an individual about how this Country’s laws and heritage are Christian (are of Christian origin), and the Federal Government has forcibly removed all references of that Christian heritage then, yes, I have been hindered from worshiping my God because part of my Worship is to speak the TruthA. {Exodus 20: 16, Exod23: 1, Prov19: 9; 24: 28}
This is a big part of why I participate in these discussions. I speak the Truth because I am compelled to by my devotion to my God.
Thank you again for your comments; hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr
A. Truth
—noun, plural truths
1. The true or actual state of a matter: He tried to find out the truth.
2. Conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement.
3. A verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.

{Dictionary.com}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by purpledawn, posted 08-11-2010 6:49 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by jar, posted 10-26-2010 1:20 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 221 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-26-2010 2:32 PM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 216 of 331 (588543)
10-26-2010 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by Theodoric
08-11-2010 10:55 AM


Still looking?!?!?
Dear Theodoric,
Great to hear from you again;
Theodoric writes:
still looking for any reference to christianity. So, I guess on your part that is a fail.
Man who looks with eyes closed; sees nothing
It is easy to deny something; not so easy to prove it wrong.
Just because you do not see it does not mean it is not there.
Hold on; I’ve got more ;-} O.K., maybe later.
You, being a non-Christian, may not recognize the references to the Christian faith in these things, however, that does not mean they are not there; Does it?
Fictional story
This guy goes hiking with some friends. Deep in the forest they stumble upon a rock formation.
One of the guys, in the group, puts his foot on one of the rocks and says that that rock is gold.
One of the other guys in the group chuckles and says ‘your kidding I don’t see any gold’.
The leader of the group looks over to him and says ‘you sure you don’t see any gold? After all he’s a geologist.’
Note here that the Geologist did not mean that the entire rock was gold.
Moral of the story is: Just because you do not see it does not mean it does not exist.
Theodoric writes:
the Declaration is not a US legal document.
In what sense of legal document are you speaking of?
Whether or not the Declaration is a legal U.S. document is not really relevant to my point; I’m just curious.
Thank you, again, for your participation,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Theodoric, posted 08-11-2010 10:55 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by ringo, posted 10-26-2010 2:06 PM JRTjr has not replied
 Message 218 by Theodoric, posted 10-26-2010 2:09 PM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 220 of 331 (588551)
10-26-2010 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by New Cat's Eye
08-11-2010 1:03 PM


Contradiction!?!?
Dear Catholic Scientist,
Great to hear from you; I am sorry, however, I just answered you question in Message #214.
If you have any other questions or comments I would love to hear them.
God Bless,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-11-2010 1:03 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-26-2010 2:44 PM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 226 of 331 (588685)
10-27-2010 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by Bikerman
08-12-2010 3:55 AM


Dear Bikerman,
If their reasons were completely secular in nature, being mostly concerned with legislation, taxation and supporting hostile powers/peoples; Then why did they appeal to Nature's God for their justification for writing up this ‘Declaration of Independence’?
Declaration of Independence
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. (First Paragraph)
Second, the Term Nature's God is a direct reference to the Biblical God:
Revelation 3: 14
14 And to the angel (messenger) of the assembly (church) in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the trusty and faithful and true Witness, the Origin and Beginning and Author of God's creation
Ecclesiastes 12: 13
13All has been heard; the end of the matter is: Fear God [revere and worship Him, knowing that He is] and keep His commandments, for this is the whole of man [the full, original purpose of His creation, the object of God's providence, the root of character, the foundation of all happiness, the adjustment to all inharmonious circumstances and conditions under the sun] and the whole [duty] for every man.
Genesis 14: 22
22But Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lifted up my hand and sworn to the Lord, God Most High, the Possessor and Maker of heaven and earth
As to the ‘Biblical Violation’?
Declaration of Independence
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
Leviticus 19: 15
15 You shall do no injustice in judging a case; you shall not be partial to the poor or show a preference for the mighty, but in righteousness and according to the merits of the case judge your neighbor.
Declaration of Independence
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Ephesians 6: 9
9You masters, act on the same [principle] toward them and give up threatening and using violent and abusive words, knowing that He Who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and that there is no respect of persons (no partiality) with Him.
You may want to do some research before commenting next time.
But, hay, great hearing from you anyway,
JRTjr
(Emphasis added; all Biblical references are from the Amplified Bible)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Bikerman, posted 08-12-2010 3:55 AM Bikerman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-27-2010 1:55 PM JRTjr has replied
 Message 228 by Otto Tellick, posted 10-29-2010 12:29 AM JRTjr has seen this message but not replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 229 of 331 (589479)
11-02-2010 7:49 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by jar
08-22-2010 6:14 PM


Topic of this thread
Dear Jar,
Jar writes:
I've looked for your evidence but have not been able to find any so far.
Man, whom looks with eyes closed, sees nothing.
You may as well tell me you don’t see the evidence for the 9/11 World Trade Center tragedy, the holocaust, etc.
If you actually look at the historical documents and the people that founded the United States of America you almost can’t help tripping over the evidence.
Jar writes:
Even more important though is the topic of this thread
Agreed, unfortunately, I find myself bombarded with retorts to secondary topics. I am simply trying not to ignore people whom respond to my posts; even if they are ‘off topic’.
Jar writes:
There is no "Christian Creation Story", in fact the Creation myths in the Bible are mutually exclusive.
O.K.?
Do Christian Creation Stories/Myths not exist: or do the ones that do exist contradict each other?
It is hard to respond to your statements when you say two mutually exclusive things.
Hope to hear from you again soon,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by jar, posted 08-22-2010 6:14 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by jar, posted 11-02-2010 8:09 PM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 231 of 331 (589492)
11-02-2010 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by bluescat48
08-22-2010 8:31 PM


Which ‘god’?
Dear Bluescat48,
Great to hear from you.
Bluescat48 writes:
Nowhere does it mention the Christian God, simply God. That God can be a Deist God.
I responded to this claim in two different postings {This one; and This one}; so I hope you will go to those postings and read them.
Also, if you will note that the term God is referring to one specific being; I.E. The Declaration of Independence does not say ‘Nature’s god; gods; goddess; goddesses, or no god at all’
Therefore, if it is not the ‘Christian God’ that they were referring to which ‘god’ were they referring to?
Before you answer that question, though, remember that 75% of the signers of the Declaration of Independence identified themselves as being Christian.
Thank you for your interest,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by bluescat48, posted 08-22-2010 8:31 PM bluescat48 has not replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 232 of 331 (589493)
11-02-2010 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by jar
09-04-2010 9:32 AM


Re: On Founding Father's intents
Dear Jar,
You asked:
Jar writes:
What does any of that have to do with: Which religion's creation story should be taught?
Whether or not a particular ‘Creation Account’ should be taught in public schools depends on many things; one of which is whether or not it is permissible for ‘religious material’ to be presented to students.
The argument that presenting ‘religious material’ is a violation of the ‘Separation of Church and state’ is one of those things.
I believe this is the reason that our benevolent Administrators have allowed this line of thought to continue.
Thank you again for your comments,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by jar, posted 09-04-2010 9:32 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by jar, posted 11-02-2010 9:53 PM JRTjr has replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 233 of 331 (589496)
11-02-2010 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by crashfrog
09-12-2010 6:33 PM


Federal Government document!?!?!?!?
Dear Crashfrog,
Great to hear from you once again.
Crashfrog writes:
It can't be a "Federal Government" document since it predates the existence of the US Federal Government by a decade.
So? What you’re saying is that the ‘Declaration of Independence’ has no bearing on this Nations founding? That it’s signers, whom risked life and limb to free us from the oppression of England, had no comportment on the formation of our government?
A Federal Government document simply means that it has bearing on the government; not, necessarily, that the Government produced it.
Thanks again,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by crashfrog, posted 09-12-2010 6:33 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by Larni, posted 11-03-2010 8:12 AM JRTjr has not replied
 Message 244 by Larni, posted 11-03-2010 8:12 AM JRTjr has not replied

  
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 4306 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 235 of 331 (589499)
11-02-2010 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by jar
09-12-2010 6:51 PM


Re: Possible Christian Curriculum
Dear Jar,
Yes, they could teach it that way if they were completely incompetent, and had done no research; or simply chose to lie outright about the Biblical account of creation.
Which, by the way, many have done.
Or, they could teach:
Genesis 1: 1 States: IN THE beginning God (prepared, formed, fashioned, and) created the heavens and the earth.
The ‘Big Bang’ shows that the universe had a beginning.
Genesis 1: 2 States: The earth was without form and an empty waste, and darkness was upon the face of the very great deep. The Spirit of God was moving (hovering, brooding) over the face of the waters.
Archeological evidence supports the fact that, before life appeared on Earth, the Earth was both clothed in darkness, and that water covered the whole face of the planet.
And then the next 22 verses place things in this order:
1) The atmosphere became translucent.
2) Light became visible on the surface of the Earth.
3) Land emerged.
4) God created vegetation on the land and it grew.
5) The atmosphere became transparent.
6) Birds and sea creatures were created.
7) God created land animals.
8) God created Mankind.
As far as the Fossil record goes there seams to be only one thing out of order here. That would be the ‘Birds’ coming before the ‘land animals’. However, that is not proof that the account is inaccurate; just evidence that (A) the writer is wrong about that one thing {May I add that, this is one possible error out of 12 named events} or (B) the Fossil record is incomplete.
Then, any studious teacher, would point out that chapter two of Genesis is a continuation of a single topic {God’s preparation for; and dealings with mankind}, not a rehashing of the creation account.
Please check out this chart of the Creation days
Hope to hear from you soon,
JRTjr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by jar, posted 09-12-2010 6:51 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by jar, posted 11-02-2010 11:08 PM JRTjr has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024