Genesis: is it to be taken literally?

buzsaw Gen 1:5 And the evening and the morning were the first day.Gen 1:8 And the evening and the morning were the second day.Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.The hebrew word for evening is `ereb.The translation is evening,sunset or night.
The hebrew word for morning is boqer. The translation is morning, break of day,of end of night,of coming of daylight,of coming of sunrise,of beginning of day,of bright joy after night of distress morrow, next day, next morning take your pick.Obviously it is a description of the cycle of night and day which, unless you mean to ignore the evidence of the cycle of day and night we still experience,then it is a 24 hour period no doubt.

---

"We cannot define anything precisely! If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers, who sit opposite each other, one saying to the other, 'You don't know what you are talking about!' The second one says 'What do you mean by know? What do you mean by talking? What do you mean by you?', and so on."

buzsaw Now you are grasping at straws. Here in this post you are now making God as the source of light to save the obvious embarassment of admitting that the ruse you are employing does not work. I mean what the heck does God need to distinguish betwwen evening and morning while in the act of creation.LOL Sorry but this is a prime example of twisting square pegs to fit round holes.This message has been edited by sidelined, 05-08-2004 11:04 PM

---

"We cannot define anything precisely! If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers, who sit opposite each other, one saying to the other, 'You don't know what you are talking about!' The second one says 'What do you mean by know? What do you mean by talking? What do you mean by you?', and so on."

almeyda Where do you get the idea that you could possibly know the reason behind our points of view as regards Genesis? I for one see the fact of evolution in nature and have seen the evidence. It is an error to say that the words of Genesis were Gods since it is obvious that they were written by men.
You can claim that the men were inspired by God but that amounts to no more than opinion. You are allowed your own opinion but not your own facts.Genesis is opinion while evolution is fact.

---

"We cannot define anything precisely! If we attempt to, we get into that paralysis of thought that comes to philosophers, who sit opposite each other, one saying to the other, 'You don't know what you are talking about!' The second one says 'What do you mean by know? What do you mean by talking? What do you mean by you?', and so on."

almeyda It is a fact.Incremental change resulting in new species over time has occured. The theory of evolution is the model we use to describe the way in which the observed physical change in species drove evolution.We have observed it in existing species numerous times.We can infer it from the fossil record and geology.It occurs whenever you use an anti-bacterial solution in your household.It is pervasive in nature and,yes,you are included in its realm. Absolutely spot on! That is the nature of facts,they are what remains regardless of interpretation or opinion.A theory willattempt to interpret facts but is itself capable of change as evidence comes in.
Theories are useful in making predictions about what we can expect to discover in further experiments or evidence and when these predictions bear fruit or evidence attests to the accuracy of assumptions made then we have a greater confidence in our model as a outline of what we observe.Evolution does not disprove Genesis. It does that on its own when we try to apply what we know about the physical world to the statements contained in the book.It does not match what is observed about the universe. The bible is fascinating in its own right as a myth and in a cultural sense but as a description of the subtle intricacies of the universe it is feeble and empty of nourishment.This message has been edited by sidelined, 05-09-2004 02:49 AM

jar I just gotta ask. Just what is the moral lesson here?This message has been edited by sidelined, 05-09-2004 09:57 PM

mpaul73 Would you like to clarify what you find to be impossible with evolutionary explanation for life? As for the universe evolution theory has nothing to say with the origins of that.

mpaul73 This is no explanation but we may now narrow your objection down to this question.What is it about purely naturalistic/mechanisitic processes that you do not understand could have produced the evidence we find all around us? Evolution theory deals with the means by which life has changed since life began.How life began is a study known as abiogenesis. How the universe began is a part of the field known as cosmology.I am an atheist and have no God to go by but,as some people here will attest,belief in God and an understanding of the processes of evolution as we model it in evolutionary theory are not mutually exdclusive.