Youth question

No worries mate. Let me try and break it down slowly (and please note I don't know if this is right it is just one point of view).

Before I make my point can I say that you, STC and C$ seem to me to be very intelligent guys (I am really chuffed to have had this discussion with you guys). I assume you will go to college soon which is why I am pursuing this point. I alienated many at my university for years when I refused to move from a seven day creation story. I now feel somewhat guilty for my strong and uncompromising point of view when I now feel I never needed to. With fundementalism being one of the greatest threats to christianity today you guys can't afford not to think very seriously about why you believe what you believe for anyone at college level to take you seriously.

Please hold tightly onto what you believe but make sure you are acquiring the tools you will need to truly provide the best answer you can to those who ask. Here we go.

1. Who is Genesis Written to: Genesis is written to a specific audience. In this case Israelites who have grown up in an Egyptian culture and know Egyptian mythology and have been taught that the Pharaoh is God on Earth and the temple of Ra is his throne.

2. What style is the book written in: The creation story is very similar to the story of the creation of the story of the creation of the temple of Ra. This makes sense as this is the only creation story the people of Israel would have been familiar with.

3. What would the original recipients have got from Genesis: They would have noticed the story instantly and seen the twist. God is LORD of all not Ra. The earth is his throne not a temple. We are his representatives on earth not the Pharaoh.

4. How do we apply this to our lives: No matter what theory of creation we hold onto God must be at the centre of it. He is the creator, He is lord of all, we are his image and representatives on earth.

A final point from this is that if we read Genesis like this the bible does not lose any of its credibility. We don't call poets liars. We don't accuse those who use metaphors or speak with examples to help us understand as liars. In this case the bible is not a liar and does not stand in contradiction to the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution. I am a PhD student at an Ivy league school in Aus and I have tried to find convincing evidence against it but the fact is that the overwhelming majority of evidence supports it.
 
Last edited:
ppar3566 said:
In this case the bible is not a liar and does not stand in contradiction to the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution. I am a PhD student at an Ivy league school in Aus and I have tried to find convincing evidence against it but the fact is that the overwhelming majority of evidence supports it.
Click to expand...

Evolution happening now on a small scale and all of creation being made through evolution are very different issues. Almost no on will deny that evolution is occurring. It is a fact. However, that does not mean that the world was created through it. I don't deny that it is possible. God certainly could have used evolution, however, I doubt it.

Furthermore, although we can't deny evolution is occurring, it is a huge jump to say that evolution can take an single celled organism and come out with a person by mere probability. The only way that you can make an argument for evolution occurring (macro evolution) is by assuming that there are an infinite number of inhabitable planets. Otherwise, the probability is so small it is laughable. However, as I stated before, this does not mean that God could not have used it. I am suggesting, thought, that this would be an even greater mirical than the traditional 7 24 hour day creation view.

However, in conclusion, the point of the creation story is not to tell us how God did it. He is God. He did it however he felt like doing it. The point of the creation story was to tell Israel, and us, about our God and his greatness and faithfulness.
 
Ppar, i am very interested in what you believe. Could you tell us what you believe. Like millions of years ago God created the Earth, evolution.. you know, when someone asks you how the Earth and the universe got created, what do you say back?
 
Stc95 said:
In my Bible it says (Gen 1:4) "God saw that the light was good, so he divided the light fromt he darkness. 5 God neamed the light "day" and the darkness "night" Evening passes and morning came. This was the first day."

Doesnt this mean that the DAY God created the Earth was in a 24 hr period? I know of no time that it was light out for more then however it is light out now.
Click to expand...

A frequent criticism of scientists is that they look at what exists now...for instance, the current decay rate of Carbon 14...and they extrapolate these current parameters to the very beginning of our universe. I would encourage you not to make the same kind of logical mistake. If you look at how things are now...for example, the fact that we have sunlight...and from that you extrapolate that life would have been impossible on this planet without that sunlight...well, how do you know that, exactly? Does the Bible say explicitly that life cannot exist without sunlight? Would God have been incapable of sustaining life without help from the sun? The thing about God is...if we really believe that he is truly omnipotent, then we really can't believe something like that would be impossible for him. The Bible says time and time again that God is bathed in glory...and one of the names we have for him is 'sustainer', isn't it? I think he would have been more than capable of sustaining life without the sun.

Also if the Gap Theory is true (where God's "days" are really numbers and numbers of years long) it is a heresy and that is exactly what that website is saying. Because then you put death in before man. The Bible says (Romans 5: 12) "Sin came into the world because of what one man did, and with sin came death." Man bright death into the world. You cant have living animals (who are created before man) keep living to be immortal. They have to die. Which couldnt happen because man wasnt created yet so he couldn't bring death into the world. And im surprised that the website didnt say anything about that because i think that it should jump out at you.
Click to expand...

When you say that animals would have to die...again, I think you're applying your understanding of how things happen now. I can do the same to present a counter-argument...recent scientific study of the aging process and DNA shows that aging seems to be 'programmed' into our very genetic makeup. Animals certainly have DNA too. And I think it is perfectly reasonable, if one believes God is omnipotent, to believe that the ultimate 'High Programmer' :D can change and has changed this over time. After all STC...do you believe that people literally lived for hundreds of years as the Bible said they do? If so...how can you believe that and not believe that even longer spans of life would have been possible for animals, as they bathed in the very glory of God in the first era of their creation?

Paul
 
Paul i see what you are saying. And it is all possible, but i believe that God knew that Satan would birth the evolution theory and that he left TONS of proof that HE, God Almighty, created the Earth.
And another thing about Carbon-Dating, i know very little about it, but i do know that if there was a flood (which there was) it would make Carbon-dating seem more years then it actually is. (which is what ultimatly happened)

And i do believe that people those days lived for 900 years. And people and things did live for 900 years, but that 900 years is a big difference than millions of years. Reptiles do not ever stop growing, and if things were living for 900 years, you get big lizards! AKA: Dinosaurs.

Mist said:
Evolution happening now on a small scale and all of creation being made through evolution are very different issues. Almost no on will deny that evolution is occurring. It is a fact. However, that does not mean that the world was created through it. I don't deny that it is possible. God certainly could have used evolution, however, I doubt it.
Click to expand...

of course Evolution is happening! Thats a no brainer, we have actually seen it! But Evolution is a tricky word. Since there are six definitions:
1. Cosmic Evolution: The origin of time, space, and matter (Big Bang)
2. Chemical Evolution: The origin of higher elements from hydrogen
3. Stellar and Planetary evolution: Origin of stars and planets. No one has ever seen a star form.
4. Organic Evolution: Origin of Life. No body has a clue how life started from non-living material
5. Macro-Evolution: Changing from one kind into another. Nobody has seen a dog produce a non-dog,ever.
6. Micro-Evolution: Variations within kinds. Only this one has been observed. Changes within the kinds.

5 out of those 6 definitions are purely religions, the 6th one is a science. If you ever want to win a debate on Evolution you will win if you just define what you are talking about, and you will find that they only give examples for number 6.

I believe in Micro-Evolution, that you can have variations within kinds. Noah didnt bring all 100 breeds of Dogs on the Arc, thats insane. I think that Noah didnt even see a Chuauaua. (that small Taco Bell dog thing...)

God certainly could have used evolution, however, I doubt it.
Click to expand...
a god who uses evolution to create life is cruel, wasteful, and decitful. And its not the God of the Bible.
 
STC you asked what I believe. I must confess that I have not the foggiest. I lean towards evolution though I am still trying to figure it all out (and I am a long way from this as yet). A few points I would like to make in this respect is as follows:

Te distinction between macro and micro evolution could well be a false one. This is because it assumes that different species are QUALITATIVELY different (i.e. distinct and unconnected). However, it is quite possible that the differences are much more QUALITATIVE in nature (i.e. exist on a continuum with lower animals on one end and high animals on the other). It is worth reading Climbing mount Impossible by Richard Dawkins here (note that his recent book the God Delusion is a serious miscarriage of science and appallingly illogical in places).

In relation to a god using evolution being cruel, I don't really get the connection.

Lastly Dork elf's comment about us looking at things now and extrapolating into the past I think is somewhat correct but needs one cravat. As humans you believe God is able to create whatever he wants but we should use our logic to explore the natural order of things. C.S. Lewis uses this idea in Christianity explained (I think) where you can not tell the source of a light in a basement looking at it sideways (taking a cross-section view of the world - I think this is your point here Dork elf and it is a good one) but we can by looking alone it and following it as far as we can. In other words we should not assume the world today is the same as the world when God created it but we can take a developmental approach to explore how God may have created it (this is where I think evolution is potentially useful).

Lastly, thanks for this enlightening discussion. Again let me say how proud I am to be discussing this with people who are obviously very intelligent. Kudos guys.
 
Evolution is a cruel thing. Its like the whole "do the ends justify the means" thing. Like did Stalin's Industrialization of Russia, and possibly save the world from Nazi Germany, justify that he killed millions of people to do it?
And there is so much evidance for a young, 6,000 or less year old Earth. Idk any proof for a longer one, or at least one that i dont have an opposite theory.

ppar3566 said:
Lastly, thanks for this enlightening discussion. Again let me say how proud I am to be discussing this with people who are obviously very intelligent. Kudos guys.
Click to expand...

Ya not bad for 15, eh? :D

Im thinking about doing some creation science in college. I think right now God is calling me to do it. Tho i dont like science... kinda. idk... IM SO CONFUSED!

and i feel the same way Ppar, this guild/group of people are amazing. i know that if i had had this discussion with any other online forum i probably would have been flammed. Its nice to know we arnt in the fire here. PRAISE GOD!
 
To make this simple I'm putting my comments in bold.

ppar3566 said:
No worries mate. Let me try and break it down slowly (and please note I don't know if this is right it is just one point of view).

Before I make my point can I say that you, STC and C$ seem to me to be very intelligent guys (I am really chuffed to have had this discussion with you guys). I assume you will go to college soon which is why I am pursuing this point. I alienated many at my university for years when I refused to move from a seven day creation story. I now feel somewhat guilty for my strong and uncompromising point of view when I now feel I never needed to. With fundementalism being one of the greatest threats to christianity today you guys can't afford not to think very seriously about why you believe what you believe for anyone at college level to take you seriously.

Yep, college soon. Graphic Design :D

Fundamentalism is a threat to Christianity? You mean, taking the Bible literally and all that? Hmm. Anyway, if you think I've never thought long and hard about why I believe what I do than you're quite mistaken.

Please hold tightly onto what you believe but make sure you are acquiring the tools you will need to truly provide the best answer you can to those who ask. Here we go.

1. Who is Genesis Written to: Genesis is written to a specific audience. In this case Israelites who have grown up in an Egyptian culture and know Egyptian mythology and have been taught that the Pharaoh is God on Earth and the temple of Ra is his throne.

2. What style is the book written in: The creation story is very similar to the story of the creation of the story of the creation of the temple of Ra. This makes sense as this is the only creation story the people of Israel would have been familiar with.

Aha, but numerous civilizations have all had their accounts of creation, and many of a worldwide flood... I think it could go the other way around--they're similar to the Biblical account because what the Bible depicts actually happened. The ancient Chinese symbol for "create" (maybe "to create") includes the symbols for breath, dust, man, life, and "to walk". It seems they believed we were created from dust in some way, and "breath" + "life" seem to be similar to the Biblical account of creation also... although it isn't particularly clear, either, so it can be interpreted many different ways. My point: Many peoples believed similar things to the Bible, and maybe for a reason.

3. What would the original recipients have got from Genesis: They would have noticed the story instantly and seen the twist. God is LORD of all not Ra. The earth is his throne not a temple. We are his representatives on earth not the Pharaoh.

You got that from the Creation account?

4. How do we apply this to our lives: No matter what theory of creation we hold onto God must be at the centre of it. He is the creator, He is lord of all, we are his image and representatives on earth.

I would agree somewhat, but if you can take one book of the Bible and say "no, that's not true" than the rest of it cannot be taken seriously. "Well, I don't think the Israelites crossed the Red Sea, either. It was just written as a metaphor." "Well, I don't think Revelations is true because at the time, John must've gone mad." "Well, I don't really think David, a boy at the time, could've thrown one rock and killed a giant." You detract from the whole thing.

A final point from this is that if we read Genesis like this the bible does not lose any of its credibility. We don't call poets liars. We don't accuse those who use metaphors or speak with examples to help us understand as liars. In this case the bible is not a liar and does not stand in contradiction to the overwhelming scientific evidence for evolution. I am a PhD student at an Ivy league school in Aus and I have tried to find convincing evidence against it but the fact is that the overwhelming majority of evidence supports it.
I frankly don't see the point in God using a big bang and then having us evolve. Maybe it would show how He is infinitely complex, but it seems to me that He would create us specifically, carefully, and for a purpose.
Click to expand...

dorkelf said:
After all STC...do you believe that people literally lived for hundreds of years as the Bible said they do? If so...how can you believe that and not believe that even longer spans of life would have been possible for animals, as they bathed in the very glory of God in the first era of their creation?

Paul
Click to expand...

I personally believe that animals lived longer when the humans did (and reptiles grow their entire lives, right? makes for some fairly large animals...), but after the flood you fail to see extravagantly long-lived humans anymore, and I suppose the animals would be affected also.
 
ChickenSoup said:
I frankly don't see the point in God using a big bang and then having us evolve. Maybe it would show how He is infinitely complex, but it seems to me that He would create us specifically, carefully, and for a purpose.
Click to expand...
No, God created us with a purpose. and for a reason. Evolution teaches that we all came from rock-soup. How is there purpose in life if we came from soup? Every time i eat Chicken Noodles am i eating Grandpa? Or maybe i just killed another civilation because they didnt have time to evolve. And He created us in His image. We cant be God's image if we evolved, yes He could guide us, but then whats the point, if He knows what we are going to be in the end, just skip all the violence and get us there AND show His glory. Also God is a jealous God, He doesnt want us worshiping others, He would rather have us now than watch us fight for billions of years, killing each other until we become the super-race. Unless God is a fan of reality shows.

C$ said:
I personally believe that animals lived longer when the humans did (and reptiles grow their entire lives, right? makes for some fairly large animals...), but after the flood you fail to see extravagantly long-lived humans anymore, and I suppose the animals would be affected also.
Click to expand...
Your exactly right C$. Tho there are scientific theories (based on the Bible) that give a scientific reasoning to it. Not that God needs any reasoning, but so we can help pursuade people FROM Evolution TO God.
 
C$ I didn't mean to offend by assuming that you had not thought about it (you obviously have) just that it is always good to hear other viewpoints to expand our understanding.

Also great to hear you are doing design. My wife just finished her GD degree last year.

Yes there are heaps of other stories that follow the biblical example. The point I am making is the story of Ra pre-dates the biblical story and is used as a formate to translate to the people of Israel the awesomeness of God in a form that was accessible to them. By the way this does not mean the bible is lying far from it. Indeed I never said Genesis is not true. Rather that our interpretation of it is not true. When someone writes a love letter we understand from the context that they are not really going to climb the highest mountain etc. but rather it is a way of illustrating how much they love the person they are writing about. They are not lying at all just using a technique to explain that thing that is real (i.e. their love for the other person). On a side point no one takes the bible 100% literally ever. You don't assume Song of Songs is to be taken literally but rather that the author is using poetry to express real emotions.

Finally, your argument that I am suggesting we can just now dismiss bits of the bible as we please due to my Genesis revelation is quite simply wrong. I am suggesting that we need to take the bible message very seriously and try to understand what the author intended (by the way the slippery slope argument you make here is a heuristic – a mental shortcut - rather than a logical deduction).
 
Last edited:
Stc95 said:
Evolution is a cruel thing. Its like the whole "do the ends justify the means" thing. Like did Stalin's Industrialization of Russia, and possibly save the world from Nazi Germany, justify that he killed millions of people to do it?
And there is so much evidance for a young, 6,000 or less year old Earth. Idk any proof for a longer one, or at least one that i dont have an opposite theory.



Ya not bad for 15, eh? :D

Im thinking about doing some creation science in college. I think right now God is calling me to do it. Tho i dont like science... kinda. idk... IM SO CONFUSED!

and i feel the same way Ppar, this guild/group of people are amazing. i know that if i had had this discussion with any other online forum i probably would have been flammed. Its nice to know we arnt in the fire here. PRAISE GOD!
Click to expand...

Good one you mate. Could I suggest though that you seem to have the smarts to go to a top notch college and get a degree that the secular world understands. That way you could have even more impact.

I believe God uses what we must enjoy. If you like science go for it. If you like theology go for that. If you like something else do that. You will do best doing what you love.

Just quickly I understand the ends/mean explination in general but still cannot see the connection to evolution. By the by, in relation to your comment "FROM evolution TO God", my relationship with God has not been effected one-bit by me considering whether evolution is true (indeed I am slightly offended by the suggestion ;). I also have an even greater respect for the word of God. Genesis is truely awesome.
 
Ppar i had no intention to say that your walk with God was hindered or... below par, or anything of that nature. Im sorry you took it that way and i apologize.
 
Stc95 said:
Ppar i had no intention to say that your walk with God was hindered or... below par, or anything of that nature. Im sorry you took it that way and i apologize.
Click to expand...

Just joken mate no offence taken (I was just pulling your chain :D). Truth is this discussion has brought a spark into my spiritual life that has been somewhat lacking of recent (bit frustrated at church, Father-in-law pastor, enough said). So truth is I should be thanking you.
 
C$ I didn't mean to offend by assuming that you had not thought about it (you obviously have) just that it is always good to hear other viewpoints to expand our understanding
Click to expand...

No no, you didn't offend. :)

Finally, your argument that I am suggesting we can just now dismiss bits of the bible as we please due to my Genesis revelation is quite simply wrong. I am suggesting that we need to take the bible message very seriously and try to understand what the author intended (by the way the slippery slope argument you make here is a heuristic – a mental shortcut - rather than a logical deduction).
Click to expand...

Maybe the stories that Jonah was swallowed by a whale was just a metaphor that things may seem bad at times but God will deliver when we repent. Maybe the Israelites' crossing the Red Sea on dry land is just a metaphor that God will provide a way that we don't expect. Maybe Jesus didn't really come to save us, and it's just a metaphor that God loves us and will forgive us.

See? You detract from the whole thing.

The point I am making is the story of Ra pre-dates the biblical story and is used as a formate to translate to the people of Israel the awesomeness of God in a form that was accessible to them. By the way this does not mean the bible is lying far from it. Indeed I never said Genesis is not true. Rather that our interpretation of it is not true.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. Just because it was written after doesn't mean that it was based on it.

I think Genesis was very direct. The creation account was mentioned various times throughout the Bible, but never--EVER--do we find anything that ever suggested evolution in any way shape or form.

When someone writes a love letter we understand from the context that they are not really going to climb the highest mountain etc. but rather it is a way of illustrating how much they love the person they are writing about. They are not lying at all just using a technique to explain that thing that is real (i.e. their love for the other person). On a side point no one takes the bible 100% literally ever. You don't assume Song of Songs is to be taken literally but rather that the author is using poetry to express real emotions.
Click to expand...

Genesis wasn't a love letter. You'll note that the other 4 books of the Pentateuch (Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), believed to be written for the most part by Moses, have been very literal--in fact, I can hardly stand to read the latter three not because I don't like them but because they're so drawn out and exact in measurements and directions and everything. Nothing suggests that Genesis was a love letter, either. As a last note, I don't see why God would purposefully spell out all of that, without pointing out that it was, in fact, a metaphor, when He knew that it would confuse most of the Christians who have ever lived.
 
ppar3566 said:
Just joken mate no offence taken (I was just pulling your chain :D). Truth is this discussion has brought a spark into my spiritual life that has been somewhat lacking of recent (bit frustrated at church, Father-in-law pastor, enough said). So truth is I should be thanking you.
Click to expand...

lol, the ';)' through me off, but i wanted to be safe.

anyway.. um.. i guess your welcome.
 
ChickenSoup said:
No no, you didn't offend. :)



Maybe the stories that Jonah was swallowed by a whale was just a metaphor that things may seem bad at times but God will deliver when we repent. Maybe the Israelites' crossing the Red Sea on dry land is just a metaphor that God will provide a way that we don't expect. Maybe Jesus didn't really come to save us, and it's just a metaphor that God loves us and will forgive us.

See? You detract from the whole thing.



It doesn't matter. Just because it was written after doesn't mean that it was based on it.

I think Genesis was very direct. The creation account was mentioned various times throughout the Bible, but never--EVER--do we find anything that ever suggested evolution in any way shape or form.



Genesis wasn't a love letter. You'll note that the other 4 books of the Pentateuch (Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy), believed to be written for the most part by Moses, have been very literal--in fact, I can hardly stand to read the latter three not because I don't like them but because they're so drawn out and exact in measurements and directions and everything. Nothing suggests that Genesis was a love letter, either. As a last note, I don't see why God would purposefully spell out all of that, without pointing out that it was, in fact, a metaphor, when He knew that it would confuse most of the Christians who have ever lived.
Click to expand...

Come on C$ that is ridicules. Paul uses metaphors to explain the church (i.e. the body). You don't go around assuming that you are really an arm or a leg you understand what he is trying to do. Further, you don't simply go ok everything he has written is a metaphor because that bit was.

My simple point is this: We understand how to read things, what they are trying to do, and what should be taken literally or not, in everyday readings by looking at the context:
1. If we read Dear ... we know that what will follow is a letter
2. Strange layout of text = poetry.

This is what I was trying to get at not that Genesis is a love letter, it is not.

How do we tell what is a metaphor or not? Simply put (but difficult to do)we need to get as much information as possible. I.e. we know the story of Jesus is not a metaphor because the writers of the gospel tell us that is not what the book are meant to do (i.e. Luke says right up front that he is writing a history)
 
Stc95 said:
No, God created us with a purpose. and for a reason. Evolution teaches that we all came from rock-soup. How is there purpose in life if we came from soup? Every time i eat Chicken Noodles am i eating Grandpa? Or maybe i just killed another civilation because they didnt have time to evolve. And He created us in His image. We cant be God's image if we evolved, yes He could guide us, but then whats the point, if He knows what we are going to be in the end, just skip all the violence and get us there AND show His glory. Also God is a jealous God, He doesnt want us worshiping others, He would rather have us now than watch us fight for billions of years, killing each other until we become the super-race. Unless God is a fan of reality shows.


Your exactly right C$. Tho there are scientific theories (based on the Bible) that give a scientific reasoning to it. Not that God needs any reasoning, but so we can help pursuade people FROM Evolution TO God.
Click to expand...

Your post made me hungry.

The Bible said that we came from dust. Now, we could have a discussion about which is more dignified...dust, or pond scum...but I don't personally take any more offense to the idea that my ultimate ancestor was a speck of slime than I do that it was a speck of dust. What I do take offense to is that evolution as a means for life to adapt (an observable phenomenon) has been extrapolated into the related but separate theory that this explains the origin of our species - and, of course, the minor detail that this theory is treated as indisputable scientific law. :mad:

Paul
 
dorkelf said:
Your post made me hungry.

The Bible said that we came from dust. Now, we could have a discussion about which is more dignified...dust, or pond scum...but I don't personally take any more offense to the idea that my ultimate ancestor was a speck of slime than I do that it was a speck of dust. What I do take offense to is that evolution as a means for life to adapt (an observable phenomenon) has been extrapolated into the related but separate theory that this explains the origin of our species - and, of course, the minor detail that this theory is treated as indisputable scientific law. :mad:

Paul
Click to expand...


Oh ya Paul. Thats what gets me infuriated. That their RELIGION is taught in public schools as A LAW! Last year my teacher is like "i dont care what you believe in, Evolution is true and theres no way around it." You seriously dont know how much i wanted to walk out of that room and hit something.. or her.. but that would be mean.
See, the question is, not whether religion should be taugh in school (cause it is!) but whether we should have Public schools. I want to go to a school that DOESNT believe in Evolution, but then again, think of all the good i could do in a Evolution school. VIVA LA CREATION!

Also the thing about Dust and Slime. I think i was trying to get as is
Creation: In the beginning God.
Evolution: In the beginning Rock.

I think that the creation story is SO much more logical than evolution. Its funny to think that even science proffesors dont even realize how dumb their theory sounds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top