This has been bugging the heck out of me all my life. Xians are not alone on this concept. I have seen orthodox types come up with the same nonsense. I got this idea reading the prove evolution thread. The universe is simply not, I repeat not, 6000 years old. I will state the proof. Forget fossils; this is better. Look outside at night. What so you see? Stars? You are wrong. You are seeing a few million stars, in the local galaxy. You are also looking at billions of galaxies, each of which contains billions of stars. Follow me on this, please. We know the speed of light; I don't know a single Xian that can dispute this. If you don't know what a light-year is, it is the distance light travels in an earth year.Some of these stars and galaxies are millions of light-years away! This means, the universe has certainly existed long enough for the light to get here! Now I believe in God, and creation, but I disagree with a lot of you religious types. There is nothing to say that the "days" of Genesis 1 don't represent a much longer period of time. I have seen argument after argument about the "weeks" of daniel, etc. supposedly they mean a period of seventy years. Where is the proof of this? Why are Daniel's weeks supposed to be 70 years long, but the days of genesis just days? Where is the logic in this? Where is it stated to make this calculation? Don't you dare say the n.t.; I won't accept it!Why do you ignorantly refuse, if you can't for some weird reason accept evolution, to at least give the scientists some credit. We know the age of the universe, because we know the speed of light; it is one of the few constants, other than god, in the universe.

Pffft...

God made it look that way...

Easy

savor this moment GM, it may be the only time i agree with you. Here is the lexicon entry for the hebrew word yowm, which is the word translated as day throughout Gen 1.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/wor...rd=03117&page=1
especially note 1.c, 1.d, and 1.e.

The bible... like good poetry... IS A METAPHOR!!! stupid people dont ever realise that and they just blindly follow their religion... like sheep. Like stupid fluffy white sheep, who at the end of the day get eaten by wolves... i would rather be the wolf. Not the stupid sheep.

sorry i took so long to respond. the paramedics just left. I'm ok.

i think a lot of the bible is a metaphor-that doesn't mean it is completely untrue, just extremely hard to follow.

there is a lot of good morality, as long as we accept that the history is shaky, and the time-lines fuzzy at best.

but what about the weeks in daniel?

Ho hum. another time-line question.

To God, a day is a thousand years and a thousand years a day. God lives outside of time. Heck, GOd created time. How can it be so hard to imagine that the seven days are not literal.

Moreover, there is evidence that the Genesis account is not literal. After all, it was written long after the actual event. Look at the poetic nature of the account. Whether it's literal, or a metaphor for evolution, the fact of Genesis 1 is clear: GOD DID IT!

And if it is literal, think on this. If God created Adam a fully grown adult, why can He not do the same for the Earth? He could have created a fully formed Earth with history, records, fossils etc.

The fact is we don't know. We can only hypothesize. The account in Genesis wasn't created to be a scientific, explain-all account, rather it was written to portray a message. I said it before: GOD DID IT!

Until next time,

indeed, in so far that time is an illusion and the past, and future are persistant fallacies.

however, i wonder about why so many religious folk justify the belief of "poof, there it was" when their gods do it, yet so often misunderstand the big bang and falsely discredit it for "poof, there it was".

there is no reason in religion, and no religion in reason.

The difference is that the Big Bang does not take God into account. God can create something out of nothing. That's why he's God. But the natural laws claim that it simply is not possible.

the natural laws and "gods" have one thing in common; they are both human constructs that are false! a great human error is to create something in the head and then assume it exists outside the head just becuase it is inside the head.

make it up, make it up, make it all up!

I have never understood why scientists and creationists both refuse to accept that maybe, just maybe - god made the universe by the big bang.the catholic church, for all it's faults, is actually open to this concept...

Alot of physists now believe the speed of light is NOT a constant.

Check out the theories of Joao Magueijo.

http://frontwheeldrive.com/joao_magueijo.html


This could change the way we look at the universe forever!!!

I am no physicist, but my understanding of Dr. Magueijo's work is that he says that light can't go slower than the accepted speed of light, but depending on energy and Space Time conditions can actually go faster. IF my understanding of the matter is true, then it doesn't help the Creationists view.

I was under the impression that that's what I was alluding to.



That's part of what I posted earlier.

Well I see this question comes up often. There are only two hard core facts at this time and they are one.
1. Scientists can not agree as to how old mankind is and so is uncertain.
2. Creationists have an idea based on the scriptures but are uncertain.

Uncertain + Uncertain = 42!
But I am not sure if that is the Answer! Um! I guess I will stick with the known facts till proved otherwise!
Irish

vsl is almost 100 years old. it was dismissed for so long in large part because it did not fit the mindset of physics of the 1900's.

But we know the speed of light.

Lol, not it does not help the creationist point of view, its not supposed too. I just wanted to point out that the belief that the speed of light is this unchanging constant is not true.

What a lot of people don't realize concerning creation is that when God created everything, it was created in its most mature and grown state. All the trees where in full bloom and producing fruit. Adam and Eve were mature adults. All the animals were fully grown and able to reproduce. The stars and universe was also created in it's fully mature state. People need to stop assuming that science has everything figured how. How can they prove things such as the age of universe? How stars work and how old they are?

and yet another "poofda".....

all we need is the speed of light, to disprove the xian notion of a 6000 year universe. It doesn't mean there is no God!

I don't think any of it is real. I am just a butterfly sleeping on a flower having a nightmare that I am a human being. Somebody wake me up please.

funny-chuang tzu had that same dream...

I'm all for healthy debate, but I'm also for freedom of religion. There are too many uncertainties in the cosmos, and if religion helps people understand themselves or gives them comfort, I don't see the point of nonbelievers dissecting it or calling believers stupid or ignorant. Discourse is wonderful, but I think most would agree that name calling has no place in a healthy debate.


"Why do you ignorantly refuse, if you can't for some weird reason accept evolution, to at least give the scientists some credit"

"stupid people don't ever realise that and they just blindly follow their religion... like sheep. Like stupid fluffy white sheep, who at the end of the day get eaten by wolves... i would rather be the wolf. Not the stupid sheep."


By the way, science isn't infallible, either. Remember DDT? The brontosaurus? Asbestos?

so can anyone explain, using logic, how the weeks become conveniently years? and how the days of genesis are just days? c'mon, guys! i went to that one website where an apologist claimed a different plural ending changed the meaning of weeks, but that is poor scholarship. Hebrew changed continually during the writing of the tanach, nouns changed gender, endings, many times.

I did explain it. Go back and read my first post on this topic. I'll even give you the link.

My post

It's post #6 by the way.

so explain hopw weeks are years.

once again, science and logic win.

"Ignorance can be forgiven, betraye cannot" Book of Matthew.

The sheep have a chance in the end, the wolves do not.

Why else would Jesus refer to us as his flock?

Not all of "us" believers in God are nuts. so please have pity on those who are.

As am I.

Exactly (except for that not all xians believe the 6000 year old earth)

Something Like Laughter posted the definition for this.

Here is the link

I ALREADY REFERRED TO THIS. It is based on ignorance of the changes in the hebrew language. There are thousands of examples of the same words with different plural or other endings. It doesn't always change the meaning. Guess what? The books of the tanach were written at different dates! Languages change from time to time! They evolve!

omg! not that word!languages change, sometimes from year to year!

your site is just poor apologistic scholarship, but nice try.

You asked again, so I told you again. I don't know exactly what the word "day" is meaning here. It could mean anyone of the deffinitions I gave you. Each is just as posible as the other.

There is one word here, not an entire paragraph. Even so, has the Hebrew word for "day" radically changed that much over the years?

This is "Strongs" dictionary. Probably the most credible dictionary you can find. This IS the best dictionary to use for this matter! Hands down!

no, he posted another link to a xian apologist site that claimed that daniel's usage of a variant plural for shavua meant 70 years. sorry. that is what i was discussing.

your other xian dictionary sit about yom is very close to what i was saying, though.

oh ok^^i understand