• wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Also this doesn’t say anything about the Earth.

    Plus you can give a liberal reading of the bible to be:

    1. god created the heaven and the earth. God created the heavenly bodies.
    2. God created the sky - earths atmosphere and climate
    3. God separates oceans - creates continental forms, and plant based life
    4. God creates the moon and sun and stars. This one seems out of order to me… maybe just the earth and solar system stabilize. I don’t know how plants exist without the sun, so maybe it’s microbes or something.
    5. God creates birds and sea creatures. Maybe birds are dinosaurs.
    6. God creates modern land animals, then creates man and woman. That makes sense, mankind is certainly new with only a few hundred thousand years of records before civilization starts.

    That doesn’t have to imply the earth is 4000 years old. Even the original wording could be read as eon instead of day.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      6 days ago

      The Bible is a couple thousand chapters long. The creation story is the first two chapters. It’s pretty obviously only attempting to establish that God created the universe in some ambiguous way and move on with the story. That doesn’t stop people from inferring all sorts of things from what is essentially a poem.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        So you are saying when the Bible says Jesus died for our sins, it doesn’t mean he actually died, it’s only a metaphor.

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          I know it’s tough to pay attention for four whole sentences but if you read them again slowly I think you’ll see that I did not use the words Jesus, sin, or metaphor in any form which should make it pretty clear that, no, I’m not saying that at all.

          • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            6 days ago

            You handwaved away glaring inaccuracy in what is purported to be the word of God with “it’s just a few paragraphs before the story”.

            If you get to pick and choose what is truth, then anyone else can do it too.

            • krashmo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              No one is having a comprehensive theological discussion with you jackass. We were talking about a very specific thing. Stop being obnoxious.

              • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                5 days ago

                It’s science memes. It’s not serious. I can reply with whatever I want.

                Funny how you think only your posts are appropriate.

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 days ago

      Even the original wording could be read as eon instead of day.

      Most people don’t know that the Hebrew word “yom” (day) can be and is used to denote wildly different lengths of time.

      If anyone is interested you can read a fine destruction of the stupid “Young Earth” argument at the link I provided.

      The “Young Earth” people, both Christian and Jew, are trying to shoe horn something into the Bible that doesn’t fit and doesn’t need to exist. It’s nothing more than a desperate attempt to hold onto an old, wrong headed, and man-made theory.

      • wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Thanks for that

        I don’t see why God must be incompatible with evolution or the Big Bang or really any of science. God created us to be clever, surely that includes using logic and science to learn about the world.

        Personally I’m agnostic and I try not to judge people. I do judge people who dismiss science and decide faith alone is better.

        • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          God created us to be clever, surely that includes using logic and science to learn about the world.

          The argument can be made that since God created humanity in their image that we’re all just fledgling gods with the big difference being our lack of immortality. We’re just not long lived enough as individuals to reach God’s level of power and insight. We are who God created us to be, logic and science included so If we don’t kill ourselves off we may eventually reach a collective godhood, or something akin to it, as a species.

          I’m not saying I believe that argument, I’m just pointing out that it’s there because it supports your point.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        The excuse that the Hebrew word for day could mean an extremely long period of time doesn’t work because plants and trees were created before the Sun and insects (pollinators).

      • wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        I skimmed that link and it’s pretty interesting, I’ll have to spend more time on it. I definitely liked the part at the end about God being the observer in this context, so what’s a day to him.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      The original wording can’t be read as eon instead of a day because plants and trees could’t last for an eon before the sun was created.