I'm not sure what bible he's using, but mine says he made the sun by the third verse, soooo...
Why does he need to do that when he could have it whenever he wants? He can just poof things into existence apparently.
@guy you know, the Bible isn’t literal about everything (in fact, it rarely is). A day in Genesis could be billions of years. When you create the universe and are explaining that process to nomads in the desert who can’t count past 20, you use terms they can understand and record. Plus, on the scale of eternity, the 4.5 billion years it took to form the Earth might as well have been 7 days.
To understand God, you have to understand what infinity really is. God doesn’t have to be able to poof planets into existence instantly to be all powerful. The ability to create a universe, regardless of the timeline, is as powerful as it gets, i.e. all powerful
@RepostSniper, I wasn't being serious in my posts. I don't and will never give 2 sh!ts about religion, everyone is free to believe what they want and I won't hold it against them. Diversity is one of the great things about humanity, it's too bad there are certain groups that tend to be more judgemental towards others.
@guy you know, alrighty then, fair enough. Though as a parting thought, “there are certain groups that tend to be more judgmental towards others” is itself a judgement statement, assuming you’re collectively referring to religious people.
@RepostSniper, not really being judgemental, more of an observation. I've seen way more open minded non-religious people than open minded religious people.
@guy you know, Ah, and I assume you’ve observed all 6 billion religious people instead of just judgmentally rolling them in with a hand full of assholes you’ve met. Fair enough
@RepostSniper, I'm glad you've got good reading comprehension, I was stating my observation. Obviously it doesn't apply to the group as a whole. But if it makes yourself feel better trying to put words in others mouths to bring yourself above others than by all means go ahead. This is funny pics not debate pics so I'll leave it at that.
@guy you know, whatever you gotta tell yourself. Obviously you can do no wrong.
@RepostSniper, that just seems like moving the goal post. Once it's proven the universe and the earth wasn't made in 7 days, you can't just claim that you meant the real time it took for the Earth to come about. If you do that, then you can change the meaning of anything in the bible to mean what you want.
He had preplanned the location of the sun so he could keep track the the days while he did other things...
@MMSieBreeze, I must have missed that part
@MMSieBreeze, why would an all powerful immortal being need to keep track of time?
@guy you know, how else is he gonna know when chick-fil-a opens?
Theories I’ve heard relate to how the authors would have written. One idea is that the time they’re referring to (days) aren’t what we understand as days but rather periods of time. In addition to that, when listing what happened, they didn’t adhere necessarily to chronological order, but rather in order of perceived importance. Many religious people I know use this interpretation to square away their belief and the scientific facts we know of now (for example that the world is not only 10,000 years old).
@ThatAnnoyingStoner, Being that evidence suggest a young earth, less than 10k years, they are inaccurate.
@Thatoneguymayknow, Im sorry. Did you just seriously suggest that the Earth is LESS then 10,000 years old? You must be a troll. You have to be.
@LaDarkProphet, I'm not a troll, I'm a massive science nerd. Particularly interested in this field. There is no evidence that holds up to scrutiny. For example, radiometric dating is fine, but they can't use it to date that far back, because we don't know the conditions, they assume a lot when they try to use it as proof. However, if you view the layers in the Grand Canyon for example, you will see such a mix of creatures, and rock types, that they couldn't have happened slowly, it had to be a massive rush of water that formed the canyon. This app is hardly a good place for these discussions, especially with this limited chat function. If someone is interested in conversing about this, I'm more than happy to, but we should take it somewhere else.
@Thatoneguymayknow, not inaccurate at all. Dude said "periods of time" it can cover however long it needs too. Young or old. Cool thing about interpretation is everyone is completely full of shît lol especially when they "assume a lot when they try to use it as proof". The cool thing about religion is you literally don't need proof. You just need to chill.
@sonofafishtaco, You don't seem to be following the conversation, you are mixing up two of them. I addressed one flaw in the comment.
There is proper interpretation, and improper way. People tend to try and add to the words, when they shouldn't.
It's an interesting idea, not needing proof. But I don't know where you get that from. Sure you can choose to believe something with no proof, but you are assuming that all people, and religions do that.
Using your own words, "
You need to chill."
@Thatoneguymayknow, well no I mixed them up intentionally to create a bigger picture. Thought that was apparent.
Well yes. In a faith based system actual proof would invalidate faith. Full stop. Accordingly just have faith and chill.
I feel like you're being low key condescending because you don't like my mannerisms. You should check that shît so you can appeal to a larger audience in the future. Jsyk.
@sonofafishtaco, It was not.
Thats not accurate, some faiths don't have proof, others do. Maybe not 100%, but finding proof of accuracy, validates it.
However, the billions of year Religion, does require even more faith, since they need faith that all of the particulars match what they want them to, for those dates to be correct.
Tone is not easy to convey over text, but it seems you haven't done a great job articulating, as apparent from the mixup.
I believe you should check your own, so people can understand you. I would also suggest you check your spelling.
@Thatoneguymayknow, What peer reviewed scientific research do you have suggests an earth that is less than 10,000 years old?
@TriangleTesticles, I would be happy to provide some, however, do you have a better location to continue this fialogue, this chat system is very inadequate to continue responding.
I would also like to return the question, do you have any peer reviewed scientific research to suggest an earth older than 10,000 years? And I mean scientific, as in has to pass actual Scientific Standards, like the Scientific Method.
@Thatoneguymayknow, Open any Biology, Geology, or Astronomy textbook. Textbooks acquire their information from many peer reviewed scientific sources so you’re reading the gathered consensus of many researchers.
As far as the research I’ve done since reading your comment, I haven’t been able to find a single scientifically valid paper that argues for a young earth, the only “proof” I’ve seen has been from creationists trying to use religious logic. I guess I’ll just wait and see if it gains momentum and becomes easier to find
@TriangleTesticles, Ah, I figured you would say that. That info is not actually science, they avoid telling you that, and state it as fact, while it is simply theory.
Not solid proof.
The data is actually right in front of us. It just requires looking at it from a slightly different perspective. If you don't wish to move platforms for more detailed conversations, then you can visit https://answersingenesis.org/answers/
They provide many details, and using common sense, logic, and the scientific method, they are more grounded in science, than outrageous unfounded claims from those millions of years studies.
It was told in the concept of days, so we could understand it.
On the fourth day? So.. 3 days passed then.. right? It's Sunday, 13:40 here, I'm already smashed, and I refuse to leave my hotel room.
I already read inherit you thought you could pull a fast one on me
Its more questionable that there was light the first day
He made the light before and was governing it himself but then he made the sun to keep the pattern going
Well it’s a work of fiction, so you don’t necessarily need a fictional sun to measure fictional days.
A full rotation of the Earth counts as a day, duh
i always assumed it meant four days in heaven not four days on the nonexistant earth