Posted on 04/01/2009 6:24:14 AM PDT by seanindenver
Some time ago, a highly charged argument was set in motion. It pitted evolution against creationism. One side of this debate relies on scientific inquiry and the other relies on ancient mythological texts.
That's my view. That's what I intend to teach my children.
Yet, I have no interest in foisting this curriculum on your kids. Nor am I particularly distressed that a creationist theory may one day collide with the tiny eardrums of my precocious offspring.
Which brings me to the Texas Board of Education's recent landmark compromise between evolutionary science and related religious concerns in public school textbooks.
The board cautiously crafted an arrangement that requires teachers to allow students to scrutinize "all sides" of the issue. This decision is widely seen as a win for pro-creationists — or are they called "anti-evolutionists"?
(Excerpt) Read more at denverpost.com ...
Allow me to correct your understanding of a day, allmendream.
A 24 hour day is the time it takes the earth to rotate once on its axis.
The sun is not the issue at hand in Genesis. The earth is.
And your inflationary view is the one that informs my own, sister. If God is the author of time, then His vantage point is outside time. And time proceeds much slower at the point of creation than it does in the far flung, rapidly expanding universe.
“Morning” denotes the Sun coming up. “Evening” denotes the Sun going down. “Day” denotes the time between the two.
A day or “yom” that has a “morning” and an “evening” without a Sun, is a poetic construction; not one that specifically denotes a 24 hour span of time.
So, I tell you again: assuming unobservable P from observable Q is the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Assuming unobservable P from unobservable not-Q is the fallacy of argument from ignorance.
"How do we investigate prehistory?"
You cannot 'investigate' pre-history. You can only speculate about it. Speculation will inevitably lead to fallacy if you try to present it as anything more than pure speculation.
" If evolution is true, how do we demonstrate it?
Evolution is speculation based on fallacy. You can't tell whether it is true or false and you can't 'demonstrate' it without engaging in fallacy. You can only believe or not believe in evolution and that is a philosophical decision, not an empirical one.
The rotation on the axis is the 24 hour period known as a day.
What was created on the first day of creation?
What marked the “morning” and the “evening” of the “yoms” before there was a Sun?
The perspective of the Watcher.
Trying to pin the Bible down to specifics when it is obviously being poetic (morning and evening of a “day” without a Sun), and then insisting that reality be viewed through the prism of this literal interpretation; is just warmed over gnosticism.
Sorry, but the bible is not being poetic in Genesis 1 & 2. It is being descriptive.
The perspective of God does not mean poetic (although He is the ultimate of all poetry.)
The perspective of God is from a dimension many don’t acknowledge, although it is the ultimate REALITY, “for God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.”
Therefore the perspective of the Great Author is the critical issue. For the Timeless One to assert that it is a day is to invite us to view that statement from His reality, and He is the one unbound by time. Therefore, to say that “a day with the Lord = 1000 years” is to forget that God is not bound by linear time. He is the Alpha AND the Omega, the beginning AND the end.
Thus, God knew both the presence and the absence of the Sun at the same time. He could easily accomodate the length of an event and measure it relative to the time of our dimension.
The best explanation of the facts is that the duration He addresses (a day) relates to the REALITY He had just created. Perhaps a proportion or a quantity, but it is NOT some will-o-the-wisp of fancy with no basis in fact.
So what is “morning” and “evening” of the first few days describing EXACTLY?
Not poetic?
A morning and an evening of a day without a Sun in existence is a poetic construction, not a definite span that must be some approximation of twelve hours.
I did not say a day for the lord = 1000 years.
I quoted the Bible that says “A day unto the Lord is AS a thousand years, and a thousand years is AS a day”. Once again this is being poetic not literal.
The Bible doesn’t say or imply that one day to the lord is exactly equal to one thousand years. It is saying that it is “as” a thousand years.
Genesis is being descriptive, it is also being poetic and allegorical. Being descriptive or poetic and allegorical are not mutually exclusive.
I would say that it remains the rotation of the earth as it is affected by the newly created light. However, I would be willing to allow for flexibility due to God’s sovereignty over all time and all dimensions. Nonetheless, I’d expect the proportion to be upheld.
And do you also expect the expression “40 days and 40 nights” to mean EXACTLY 40 days and nights?
It is a common expression from that area and era meaning “for days and days”.
Similarly when the Bible speaks of the “four corners of the Earth” it is not suggesting that the Earth is rectangular.
And when the Bible says that God created the foundations of the Earth so that they would not be moved, it doesn’t mean that the Earth does not move.
A “morning” and an “evening” of a “day” before there was even a Sun for there to be either morning, evening or daylight; in no way necessitates a twelve hour span.
40 days can mean exactly 40 days. 4 corners
“Not moved” is better translated “not overthrown or destroyed.”
Acts 26:26 for I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner.
Corner = location.
“Not moved” may well be better translated as “not overthrown or destroyed”, it is certainly consistent with the meaning of the passage (that God made the Earth safe for us). But that has not stopped many from claiming that this passage and others was best interpreted as a Biblical claim for Geocentricity.
Concerning the evening/morning issue, I thought y'all might be interested in Gerald Schroeder's comments:
The Talmud (Chagiga, ch. 2), in trying to understand the subtleties of Torah, analyzes the word "choshech." When the word "choshech" appears in Genesis 1:2, the Talmud explains that it means black fire, black energy, a kind of energy that is so powerful you can't even see it. Two verses later, in Genesis 1:4, the Talmud explains that the same word - "choshech" - means darkness, i.e. the absence of light.
Other words as well are not to be understood by their common definitions. For example, "mayim" typically means water. But Maimonides says that in the original statements of creation, the word "mayim" may also mean the building blocks of the universe. Another example is Genesis 1:5, which says, "There is evening and morning, Day One." That is the first time that a day is quantified: evening and morning. Nachmanides discusses the meaning of evening and morning. Does it mean sunset and sunrise? It would certainly seem to.
But Nachmanides points out a problem with that. The text says "there was evening and morning Day One... evening and morning a second day... evening and morning a third day." Then on the fourth day, the sun is mentioned. Nachmanides says that any intelligent reader can see an obvious problem. How do we have a concept of evening and morning for the first three days if the sun is only mentioned on Day Four? We know that the author of the Bible - even if you think it was a bunch of Bedouins sitting around a campfire at night - one thing we know is that the author was smart. He or she or it produced a best-seller. For thousands of years! So you can't attribute the sun appearing only on Day Four to foolishness. There's a purpose for it on Day Four. And the purpose is that as time goes by and people understand more about the universe, you can dig deeper into the text.
Nachmanides says the text uses the words "Vayehi Erev" - but it doesn't mean "there was evening." He explains that the Hebrew letters Ayin, Resh, Bet - the root of "erev" - is chaos. Mixture, disorder. That's why evening is called "erev", because when the sun goes down, vision becomes blurry. The literal meaning is "there was disorder." The Torah's word for "morning" - "boker" - is the absolute opposite. When the sun rises, the world becomes "bikoret", orderly, able to be discerned. That's why the sun needn't be mentioned until Day Four. Because from erev to boker is a flow from disorder to order, from chaos to cosmos. That's something any scientist will testify never happens in an unguided system. Order never arises from disorder spontaneously. There must be a guide to the system. That's an unequivocal statement.
Order can not arise from disorder by random reactions. (In pure probability it can, but the numbers are so infinitesimally small that physics regards the probability as zero.) So you go to the Dead Sea and say, "I see these orderly salt crystals. You're telling me that G-d's there making each crystal?" No. That's not what I'm saying. But the salt crystals do not arise randomly. They arise because laws of nature that are part of the creation package force salt crystals to form. The laws of nature guide the development of the world. And there is a phenomenal amount of development that's encoded in the Six Days. But it's not included directly in the text. Otherwise you'd have creation every other sentence!
The Torah wants you to be amazed by this flow of order, starting from a chaotic plasma and ending up with a symphony of life. Day-by-day the world progresses to higher and higher levels. Order out of disorder. It's pure thermodynamics. And it's stated in terminology of 3000 years ago.
==Why is it that when creationists are trying to attack or insult science, they accuse it of being like a religion?
Not like a religion, it is a religion. And a false religion at that.
Cite please.
Exodus Chapter 20.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.