Why?

[TheFinalWord]

TFW,

 

What do you make of the fact that Genesis says, "And there was evening and there was morning--a first day." Then the next day says, "And there was evening and there was morning--a second day." And so on. This suggests literal days. Any time the Bible repeats a phrase over and over it's usually for a significant reason.

 

Many people argue that it would have been impossible for there to be evening and morning since the sun (stars) weren't created until the fourth day. But it's important to realize that external light source--at least according to the Bible--is not a necessity. I wrote in another post that in the New Jerusalem there won't be day or night because, it says, God will be there and he is their light.

 

Sure!

 

There are three four literal meanings of the word "day" in Hebrew, yom. A long period of time is a literal definition of day in Hebrew. Just my initial reading, evening to morning is only 12 hours, not 24. Evening to evening would be 24 hours. So maybe it's Jesus' definition as Kaiser said: "Are there not 12 hours in a day? (John 11)"

 

Days, the 24 hour kind, weren't created until the fourth day. The seventh day has not ended. So 4 out of the seven are indeterminate from what I can tell, biblically...not getting into scientific problems with the 24 hour interpretation. What made sense to me was to go through and look at everything that happened on day 6. The Hebrew word for when Adam sees Eve "happa'am" which means "after all this time".

 

I'm no expert at reading Hebrew though. To me long periods of time make more sense.

 

You can see both views here:

 

Debate on science and the bible - YouTube

 

Enjoy

Edited August 16, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[quankanne]

We'll all be OK and able to enjoy many more Hobbit movies.

*grumbles* actually, if it DID end this december, damn Hollywood wouldn't be milking it and we'd get to SEE the movie in one pop.

 

See, superstition's good for something! :lmao:

[YellowShark]

There are three four literal meanings of the word "day" in Hebrew, yom. A long period of time is a literal definition of day in Hebrew. Just my initial reading, evening to morning is only 12 hours, not 24. Evening to evening would be 24 hours. So maybe it's Jesus' definition as Kaiser said: "Are there not 12 hours in a day? (John 11)"

 

Uhhhh.. nope. My mother is Israeli and yom means day. It doesn't mean 1000 years. It doesn't mean 1,000,000 years, 2 weeks or anything else. It means 1 day. 24 hours. It was Christians who have interpreted Yom to mean a "period of time" so that they could make adjustments to their Genesis "stories." Truth.

 

*grumbles* actually, if it DID end this december, damn Hollywood wouldn't be milking it and we'd get to SEE the movie in one pop.

 

See, superstition's good for something! :lmao:

 

The whole Mayan calendar scam is absolutely hilarious. Some wackos decided that because the Mayan calendar ends on Dec 21st 2012 that's the day the Earth must end. It's like saying the calendar on my fridge ends on December 31st so that must mean the world ends on December 31st. It's hilarious that an entire industry has been built on it. Well quankanne when you are opening your presents on Xmas day this year think about all those "experts" and books that predicted the Earth was supposed to end a few days earlier.

[TheFinalWord]

Uhhhh.. nope. My mother is Israeli and yom means day. It doesn't mean 1000 years. It doesn't mean 1,000,000 years, 2 weeks or anything else. It means 1 day. 24 hours. It was Christians who have interpreted Yom to mean a "period of time" so that they could make adjustments to their Genesis "stories." Truth.

 

Well, that's your opinion. Many Hebrew scholars, including Moses, disagree with you mom

 

Please provide evidence to substantiate your claims. Just like my evidence of my life doesn't count for you, your mom's Hebrew translations are the same for me.

Edited August 16, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[YellowShark]

Well, that's your opinion. Many Hebrew scholars, including Moses, disagree with you mom

 

Please provide evidence to substantiate your claims. Just like my evidence of my life doesn't count for you, your mom's Hebrew translations are the same for me.

 

Hebrew scholars can interpret whatever they want. There were more words than just "yom" to describe the passage of time in ancient Hebrew and Aramaic. In Hebrew, Yom = day, Yamim = days, chodesh=month.. I grew up with the stuff. Back then people weren't jumping around like monkeys calling everything "yom."

 

And anything you read about Moses was written by people who heard stories about him around the fire.. and never ever knew the guy. He lived over a thousand years before Christ. I bet he was a lot different than his mythology in "the stories."

[M30USA]

Sure!

 

There are three four literal meanings of the word "day" in Hebrew, yom. A long period of time is a literal definition of day in Hebrew. Just my initial reading, evening to morning is only 12 hours, not 24. Evening to evening would be 24 hours. So maybe it's Jesus' definition as Kaiser said: "Are there not 12 hours in a day? (John 11)"

 

Days, the 24 hour kind, weren't created until the fourth day. The seventh day has not ended. So 4 out of the seven are indeterminate from what I can tell, biblically...not getting into scientific problems with the 24 hour interpretation. What made sense to me was to go through and look at everything that happened on day 6. The Hebrew word for when Adam sees Eve "happa'am" which means "after all this time".

 

I'm no expert at reading Hebrew though. To me long periods of time make more sense.

 

You can see both views here:

 

Debate on science and the bible - YouTube

 

Enjoy

 

So do you believe the 7000 year theory? According to that, we are in the year 6900 or something.

[quankanne]

when you are opening your presents on Xmas day this year think about all those "experts" and books that predicted the Earth was supposed to end a few days earlier. yeah, well, my birthday falls a week after Christmas, so I'll be thinking about getting suckered with one gift instead of two, as usual!

[TheFinalWord]

Hebrew scholars can interpret whatever they want. There were more words than just "yom" to describe the passage of time in ancient Hebrew and Aramaic. In Hebrew, Yom = day, Yamim = days, chodesh=month.. I grew up with the stuff. Back then people weren't jumping around like monkeys calling everything "yom."

 

And anything you read about Moses was written by people who heard stories about him around the fire.. and never ever knew the guy. He lived over a thousand years before Christ. I bet he was a lot different than his mythology in "the stories."

 

Yellowshark, I am really interested in your analysis here. Do you speak Hebrew? Not trying to bait you, but in other posts here you have taken verse really out of context, for example before you cited prophetic verses as literal. But if you know Hebrew, then I am sincerely asking your opinion

 

Why did the "author" (if you want to say it's not Moses, that's fine I could care less with this post) of Genesis use yom to describe the entire creation in Genesis 2, if day can only mean 24 hours?

 

Why is yom translated as "time" in several instances in the Old Testament if it can only ever mean 24 hours.

 

More examples....

 

1. Genesis 4:3 "And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord." In this instance, Yom refers to a growing season, probably several months.
   
2. Genesis 43:9 "...then let me bear the blame for ever." Here, Yom to represents eternity
   
3. Genesis 44:32 "...then I shall bear the blame to my father for ever." Again, Yom to represent eternity
   
4. Deuteronomy 4:40 "...that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which the Lord thy God giveth the, for ever." Here Yom represents a physical lifetime
   
5. Deuteronomy 10:10, "Now I stayed on the mountain forty days and nights, as I did the first time,..." Here, Yom is a "time" equal to forty days.
   
6. Deuteronomy 18:5 "...to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for ever." Again, Yom is translated as eternity
   
7. Deuteronomy 19:9 "...to love the Lord thy God, and to walk ever in His ways..." Here, Yom represents a lifetime. As long as we live we are to walk in his ways
   

Word Study Yom

 

I'm really interested here. If you have the expertise in Hebrew, I'm interested.

 

I don't speak Hebrew, but just from my basic English reading of the chapters it does not seem like the word translated day is strictly limited only to 24 hours of time...there is a context...for example, yom also can mean daylight...

 

"And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night (here is seems to me that day (yom) is referring just to day light, correct? So that would not be 24 hours), and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years (here seems like 24 hours make sense, day in the context of year), and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day (yom to mean daylight again) and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning —the fourth day.

[TheFinalWord]

So do you believe the 7000 year theory? According to that, we are in the year 6900 or something.

 

No, I don't believe anyone can "calculate" to figure out the end of the age and the like.

 

This is interesting from the book of Esdras though

 

What do you think???

 

Art and the Bible - 2 Esdras 4 - Apocrypha

 

Shew me then whether there be more to come than is past, or more past than is to come. 46 What is past I know, but what is for to come I know not.

47 And he said unto me, Stand up upon the right side, and I shall expound the similitude unto thee.

48 So I stood, and saw, and, behold, an hot burning oven passed by before me: and it happened that when the flame was gone by I looked, and, behold, the smoke remained still.

49 After this there passed by before me a watery cloud, and sent down much rain with a storm; and when the stormy rain was past, the drops remained still.

50 Then said he unto me, Consider with thyself; as the rain is more than the drops, and as the fire is greater than the smoke; but the drops and the smoke remain behind: so the quantity which is past did more exceed.

[Fugu]

I think if I were to bring myself to believe in a version of afterlife, it would probably be somewhat similar to what little I've read about in Eastern religion or philosophy, that with the whole reincarnation or shall we call it 'recycling' of spirits. We know that our physical being is broken down and recycled into organic matter. Maybe the spirits (our spirits) get used by other people. And just like our progeny never looks quite the same as its parents, I think the same is true of human spirits or animal consciousness: it's being passed through live channels and it keeps evolving, never quite dying out completely but being absorbed by others to the point of no longer being recognizable in its original form.

[M30USA]

This is exactly why I dont trust the bible.

 

So you're looking to the Bible as a scientific encyclopedia? Aren't people like you the very first to claim that this is not the purpose of the Bible...and that it's merely a religious book?

[YellowShark]

Yellowshark, I am really interested in your analysis here. Do you speak Hebrew? Not trying to bait you, but in other posts here you have taken verse really out of context, for example before you cited prophetic verses as literal. But if you know Hebrew, then I am sincerely asking your opinion

 

Why did the "author" (if you want to say it's not Moses, that's fine I could care less with this post) of Genesis use yom to describe the entire creation in Genesis 2, if day can only mean 24 hours?

 

Yes I know Hebrew. Don't use it in my day-to-day life anymore but I grew up with it. It goes like this. I am 100% sure that people back then were not so primitive that they only had 1 word - "yom" - to describe a passage of time. I can't be almost 100% sure about that. And I am also sure that "scholars" realized that they had some explaining to do. The Earth is BILLIONS OF YEARS older than the bible says it is. We know that with 100% certainty. So they "fudged." They took the word "yom" and shoehorned it into their religious world view. Suddenly "yom" means 1000 years! Or 1,000,000 years! Ahhhhh... that fixes a lot of things regarding the actual age of the Earth doesn't it.

 

And you can quote from the bible all you like. It means nothing to me. What people wrote in the Bible is entirely exaggerated and mythical. It's not fact, it's testimony. Hell with all the verification and technology today the media like CNN and BBC *still* get stories wrong and you folks are trying to convince me that stories from 2000 and 3000 years ago in the Bible are accurate? Pla-eze. You can't check OR verify one story from the bible.

 

This is why I just don't understand why intelligent people throw their intellect out the window when they start quoting from the bible.

[YellowShark]

yeah, well, my birthday falls a week after Christmas, so I'll be thinking about getting suckered with one gift instead of two, as usual!

 

I promise you the Mayan calendar ends on Dec 21st 2012 because that is simply when they ended it. Just like Bill Smith the Realtor ended his complimentary calendar on December 31st of this year. Neither means the Earth will end on those dates.

 

I marvel that an entire cottage industry has been built on the Mayan calendar and the end of the world this year. It's hilarious. And it only goes to prove that people will say ANYTHING to make reality fit into their own world view. This includes what they wrote in the bible.

[Fugu]

For me, it's compelling enough to take people out of the narrow-minded dismissal of there being a Creator, and to at least consider the possibility of their being an intelligent force behind all of it. What I can't stand is this absolute refusal to even consider it a possibility...

 

Why not consider the possibility that we're alien offspring, or that we're actually nothing more than holograms? Are you willing to consider these possibilities as well -- or do you only want us to consider the possibilities that you want to believe in? That's the problem I have with discussions like this. The same people who want us to believe in a God like the one mentioned in the Holy books are typically the ones who don't want to consider the possibility of evolution. It's a one-way street. The problem we have here is, there's more observed evidence than there is supporting a conscious force guiding the development of the Universe. If you question the recorded observations and conclusions that support evolution, then you may as well question every other scientific observation that has led to all of the other scientific theories we now widely accept as fact. Even Christians wash their hands, cook their meat, and crap in a commode -- why? Because scientific observation long ago proved the link between sanitation, germs, and fatal diseases.

 

That being said, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs/lack of.

 

I don't necessarily see it that way. I think you're entitled to your opinions, sure. You're entitled to think that Ronaldino is better than David Beckham. You're entitled to think Las Vegas is more exciting than New York. You're entitled to think Mediterranean food is better than standard American fare. But you're not entitled to your own beliefs about facts - that's just irresponsible thinking. You're not entitled to propagandize and brainwash children into believing in fairy tales over facts.

 

FWIW, it's fine to believe in a Creator. I happen to believe in a God-like force myself. I believe in forces that are beyond the ability of the human mind to understand. The problem for me has always been one of definition: What is "God"? I just think that most religions have an over-simplified view of God, based on assumptions that were probably made at around the time that humans were just beginning to learn agriculture. A lot has changed since then. We know a lot more, yet we also know enough to know that we know very little. It is with this mindset that we should approach the subject of God.

Edited August 17, 2012 by Fugu

[soccerrprp]

Like I've said, watch the video I posted.

 

I'm not against the theory of evolution, per se. I used to believe in it, before I found God, and I'm not saying people ought to only believe what I believe. I can only say what I believe, right? It's a one-way street on this entire discussion really.

 

Atheists have been crying for scientific evidence, and when it's provided, the same people ignore it. I'm not saying that the video has to convert, but it's definitely something to mull over. Food for thought, as it were. And there actually isn't really all that much evidence that supports the theory of evolution, in fact, it is close to being discredited. A lot of scientists have turned away from that theory.

 

For me, as The Final Word said in one post, just looking at the night sky is enough to convince me that there is a God, and maybe that isn't good enough for everyone. I've done my research in my faith, but I genuinely believe that whatever we say will just get discredited because God has not come down from the Heavens and shown Himself.

 

The theory of evolution isn't a fact, though is it? It's a theory, hence the name. If you're entitled to take that as fact, then I'm entitled to take creationism as fact.

 

Wow, I know plenty of Christian scientists who see evolution as another wonderful example of God's creativity. People who believe that evolution has no room in their faith seem inclined to believe in a creation myth that was not meant to be taken literally and does not stand the test of any meaningful or believable evaluation.

 

There are problems with evolution certainly. It's full appreciation cannot necessarily be done in one's single life time, but I have seen it and people see it happening all around. The problem is that people don't understand what evolution is about...fixated on the whole men evolved from monkies thing so can't or unwilling to see the evolution of life forms that are happening all the time all around them. No, no monkeys changing into humanoids, but many examples of simpler lifeforms evolving...

 

Evolution is being discredited? By whom? I've seen some religious entities claiming this and "some" in the scientific community questioning it, but where is this discreditation? Just asking...

 

One thing is clear, creationist idea is untenable. So, to believe it alone is treading on a fantasy world.

 

BTW, liked the video.

Edited August 17, 2012 by soccerrprp

[TheFinalWord]

I am 100% sure that people back then were not so primitive that they only had 1 word - "yom" - to describe a passage of time.

 

How do you know, where you there then? Hey, is that Bilbo over there

 

Sorry I couldn't resist Plus that's a strawman anyway. No one said that was the only word they had. There is more than just a single word anyway, it's a context. If you speak Hebrew I'm surprised I have to explain that to you. Hey I can count to ten in Spanish, so I can now speak Spanish. Maybe I'll learn Hebrew this afternoon too!

 

And you can quote from the bible all you like. It means nothing to me. What people wrote in the Bible is entirely exaggerated and mythical. It's not fact, it's testimony. Hell with all the verification and technology today the media like CNN and BBC *still* get stories wrong and you folks are trying to convince me that stories from 2000 and 3000 years ago in the Bible are accurate? Pla-eze. You can't check OR verify one story from the bible.

 

I know the bible means nothing to you. Believe me I'm not trying to convince you. I totally get you have a bias and would never consider anything I present as even a possibility. I won't waste you time Another strawman though. Half the reason the news gets things wrong is b/c they give excruciating details.If we had all the details from the bible we wouldn't need things like day-age, hermeneutics, eschatology, denominations. We would know specifics.

 

This is why I just don't understand why intelligent people throw their intellect out the window when they start quoting from the bible.

 

Uhhhh.. nope. My mother is Israeli and yom means day. It doesn't mean 1000 years. It doesn't mean 1,000,000 years, 2 weeks or anything else. It means 1 day. 24 hours. It was Christians who have interpreted Yom to mean a "period of time" so that they could make adjustments to their Genesis "stories." Truth.

 

I wasn't quoting from the bible to convince you of anything religious, only that it is readily obvious that yom can be mean more than ONLY 24 hours. Which is what you said my friend. I wasn't giving you anything about day-age hypothesis. I already know you don't care about it.

Edited August 17, 2012 by TheFinalWord

[Fugu]

Like I've said, watch the video I posted.

 

I'm not against the theory of evolution, per se. I used to believe in it, before I found God, and I'm not saying people ought to only believe what I believe. I can only say what I believe, right? It's a one-way street on this entire discussion really.

 

What is there to believe in? It's an observable reality -- as observable as the fact that poor sanitation leads to diseases. No, you don't have the right to deny facts. It's dishonest.

 

Atheists have been crying for scientific evidence, and when it's provided, the same people ignore it. I'm not saying that the video has to convert, but it's definitely something to mull over. Food for thought, as it were. And there actually isn't really all that much evidence that supports the theory of evolution, in fact, it is close to being discredited. A lot of scientists have turned away from that theory.

 

Oh wow, a YouTube video. Color me converted.

 

For me, as The Final Word said in one post, just looking at the night sky is enough to convince me that there is a God, and maybe that isn't good enough for everyone.

 

Yours is an interpretation of experience; it's not proof of God. You can call that proof of God, but there's no real reason for anyone else to accept it as such. But watching how species change according to their environment is indeed proof of evolution. It was observed. It has been observed again and again.

 

The theory of evolution isn't a fact, though is it? It's a theory, hence the name. If you're entitled to take that as fact, then I'm entitled to take creationism as fact.

 

No, it's fact. It's a theory because it is based on facts. It would take another set of facts that contradict the set of facts used to support evolution in order to alter our conclusions of what evolution means.

[OpenBook]

I watched the video, and there were several things that I didn't understand why scientists (of all people) would make such huge leaps in their conclusions:

 

#1 - The universe is expanding. They came to this conclusion by observing that galaxies appear (to us) to be moving farther and farther apart from each other. In our limited 3-dimensional world, sure that would be a reasonable guess. But we know so little about the universe. I don't understand why scientists would come to this conclusion so quickly?

 

#2 - The chances of other habitable planets in our galaxy are infinitely small. Habitable by us humans, yes I could buy maybe. But they didn't consider the possibility that there might be other advanced lifeforms in the universe besides humans. Nor did they mention anything outside our galaxy, which (my understanding) is an infinitessimally small part of the universe. They just came up with 20 elements of our Earth that would have to be present to "sustain life." To me that's an incredibly narrow view, especially for a scientist.

 

#3 - Strobel's early conclusion as a young scientist that since life (specifically, amino acids) could be created from a careful selection of gases in a lab experiment, points to the unlikelihood of intelligent design. I don't even know what to say here! Where's the connection?

 

Sorry, I'm just not making the jump to hyperspace here. The biggest impression I got from that video is - whatever happened to the scientific process of skepticism, refusal to assume anything, being open to all possibilities, and objective measurement & analysis?

 

That said, I do strongly agree with Strobel that God and science can and do play well together, and our study of science is actually part of God's intelligent design.

 

In fact, this is my fondest wish for us humanoids as a species - the more we discover, the closer we get to God. Yes this could just be wishful thinking on my part. So sue me. I just don't think Strobel is the best advocate for it.