Created for all 2
67
In the beginning...again
First and foremost, I believe that it is important to note that I believe the bible is true and correct in every way. I do not believe that the bible contradicts itself in any method or presentation. It is only by the fallacy of man that perceptions have been created to propagate the belief that the bible is filled with contradictions.
Now that is out of the way...onward to the creation!
- 9 And God said, "Let the waters beneath the sky be gathered into one place so dry ground may appear." And so it was.
- 10 God named the dry ground "land" and the water "seas." And God saw that it was good.
Something that I want to point out here. God said let the waters beneath the sky be gathered into one place so dry ground may appear. In my previous article I pointed out how God made a separation between water and water and put the sky in between it.
My Point?
Scientific studies have shown that there are approximately 5 layers of atmosphere on Earth. They determine these layer by the contents of the layers, how the contents,(hydrogen, oxygen, helium) stack up as you reach space. You should be aware that if there was no atmosphere, we wouldn't be here.
Again, my point?
Simply this, some creation scientists will note that our atmosphere should have a 6th and final layer that was made of water. Given the closeness of space, this would have been crystaline in nature. Another layer of atmosphere would radically change the landscape of earth, how the sun's rays filter through to us, how our plants and animals grow, how we grow. The implications are immense. Additionally, this would give us enough water for a worldwide flood when the bible says that God opened the heavens and the earth to flood it.
- 11 Then God said, "Let the land burst forth with every sort of grass and seed-bearing plant. And let there be trees that grow seed-bearing fruit. The seeds will then produce the kinds of plants and trees from which they came." And so it was.
- 12 The land was filled with seed-bearing plants and trees, and their seeds produced plants and trees of like kind. And God saw that it was good.
- 13 This all happened on the third day.
This all happens in 24 hours. God planned His creation and He timed it. He knew what He wanted, where He wanted it and when it should be put in play. Can't plant seeds without land can you? Can't really have land without water?
Let there be light
Do you have a watch? A timer of some kind? A clock that hangs from your walls? I personally don't know how people told time before the microwave oven was invented. Of course, once the power goes out, I have no idea what time I should reset it to....
God knew that we would need some help telling time, when to plant crops, when to celebrate birthdays(I just had one by the way, please send gifts to my po box!). He also is aware that we cannot see without the light.
Intelligent Design
|
Illustra Media Intelligent Design Collection - 3 DVDs
Current Bid: $20.97
|
|
Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & Theology by William A....
Current Bid: $4.99
|
|
Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design by Stephen...
Current Bid: $16.77
|
Christian Devotional Books
 | Amazon Price: $7.39 List Price: $14.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $6.97 List Price: $15.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $9.99 List Price: $19.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $8.92 List Price: $14.99 |
- 14 And God said, "Let bright lights appear in the sky to separate the day from the night. They will be signs to mark off the seasons, the days, and the years.
- 15 Let their light shine down upon the earth." And so it was.
- 16 For God made two great lights, the sun and the moon, to shine down upon the earth. The greater one, the sun, presides during the day; the lesser one, the moon, presides through the night. He also made the stars.
- 17 God set these lights in the heavens to light the earth,
- 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.
- 19 This all happened on the fourth day.
We also need to be able to see. Have you ever tied to walk around in perfect darkness? I mean no lights shinning in the house, no clock light, anything. You need to have some kind of light to go by, something that gives your eyes enough to start trying to draw out details. We need light shinning off of things in order to see them. So God gave us a tool to see at night, several tools actually, the stars light up the night just as much as the moon will, pouring light to let you percieve the world.
Only Seeing with the Light
There is something to be said about the representation of darkness here. Creation has both light and dark, day and night. God calls us to be a light to the world, a light in the darkness. Before we even were made, God showed us light and darkness. He proved that there needs to be light in the dark to prevent us from being lost somewhere,(again, try walking around your own home in total darkness, you're gonna get hurt). You cannot see or survive in darkness. The darkness itself won't kill you, but it sure will cripple all your efforts to get along with living.
The same goes for you. Without the light of Christ, you are living in darkness.
John 8:12 Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, "I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life."
You will survive, you will live, but your existance is choked, stimied, held back. Only until you let the light that is the Son of God govern you, will you thrive.
Creation Science Books
|
Exploring Creation With Physical Science by Jay L. Wile (2000, Hardcover, St...
Current Bid: $.99
|
|
FREE Kent Hovind Creation Science DVDs, 9 Vol. Set NEW
Current Bid: $25.00
|
|
Apologia Exploring Creation with Physical Science Great Homeschool Book by Wile
Current Bid: $53.50
|
|
FREE Creation Science DVD 9 Vol Set NEW Bible Christian
Current Bid: $25.00
|
|
Apologia Exploring Creation with General Science Text/Tests/Solutions
Current Bid: $10.00
|
Latest Hubpages by Gspyda
- How to Build a Mouse Trap Car - A Step-by-Step Guide
Building a mousetrap car does not require a degree in physics. Truly anyone can make a mousetrap car that works. In this article you will see the basic principles to making a car powered by a mousetrap along with some helpful links to further your understanding of the project. Details include the types of tools you will need, and the easiest way to accomplish the task. - 3 years ago
- Mechwarrior Combat part 4
The mechwarrior universe is rich in content. Much like Star Wars, there is a huge tapestry of people and events, cities and planets. Within that universe, the mechwarrior miniature tabletop game has a lot... - 3 years ago
- Endless Ocean (Wii) - Walkthrough and Cheats
Endless Ocean is a new video game for the Nintendo WII video game console. In this game you become a scuba diver who is tasked with exploring the local ocean floor. You must search for treasures, fish and other items as you guide tourists, take underwater photographs for journalists and help the local marine life foundation to preserve nature. Befriend dolphins and teach them how to perform tricks. With a fully customizable character and the ability to use additional customization options as - 3 years ago
- How To Repair Drywall
If you are anything like me, you have managed to put a hole in one of the walls in your home. If you are a very close to being like me, then you have put more than one hole in more than one of your walls. Read... - 4 years ago
- The Bombardier Beetle Theory
The myth, the legend, the bug that all creationists bet their chips on to prove the existence of God as the father of creation. There are other things mind you that creationists offer as proof of a divine creator making a world of purpose. However... - 4 years ago
CommentsLoading...
well i didnt get to that part of a lesson! its is amazing that scientific principles apply to what God has done. i really love looking at things and seeing the intelligent design He made
The claim that the atmosphere was once covered by a layer of water, or a "water canopy", has been shown to be scienifically impossible. Please review http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvprBLhJx_o
even inside of that video, it doesnt truly disprove the possibility of the existance of a layer of water that would be a 6th atmospheric layer. an example: they say barometric pressure would have destroyed the layer. i can agree that barometric pressure as we see it in operation today may have done that. however i will point out that any additional atmospheric layers would dramatically change barometric pressures and the entire landscape as a whole.
you as a reader must also suspend your commonlyeld beliefs to read this much as I have to in order to read what you have to say.
As an earnest question, if it turned out that the Bible wasn't every bit literally true, would that shake your faith at all? Why or why not? After all, the Son was quite fond of teaching his lessons via parables, why is it so objectionable to many Christians that other parts of the Bible are intended as parables as well?
i dont think it is a matter of obectivity.
if there are parts of the bible that arent true, it would negate so much of what the bible is. there are historic recounts in the bible in addition to explanations of things that we dont understand. some of it even with the bible isnt really meant for our earthly understanding.
as for shaking my faith, that is tough to answer. my faith is in God, because of knowing Him, i believe all that is written in the bible is true and correct. if it werent true, then i would have things to think about as far as knowing God as i know Him
I'm afraid you misunderstood me, I didn't mean objectivity, by "objectionable" I meant that many Christians find a non-literal reading to be an unacceptable idea.
I ask about your reliance on Biblical literalism in your faith, because I've always had trouble with Biblical literalism, not the least because Paul's disciple Timothy had some definite issues with women (if we literally obeyed his injunction not to allow women to teach, the entire educational system in this country and most others would fall apart). For me, "faith" itself is defined as believing in that which cannot be known (once you have evidence, it's no longer faith, but knowledge), so to have a series of factual conditions on that faith sort of contradicts the whole concept. St. Augustine had some interesting ideas about this way back in the fifth century, long before school prayer was deemed unconstitutional: http://www.pibburns.com/augustin.htm.
I know that you state that you don't believe that the Bible contradicts itself, but I do have to ask one very simple question: who was the father of Mary's husband Joseph?
"And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." Matthew 1:15-16
"And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph," Luke 3:23 -24
(I've used the King James version here, the comparison also works within the NRSV, please let me know if you prefer another translation. There are some newer translations that gloss over this, I think for obvious reasons, but the comparison works back into the original Greek.)
The standard apologetic response to this comparison is that one genealogy is for Mary and the other is for Joseph. But the literal reading doesn't say that. Matthew literally states that Joseph's father was Jacob while Luke literally states that Joseph's father was Heli. The question itself doesn't really mean that much to me, Joseph wasn't even Jesus' true father, but it does factor in my rejection of Biblical literalism.
And yes, I know that even the Devil may quote scripture, but I'm not him, and as I said before, I don't want to challenge your faith in God or Christ at all. But Biblical literalism asks me to reject all of the empirical data scientists in every field, from geologists and biologists to astrophysicists, have collected for the last two hundred years. This scientific has shown its validity via thorough testing by a wide variety of methods as well as its predictive abilities (see the pursuit and discovery of the Tiktaalik fossil). In turn, Biblical literalism cannot consistently identify Joseph's father.
This is just one example of why I've never been able to accept Biblical literalism, and why I (not to mention thousands of clergy members from a wide variety of denominations, see http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/religion_scien choose to accept that science and religion can and should comfortably coexist.
I look forward to your thoughts and comments.
Sorry, the Clergy Project URL got cut off, for your reference, it can be found here:
"even inside of that video, it doesnt truly disprove the possibility of the existance of a layer of water that would be a 6th atmospheric layer. an example: they say barometric pressure would have destroyed the layer. i can agree that barometric pressure as we see it in operation today may have done that. however i will point out that any additional atmospheric layers would dramatically change barometric pressures and the entire landscape as a whole."
Very well. Please provide or reference both the barometric calculations that would show that a water canopy would have been feasable and evidence that such a canopy has ever existed. Also, as the arguments of the video approach the alleged impossibility of a "water canopy" based upon multiple independent assertions of impossibility, please show that all of the arguments within the video are faulty.
kate, bear with me a little while i further research the lineage. i want to double check a few things before i leave a full reply.
dimensio, same thing. in order to work up any calculations, it will take me some additional time and research, so please, be patient with me. i apologize for not having something liek that immediately in had. further, i will write a more full response using the additional arguements.
Great hub. Very interesting and thought provoking. I look forward to more.
hmm maybe the translators made a mistake? It was - after all - put together by order of the king? Perhaps there are mistakes here and there, since it was touched by human minds? even things left out? maybe it's as correct as it can be, since people were involved? Some mistakes do not make me not believe, but I think belief is personal, individual and based on evidence not seen and therefore impossible for some.
Just thinking...
In other words, I believe the Bible as it is translated correctly.
Hi Marisue,
I went back and checked on the original greek (my greek has definitely gotten worse over the years, much better with the Hebrew, but I can identify the words for son and father, even if I did have to look up begat). Even in the original Greek, there are two different fathers for Joseph, and they are explicitly identified as Joseph's, not Mary's, father.
I have no problem, personally, with a human Bible, divinely inspired, but certainly limited by the efforts and fallibility of man. Like I said in the original post, it's really an immaterial issue, but I'm simply pointing out one reason why I personally cannot read the Bible literally. It makes me feel like faith is a house of cards waiting to fall over. I'd really like to understand why people adhere to Biblical literalism, that's all.
kate,
ok, i pulled up several things. first i started to look into the greek to check the daddy differences. a few things came up, one is that in the greek, the word for son wasnt always representing the immediate child, it could also be grandson or any length of great grandson. there is a lot to type so im going to add the links below. between my study bible, the articles i linked and talks with some of my pastors, im led to beleive that heli was not josephs actual father, but his father in law. jewish culture at that time supports that possibility, and im inclined to believe that way as i call my father in law dad.(not the most scientific or factual support i know, but the text doesnt exactly dive into what heli and josephs relationship was like, i know i need a dad and my father in law is one for me)
http://answering-islam.org.uk/BibleCom/mt1-1.html
the below article was my main lead in, even though it isnt an end all telling. i researched through my study bible and checked the greek through www.blueletterbible.com blue letter gave me the greek words and meanings, but not a lot of detail in regards to cultural issues, though i knew there were more. my study bible was my first indicator that showed heli as the father of mary using joseph as a stand in due to being a son in law. the articles will walk you through understanding that both lines lead through the throne of david and how even through debates, there is support for biblical prophecies being fulfilled in the curse of jehoiakim
http://www.lifeofchrist.com/life/genealogy/default
i think it important to note that matthew and luke were reaching different groups with their letters as their timelines of things were different. in each of the gospels, there are certain details that the tellers tell or dont tell. they have reasons from personalities, the age of the teller, the education of the teller, and what the story meant to the teller, what they walked away from the encounter with most prominantly...
Marye Audet Level 2 Commenter 4 years ago
Interesting to note as well that crystals focus sound waves. In Job it says that the stars were singing...imagine those crystalline bite of water focus the sound waves from space and what it might sound like on earth.
Great hub.