Does the Bible's creation account rule out the possibility that the universe began with the big bang

@maxdancona,

I think we've already seen that the Bible account of creation places things in the correct order. I fail to see the value in debating this. It is not my desire to try and prove myself right and others wrong. That's not why I engage in this forum. I only wish to help people see that what they thought was a contradiction in the Bible can be clearly explained when one engages in a thorough examination of the context. It's only when one does not take this approach that one mistakenly perceives what they beleive are contradictions.

I see you as being an inteligent person and I wish to respect your view as I hope you would be willing to respect mine.

2 Replies

@anthony1312002,

anthony1312002 wrote:

Well, for example, when summarizing God’s creative work, Moses refers to all six creative days as one day. (Genesis 2:4)

Once again, you're distorting the Bible's language. The day to which Genesis 2:4 refers is "the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens". Genesis 1 states quite clearly which day that was. It was the first of the seven, the one on which, "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth" (Genesis 1:1).

anthony1312202 wrote:

In addition, on the first creative day, “God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night.” (Genesis 1:5) Here, only a portion of a 24-hour period is defined by the term “day.”

True. That's why I said that days are delimited by mornings following evenings. So even if God created the heavens and the Earth in mid-day, it still means that every day after the first would have been a conventional 24-hour day.

anthony1312202 wrote:

Certainly, there is no basis in Scripture for arbitrarily stating that each creative day was 24 hours long.

In all due respect, you are grasping at straws. If the six creative days were really five full days plus a fraction of one creative day, that gives you a fudge factor of up to 5/6. But that's not even close to the fudging you need to rescue your hypothesis from certain death by reading comprehension. Rather, as I pointed out earlier, your fudge factor would have to be great enough that the average day of creation is (1) one-sixth of 13.8 billion years long. On the other hand, though, your fudge factor has to be small enough that (2) plants can survive a "day" without light. Good luck with that.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot wrote:

Not to mention those 'morning and evenings' before there was a sun.

Oops, I just noticed that you made my point before I did. Sorry for my inadvertent plagiarism.

0 Replies

@anthony1312002,

anthony1312002 wrote:

I think we've already seen that the Bible account of creation places things in the correct order.

Then I suggest you think again.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Well, I'm only going on what the Bible and well known and respected Bible scholars have made known.

Again, it is not my desire to prove anyone wrong, but only to promote what the Bible really teaches.

1 Reply

@anthony1312002,

I find that to be a quandary, because of the many contradictions.
Check out the <thinkingatheist.com/biblecontradictions>.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Can we examine one of what you would say is a contradiction?

1 Reply

@anthony1312002,

Look up the <thinkingatheist.com/theorderofcreation>
Genesis 1:11-12 and 1:26-27 vs Genesis 2:4-9.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I've gone to the site and looked around, but what do you perceive as a contradiction?

1 Reply

@anthony1312002,

Genesis 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Genesis 1:31
Also, 1 Timothy 4:4
For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving,

1 Reply

@anthony1312002,

Quote:

I think we've already seen that the Bible account of creation places things in the correct order. I fail to see the value in debating this. It is not my desire to try and prove myself right and others wrong. That's not why I engage in this forum. I only wish to help people see that what they thought was a contradiction in the Bible can be clearly explained when one engages in a thorough examination of the context.

No, you haven't shown that the Bible account of creation places things in the correct order. In fact, you haven't really explained in what order you think that Biblical account of creation places things.

Could you please put the following events into the order that you think the Bible places them into....

a) The creation of the first stars.
b) The creation of our Sun.
c) The formation of the Earth.
d) The light of the Sun hitting the Earth.
e) The first land plants.
f) The first sea animals.
g) The first land animals.

If you could put these into what you think is the Biblical order, it would go a long way to showing if there is actually a contradiction here.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

This on the surface might appear to be a contradiction. But again looking at the context we see what he is referring to. God felt regrets in that the conduct of humans had become so evil that he had a change of attitude as regards the wicked pre-Flood generation as verse 7 goes on to show. He determined that he could no longer allow the human family to continue on it's present course which would lead to only more suffering and misery.

But in verse 8 the Creator finds pleasure in the faithful man Noah. Thus he draws a distiction between Noah, a righteous man, and rebellious mankind. Showing that he did not regret that he had made man, but that mankind as a whole had chosen to misuse the gift of free will.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

According to science the sequence is...

A, B, C, D, F, E, G

And in my opinion, the sequence in the Bible is

C, E, ABC, E, FG

There is definitely a big contradiction here.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Both Genesis 1:31 and 1 Tim 4:4 are referenced at Acts 4:4 where the Creator, in a vision helps the apostle Peter to understand that now, not only would the Jews have an opportunity for salvation, but that now all of mankind would benefit from Jesus sacrifice.

The nothing is to be rejected referrs to those termed by the Jews as gentiles. They now had the same hope as the Jews of salvation.

0 Replies

@anthony1312002,

Do you believe that the Flood was a literal flood?

There was no world wide flood in the time that humans existed.

This is another contradiction between scientific evidence and what is in the Bible. Many people say that the Flood was a metaphor since it didn't really happen.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Actually I do. But this is also evidenced in many cultures ranging from Italy, Ice Land, Bolivia, Canada, China and other major civilizations. The fact that all of these cultures have as part of their history the account of the world being deluged by wanter, and that only a single family survived it cannot be viewed as only a mere coincidence. Especially when many of these cultures have nothing in common and would not otherwise share their history.

But to by honest, for many centuries now the Bible has been under attack and in each instance has always been able to be verified true. Thus givining further evidence of it's divine authenticity. No doubt there will be many more.

2 Replies

@anthony1312002,

You are making stuff up again.

It is a scientific fact that many cultures including Italy, Ice Land, Bolivia, Canada and China have experienced big floods. It is also a fact (and not a particularly surprising one) that floods are a consistent theme in mythology.

The part about "only a single family survived" is not correct. In many North American flood stories everyone is saved.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

According to science the sequence is...

A, B, C, D, F, E, G

And in my opinion, the sequence in the Bible is

C, E, ABC, E, FG

There is definitely a big contradiction here.

Your opinion does not take into account that ABC all took place before the first creative day. You should read more carefully.

1 Reply

@anthony1312002,

Quote:

But to by honest, for many centuries now the Bible has been under attack and in each instance has always been able to be verified true.

This is the biggest mistake you are making. It is very simply not true. I can give you any number of instances where the Bible has been proven wrong.

I would include the order of events in the creation story... which I could prove to you is false once you tell me what you think were the events in the creation story.

It is pretty easy to prove with scientific evidence that there was no world wide flood. You just have to look at geological data (since a world-wide flood would leave unmistakable geological evidence that simply doesn't exist) and the biological data (since so many species dying at one point would also leave unmistakable evidence that doesn't exist.

By the way, the story of Moses is also a myth. Such a mass migration would leave archaeological evidence, as would a long period of slavery. There would also independent historical evidence of such a period of slavery. DNA evidence also contradicts this story by telling us the real identity of the people that would become Jews.

There are plenty of places that the Bible is contradicted by scientific, historical and archaeological facts.

As long as you keep making things up, you will never be able to honestly confront this fact.

1 Reply

Does the Bible's creation account rule out the possibility that the universe began with the big bang

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know