Why did it take god 7 days? Isn't he powerful enough to do it instantly?
Printable View
Why did it take god 7 days? Isn't he powerful enough to do it instantly?
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Maybe he wanted to pace himself. :P
Ah, tortise beats the hare?
Well... I don't think that was it... cause look at the piece of crap that he created. I mean, lets face it, the universe (or atleast our planet) is a pretty shitty place to be.
This is why.
That was the funniest thing I've ever seen haha.
I thought it had more to do with http://www.400monkeys.com/God/
I'd actually kinda like a christian's perspective on this on
Metca, last time I checked, I though you WERE Christian. Did you stop believing, or something???
We're talking god-days here, since the sun didn't even exist until day 4. These days could be infinetesmally short or infinitely long when judged by our senses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by metcalfracing
If he did create the universe, then it's not days. If he's as good as people say he is, he can do it in an instant. Blind of an eye.
He probably made the entire Universe from the start of time to the end of time in one instant, it just seems like a long time to us because we're in it.
Also he taught us to work for 6 days and rest & worship on the 7th.
(good question I never thought of until I read god is not great): what did he do on the 8th day?
If you look at space we are both living in the past, and the future. Look into space and you seewhat it looks like millions of years ago (how trippy is that?), yet if you're over there you see earth from whatever planets telescope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremysr
He was with Adam and Eve in the garden, "talking" and "walking" with them. Not sure if he actually literally walked and talked like a human but he was always with them in the garden. That's what happened with them before they became evil, then God was seperated from them (and all their descendants.)Quote:
Originally Posted by paperdoll
He left and never did anything again, because he's a lazy SOB.Quote:
Originally Posted by paperdoll
If you want to get anything meaningful out of Genesis, I suggest you treat it symbolically and not literally. It is only we who experience the world in the limits of time and space; since God is Infinite, It is not subject to these limitations. The only way we can speak about things that 'exist' outside of our current limitations is symbolically. Hence, six days here does not refer to six earthly days, but rather six 'states of being' - each being a limitation (or freedom from a limitation, depending on the point of view), with the seventh day symbolizing complete unity with God. This Creation does not refer to something that happened historically in time, but rather to something happening constantly in the eternal Moment (or, it is this Moment that is the Creation). Depending on how limited one's point of view is, they will experience this Creation to varying degrees of Knowledge, or union with the Principle.
I'm of the opinion God created the universe in six creation days, not six twenty-four hour days. However, He could have done it instantaneously, so it's really not an issue as to how long it took.
I hate that argument. Christians INSISTED on taking the bible literally, until science stepped in and said "Well this not possible and here's why..."Quote:
Originally Posted by syzygy
Now you all in a vein attempt to believe this stuff, say well... its meant to be taken symbolically.
Funny, I can recount story upon story of persecutions that happened because of people taking the bible literally.
But that leaves room for you to say "Well... those are a few odd people that don't really understand..." Not really. For instance, the salem witch trials didn't happen because of a few random people taking the bible too literally, they brought in the highest leaders of the land... which sadly, in that day, happened to be high preists and nuns.
And what about the crusades... or the spanish inquistion...
... and lest we forget the banning of the life of Brian in Great Britain!
These are all very good examples of people taking the bible too literally. (Well, with the exeption of the life of brian.)
Different parts of the Bible are literal, and other parts are symbolic. Most of the time you can tell if a something is meant literally if you read around it, or know something about who wrote it and why they wrote it.
That doesn't make sense if you read that part of the Bible. It says he created certain things on certain days. One day it was the oceans, one day it was birds and fish, another day it was land animals, then humans, etc. That doesn't sound symbolic at all, it sounds like a description of how God created everything.Quote:
If you want to get anything meaningful out of Genesis, I suggest you treat it symbolically and not literally. It is only we who experience the world in the limits of time and space; since God is Infinite, It is not subject to these limitations. The only way we can speak about things that 'exist' outside of our current limitations is symbolically. Hence, six days here does not refer to six earthly days, but rather six 'states of being' - each being a limitation (or freedom from a limitation, depending on the point of view), with the seventh day symbolizing complete unity with God. This Creation does not refer to something that happened historically in time, but rather to something happening constantly in the eternal Moment (or, it is this Moment that is the Creation). Depending on how limited one's point of view is, they will experience this Creation to varying degrees of Knowledge, or union with the Principle.
I'm glad we're talking about the really important parts of Christianity here, and not just looking for ways to bash peoples core beliefs for no reason. Great job, atheists!
Yes, unfortunately many people today take the literal interpretation (which is always the base level of interpretation) to be the truth, even if it contradicts knowledge and experience. I will not go into why this is popular today, but I think the signs are obvious to anyone who is looking for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by metcalfracing
I am afraid you are somewhat confused (as many are today in regards to religion) about the history of Christian hermeneutics. Contrary to what many people believe today, Biblical literalism is actually a fairly recent phenomenon (this reminds me of the Christians in the U.S. that claim the country was founded on Christianity - and their distorted view of it at that!). The early church fathers never held the belief that is so popular today with modern conservative Christians that the literal interpretation of the Bible is above all others.
Origen, one of the earliest church fathers, wrote many exegeses that had as a central theme the discrimination against literal, historical interpretations in favor of symbolic, spiritual ones. He wrote about how the literal interpretation was the base meaning that was helpful to simple or new Christians until they (if ever) looked deeper into the spiritual truths behind the dead words. Origen was very aware of the many inconsistencies of the Bible and took great care to explain why they seemed this way. He held that the spiritual was a higher truth than the physical and rejected any literal interpretation of a physical Heaven or resurrection of bodies. An interesting side note: Origen also believed that souls do not go to Heaven or Hell for eternity based on the actions of this life alone, which is also a fairly modern perversion of religion, but that union with God was a continuous progression (one can find many similarities here with Buddhism).
Although there are others who shared similar views in the early Christian church, perhaps it is St. Augustine who wrote about this issue with the most clarity. Hell, he even wrote a 400 page book just about interpreting the first three chapters of Genesis! In it he describes how the six days of creation are not physical events in time, but rather symbols for degrees of angelic knowledge of creation. He held that these six days were in fact simultaneous and included the creation of time. He clearly states that if there is something in the literal interpretation of the Bible that seems to contradict one's own physical perceptions and rational faculties, that one should not take this to mean that physical science is wrong, but that there is a hidden, spiritual meaning that is intended in the text.
I would also recommend checking out Emanuel Swedenborg, if you are in fact interested in these topics; now there is the mother lode!
I could go on with this, but I think you get the point. These issues have been around since the beginnings of the religion, and have been thought and written about extensively. It is not the recent findings of science that have made people start interpreting the Bible symbolically. This is an ignorant and absolutely ridiculous claim to make. For one, there are still vast amounts of people who insist on interpreting the Bible literally, even though science contradicts certain passages read this way. Also, to think that the esoteric meaning of religious texts has anything to do with recent scientific discoveries is not only historically impossible, but is to completely dismiss the spiritual truths behind these texts that are fundamental to their creation and interpretation.
I don't know why you insist on grouping me into your previously conceived ideas on how Christians think. I don't even agree with the arguments you think I would make.Quote:
Originally Posted by metcalfracing
Oh come on now, hermeneutics takes a little more effort than that! It makes sense if you actually examine it for yourself. Why are the days divided the way they are? Why are certain details mentioned? What does it mean that there were the waters before the light?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremysr
You think that the physical planet Earth existed in time before the Sun? This seems perfectly logical to you?
You know a symbol can be seen from two perspectives: the dead, outer shell and the living, inner soul. Do not rely on the obvious, gross forms if you want to gain any true Knowledge; it is in the hidden, subtle waters where Heaven resides.
LOL I love the links, pretty funny haha :P
Yeah, I think the 7 day thing is just some tampering made by church to make it look cool, and godly. But they couldn't come up with somethign for the 7th day though xD
The Bible is a great moral teacher if read as a fairy tale. But really dangerous if read literally.
Define "literally"? The bible being taken seriously can change someones life just like anything can. Like you said, it is a good moral teacher. You can take it literally aslong as you don't act like a jerk about it. If you want a simple life just following what something says then read and do what the bible says. Of course some of the sins is rediculas like lust...everyone has lust, we are humans. ;) Don't kill, or steal is an obvious thing anyone should know without ever reading a bible, it's common sense.
Bah Lucid I'd rather not believe it literally (e.g. believing god exists). But anyway this is a different topic and I don't have the slightest will to have this discussion once again.
No offense man, but your way off. Study up on the puritan/calvinist movement! Perfect examples of bible literalism. While I'm at it, the settler's WERE basing the colonies around religion... luckily our founding father's actually had a great deal enlightened ideas between them.Quote:
I am afraid you are somewhat confused (as many are today in regards to religion) about the history of Christian hermeneutics. Contrary to what many people believe today, Biblical literalism is actually a fairly recent phenomenon (this reminds me of the Christians in the U.S. that claim the country was founded on Christianity - and their distorted view of it at that!). The early church fathers never held the belief that is so popular today with modern conservative Christians that the literal interpretation of the Bible is above all others.
Preconceived ideas of how christians think!? The irony! X_XQuote:
I don't know why you insist on grouping me into your previously conceived ideas on how Christians think. I don't even agree with the arguments you think I would make.
You see, the very agruement that a person who used to be on of the most prominent christians on this board for a time has "Previously conceived ideas on how christians think" makes you look like an asshat! I must pick up backwards ways of thinking fast!