Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DaveMatrix
No, land mammals didnt exist a billion years ago, but there is an order to the story, first the earth, then plants, sea creatures, and then mammals and humans. It doesnt say mammals, I think it says cattle, but there is a simplistic evolution of events. Plants, Animals, Humans....
I dont recall the Bible saying each day is to the Lord as a thousand years, but I do recall the day to a year. If it can be a year or a thousand then why not a billion???
Perhaps God did create a single celled organism which carried the genetic code that would eventually evolve into an untold multitude of life forms. Even if that organism was brought here by a comet it just makes the story that much more interesting. The whole galaxy may have been seeded that way, but where did the original organism come from??? Science hasnt been able to replicate life, only manipulate it.
|
the current estimated age of the universie is 13.7 billion years. so maybe one day is 2.28 billion years. or maybe as pigglet said, one day to god is sour cream. i used the term apologetics in my previous post because that is what trying to reconcile your faith in the bible with the world outside the bible is (at least to my knowledge, correct me if i'm wrong!).
the big problem with this entire topic, imho, is that you are trying to say that 1 god day could equal 'x' human years. but why go that extra step? why not just say that to get where we are today, it has taken 'x' years (13.7 billion in this case). why does god have to be involved? because if you're going to try to reconcile the scientifically determined age of the universe with '6 days', then you also have to reconicle where that dome of water went (gen. 1.6), etc. why are you so sure that
your god is the correct god? how can you be sure that it isn't vishnu or odin or any of the number of other gods that didn't have such good marketing in the western world? maybe the god that created the universe simply set things in motion and left? or maybe god never existed. is it more likely that moses and noah and jesus and many other biblical characters existed as described or is it possible that most of these characters are mixtures of real people and previously existing mythology from that region (hint: look to sumerian mythology and you find a lot of similarities dating back before judiasm).
i realize that this is possibly a bit off-topic, but i think the discussion of believing in a book for an explanation of the age of and creation method of the earth versus current (and evolving) scientific knowledge calls into question the credibility of both sets of evidence. as toaster126 and analog mention earlier in the thread, the
why of what you believe is more important to than what you believe. and i personally can't understand why anyone would choose to believe something so specific as the bible when all other evidence really seems to point in other directions.