Can 15 billion yrs = 6 days?

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:56 pm

My photosynthesis remark was more of an afterthought than anything. My main challenge was to your assertion that complex life didn't appear until day 5.

On day 5 the bible says God created "every living creature that moves."
Only after the waters were created because "let the waters bring forth" implies a process.
God did'nt say "Let there be living creatures and it was so" rather it was "let the waters bring forth."
Then after the creatures were created "God saw it was good."
It sounds to me like God pushed the snowball off the mountain and he watched it do what it should do and then God evaluated what he saw, which was that it was good.

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:05 pm

I think that to assign a figurative meaning to scriptures which were meant to be taken at face value, is tantamount to not accepting scriptural statements in the sense which the authors had in mind. It's one of several ways of reading into the scriptures in order to harmonize them with our other beliefs.

You're right that i am trying to harmonize the bible with science. I don't worship science but i think that it is most likely true that the universe is billions of years old.
I don't believe the age of the universe is an illusion created by God which he knew would fool us. I think God's creation is what it appears to be to the overwhelming majority of both secular and Christian scientists.
Ultimately i think science will compliment the bible and be the believers close friend.

Post by **_Paidion** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:31 pm

I don't believe the age of the universe is an illusion created by God which he knew would fool us.

Neither do I. I think the illusion has been created by the media, and a few "scientists". Real scientists recognize this perceived age is theory built upon a sequence of many other theories and assumptions.

I think God's creation is what it appears to be to the overwhelming majority of both secular and Christian scientists.

Are you sure it "appears" that way? Or is that perception of it a series of speculations, assumptions, and theories?

As an example of differing perceptions, many perceive Einstein's theory of relativity as a theory about space and time. But others see it as a theory about the behaviour of light.

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 10:12 am

Are you sure it "appears" that way? Or is that perception of it a series of speculations, assumptions, and theories?

I'm not sure therefore i used the phrase "most likely" but i understand that the approximate age of the universe has now been measured by more then method.

Post by **_Perry** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:54 am

Hi Steve7150,

I understood you to say that God didn't create complex living organisms until day 5. Yet plant life was created on day 3. Are you saying that plants are not complex living organisms?

Perry

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 12:21 pm

I'm not sure therefore i used the phrase "most likely" but i understand that the approximate age of the universe has now been measured by more then method.

Meant to say "by more then one method."

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 12:28 pm

Hi Steve7150,

I understood you to say that God didn't create complex living organisms until day 5. Yet plant life was created on day 3. Are you saying that plants are not complex living organisms?

Hi Perry, Relative to animals or man, plants are much less complex. But the point i'm driving at is that if Mr Schroeder's time table is accurate then day 5 occured 500 million years ago which does'nt leave enough time for macro-evolution.
The YECs often claim that OECs are just pandering to evolutionists and this would debunk that charge.