Creation - What do you say? (Earth, mystic, translation, genesis)

[Francine]

Originally Posted by Popeyesays

Sol is a Population II star. Population I stars only cook up to iron and iron kills those stars as it accumulates causing the supernovae which transmute elements to create everything heavier than iron.

On the contrary, it is written (Sol article in Wikipedia), "The Sun is a Population I, or third generation, star whose formation may have been triggered by shockwaves from one or more nearby supernovae."

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by divinelight

here os what i am pondering.
What if there never was creation? Maybe mass and space has always existed. There has always been a way, always been a tao

According to LDS (i.e. Mormon) doctrine, the universe was not created ex nihilo, i.e. from nothing, but out of the matter that was co-eternal with God. I don't know anything about tao, so perhaps you can tell me if that is similar to your belief.

[Mestemia]

Originally Posted by Blentyn chan Celi

As far as the time-line is concerned, for him to embellish by substituting literal days for actual eras is unrealistic IMO.

One would assume that Moses was being told what to write, at least for the parts he did not himself witness.
Or perhaps he is merely putting to paper the stories as orally being told him?

Either way, seems to me that he would be using the time period (be it hours, days, years, etc.) as he was hearing.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Blentyn chan Celi

I prefer to take a literal standpoint in most cases where biblical interpretations are disputed. Some say that the 6 days are symbolic of six ages, but I really don’t think so. The Genesis account is accepted to have been written by Moses - though we don’t know for certain. Clearly Moses did not witness the events themselves, so they must have been revealed to him in one way or another. As far as the time-line is concerned, for him to embellish by substituting literal days for actual eras is unrealistic IMO.

The Latter-day Saints actually have a more literal understanding of most biblical events than many Christians do, so I can appreciate your perspective. On the other hand, the author of Genesis (regardless of who it may have been) was not a man of science, but a man of faith. God spoke to him in a way that he would have been able to understand and in a language that he would be able to communicate with other people of his time. Here's how I heard it explained once:

"I don't understand why it is so difficult for some people to believe that God is the greatest scientist in the universe, but that he could not explain some of his high tech processes to people who thought a fig leaf was high tech. Even if He had been able to show [his ancient prophets] the whole truth, how could [they] write that down in terms that the rest of the world would understand without a few thousand years of education?

How do you explain to your children how a gasoline engine works or where rain comes from? Is it possible that you answer this never-ending flow of curiousity with 'not quite accurate answers' whichare in terms your children will understand. When God [said] that [Adam] was created from the dust in one day, is it not possible that this answer was his 'not totally accurate explanation' in terms that [people] could understand? How would you explain genetics and millenniums to a man whose first and greatest creation was disposable underwear harvested from the same tree his food was harvested from"?

[Francine]

Originally Posted by Mestemia

One would assume that Moses was being told what to write, at least for the parts he did not himself witness.
Or perhaps he is merely putting to paper the stories as orally being told him?

Perhaps Moses had the same sight reaching back in time that Ezekiel had reaching forward in time.

[Blentyn chan Celi]

Originally Posted by Francine

Perhaps Moses had the same sight reaching back in time that Ezekiel had reaching forward in time.

I’m interested to hear more in this.

[Blentyn chan Celi]

Originally Posted by Mestemia

One would assume that Moses was being told what to write, at least for the parts he did not himself witness.
Or perhaps he is merely putting to paper the stories as orally being told him?

Either way, seems to me that he would be using the time period (be it hours, days, years, etc.) as he was hearing.

Well… If you add and subtract ages in Genesis you will find that Noah as born before Adam Died. You will also find that Abraham was born 2 generations after Noah died. It may not be too farfetched to believe that Abraham heard the story of the creation from someone who had heard it directly from Noah who had heard it directly from Adam. From there it became tradition until Moses wrote it down. On the other hand, there is a lot of complex information recorded in Genesis.

But I agree with Kat. There is that possibility that days and dust are symbolic. I just don’t like taking license with the word of God.

[EtuMalku]

Everything we know was created from vibration, even God.

[Rog]

Genesis account for two creation events, not one.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Blentyn chan Celi

The Genesis account is accepted to have been written by Moses - though we don’t know for certain.

Or, more correctly, the Genesis account is accepted to have been written by Moses by those folks who believe that the Genesis account was written by Moses. Thanks for sharing ...