Why Creationism over Evolution? Bring on the arguments (Creator, Earth)

[matthew.william]

Originally Posted by Jay

I'd be curious to know the cost of making sense of Genesis 1: 21 in light of 1:24 ...

What about it doesn't make sense?

~matthew.william~

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by matthew.william

What about it doesn't make sense?

I notice that the two verses together imply that birds were created before land animals. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense when taken literally.

I note that it also doesn't make a whole lot of sense that plants (Gen. 1:11) or "day" (Gen. 1:4-5) would be created before the Sun (Gen. 1:16).

And your idea about years being shorter in the past would seem to me to make it more difficult, not easier, to reconcile Genesis with the evidence we have for the history of the Earth.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by matthew.william

What about it doesn't make sense?

It's rather sad that you need to ask, but Genesis would have you believe that the early bird not only gets the worm but predates it.

[matthew.william]

Originally Posted by 9-10ths_Penguin

I notice that the two verses together imply that birds were created before land animals. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense when taken literally.

I note that it also doesn't make a whole lot of sense that plants (Gen. 1:11) or "day" (Gen. 1:4-5) would be created before the Sun (Gen. 1:16).

And your idea about years being shorter in the past would seem to me to make it more difficult, not easier, to reconcile Genesis with the evidence we have for the history of the Earth.

Perhaps the source of 'day' wasn't the sun? I don't know and frankly, I don't interpret the whole thing literally. I was wondering why ocean life and bird life before land animals wouldn't make sense. I would like to know where I stated anything about me having any idea as to the length of years though. Please show me where I stated anything about that.

~matthew.william~

[matthew.william]

Originally Posted by Jay

It's rather sad that you need to ask, but Genesis would have you believe that the early bird not only gets the worm but predates it.

Hmmm, perhaps the birds ate the seeds, fruit, and nectar of plants instead of worms? Perhaps the early bird ancestors ate aquatic life and then evolved into species that ate primarily land-based animals?

~matthew.william~

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by matthew.william

Perhaps the source of 'day' wasn't the sun? I don't know and frankly, I don't interpret the whole thing literally.

That's fine, but the issue just raised was the idea of interpreting Genesis literally, but in such a way that it allowed for acceptance of evolution.

Originally Posted by matthew.william

I was wondering why ocean life and bird life before land animals wouldn't make sense.

Birds evolved from land animals. This precludes the possibility of birds existing before the first land animals.

Originally Posted by matthew.william

I would like to know where I stated anything about me having any idea as to the length of years though. Please show me where I stated anything about that.

You didn't. That was in the post from theDamagedOne that we've been discussing:

Originally Posted by theDamagedOne

My Pastor also explained to me that the "calendar" that was used in the Old Testament was not 365 days- it was MUCH shorter, meaning a person who in our time is 30 years old, would have been maybe 300 (or whatever #) in Old Testament time.

[matthew.william]

Originally Posted by 9-10ths_Penguin

Birds evolved from land animals. This precludes the possibility of birds existing before the first land animals.

Okay, but the question was about reconciling one verse to another, not the two verses to a scientific theory.

You didn't. That was in the post from theDamagedOne that we've been discussing:

Please don't ascribe another persons quote to me then.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Originally Posted by matthew.william

Okay, but the question was about reconciling one verse to another, not the two verses to a scientific theory.

I assumed you were asking about the subject at hand, which was reconciling the sequence given in those two verses with other evidence, i.e. the history of life. If I had known you were intentionally making a non-sequitir, I wouldn't have made my post.

Originally Posted by matthew.william

Please don't ascribe another persons quote to me then.

And I didn't. Like I said, my only assumption was that you were continuing the discussion of the subject at hand. Now that you've made it clear that you weren't, I can acknowledge my mistake in doing so and we can get back to creationism vs. evolution.

[theDamagedOne]

I'm the one who posted the theory in question regarding Genesis and the actual time frame in which the earth was created. I've been out of town for a week. Hmmm.. maybe that was a year in OT time!

[Somkid]

Originally Posted by rojse

I suppose creationism gives people an exaggerated feeling of self importance when they say God created them, instead of saying that they are one of the many products of the evolution process.

I agree with you 100% who wants to be alone and insignificant in the universe, to have a god as your invisible friend and super power is the coolest thing and I honestly wish I could buy into it because then I wouldn't be as miserable in my existence