Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What do you mean by Genesis?I'm posting here as someone else has failed to see.....the science
anyone else ?...failing to see Genesis as an experiment
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/pc/r1/lp-e/1204288/188/0I'm posting here as someone else has failed to see.....the science
anyone else ?...failing to see Genesis as an experiment
Science and the Genesis Account
Many people claim that science disproves the Bible’s account of creation. However, the real contradiction is, not between science and the Bible, but between science and the opinions of Christian Fundamentalists. Some of these groups falsely assert that according to the Bible, all physical creation was produced in six 24-hour days approximately 10,000 years ago.
The Bible, however, does not support such a conclusion. If it did, then many scientific discoveries over the past one hundred years would indeed discredit the Bible. A careful study of the Bible text reveals no conflict with established scientific facts. For that reason, Jehovah’s Witnesses disagree with Christian Fundamentalists and many creationists. The following shows what the Bible really teaches.
Genesis does not teach that the earth and the universe were created in six 24-hour days just a few thousand years ago
When Was “the Beginning”?
The Genesis account opens with the simple, powerful statement: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) A number of Bible scholars agree that this statement describes an action separate from the creative days recounted from verse 3 onward. The implication is profound. According to the Bible’s opening words, the universe, including our planet, Earth, was in existence for an indefinite time before the creative days began.
Geologists estimate that the earth is 4 billion years old, and astronomers calculate that the universe may be as much as 15 billion years old. Do these findings—or their potential future refinements—contradict Genesis 1:1? No. The Bible does not specify the actual age of “the heavens and the earth.” Science is not at odds with the Biblical text.
How Long Were the Creative Days?
What about the length of the creative days? Were they literally 24 hours long? Some claim that because Moses—the writer of Genesis—later referred to the day that followed the six creative days as a model for the weekly Sabbath, each of the creative days must be literally 24 hours long. (Exodus 20:11) Does the wording of Genesis support this conclusion?
No, it does not. The fact is that the Hebrew word translated “day” can mean various lengths of time, not just a 24-hour period. For example, when summarizing God’s creative work, Moses refers to all six creative days as one day. (Genesis 2:4) In addition, on the first creative day, “God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night.” (Genesis 1:5) Here, only a portion of a 24-hour period is defined by the term “day.” Certainly, there is no basis in Scripture for arbitrarily stating that each creative day was 24 hours long.
How long, then, were the creative days? The Bible does not say; however, the wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved.
Six Creative Periods
Moses wrote his account in Hebrew, and he wrote it from the perspective of a person standing on the surface of the earth. These two facts combined with the knowledge that the universe existed before the beginning of the creative periods, or days, help to defuse much of the controversy surrounding the creation account. How so?
Events starting during one “day” continued into one or more of the following “days”
A careful consideration of the Genesis account reveals that events starting during one “day” continued into one or more of the following “days.” For example, before the first creative “day” started, light from the already existing sun was somehow prevented from reaching the earth’s surface, possibly by thick clouds. (Job 38:9) During the first “day,” this barrier began to clear, allowing diffused light to penetrate the atmosphere.*
On the second “day,” the atmosphere evidently continued to clear, creating a space between the thick clouds above and the ocean below. On the fourth “day,” the atmosphere gradually cleared to such an extent that the sun and the moon were made to appear “in the expanse of the heavens.” (Genesis 1:14-16) In other words, from the perspective of a person on earth, the sun and moon began to be discernible. These events happened gradually.
The Genesis account also relates that as the atmosphere continued to clear, flying creatures—including insects and membrane-winged creatures—started to appear on the fifth “day.”
The Bible’s narrative allows for the possibility that some major events during each day, or creative period, occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following creative days.*
According to Their Kinds
Does this progressive appearance of plants and animals imply that God used evolution to produce the vast diversity of living things? No. The record clearly states that God created all the basic “kinds” of plant and animal life. (Genesis 1:11, 12, 20-25) Were these original “kinds” of plants and animals programmed with the ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions? What defines the boundary of a “kind”? The Bible does not say. However, it does state that living creatures “swarmed forth according to their kinds.” (Genesis 1:21) This statement implies that there is a limit to the amount of variation that can occur within a “kind.” Both the fossil record and modern research support the idea that the fundamental categories of plants and animals have changed little over vast periods of time.
Modern research confirms that all living things reproduce “according to their kinds”
Contrary to the claims of some religious fundamentalists, Genesis does not teach that the universe, including the earth and all living things on it, was created in a short period of time in the relatively recent past. Rather, aspects of the description in Genesis of the creation of the universe and the appearance of life on earth harmonize with recent scientific discoveries.
Because of their philosophical beliefs, many scientists reject the Bible’s declaration that God created all things. Interestingly, however, in the ancient Bible book of Genesis, Moses wrote that the universe had a beginning and that life appeared in stages, progressively, over periods of time. How could Moses gain access to such scientifically accurate information some 3,500 years ago? There is one logical explanation. The One with the power and wisdom to create the heavens and the earth could certainly give Moses such advanced knowledge. This gives weight to the Bible’s claim that it is “inspired of God.”*—2 Timothy 3:16.
You may wonder, though, does it really matter whether you believe the Bible’s account of creation? Consider some compelling reasons why the answer does matter.
In the description of what happened on the first “day,” the Hebrew word used for light is ’ohr, light in a general sense, but concerning the fourth “day,” the word used is ma·’ohrʹ, which refers to the source of light.
For example, during the sixth creative day, God decreed that humans “become many and fill the earth.” (Genesis 1:28, 31) Yet, this event did not even begin to occur until the following “day.”—Genesis 2:2.
Posting walls of plagiarized text is against forum rules. Hell, posting any plagiarized material is against forum rules.
.
.
Yes it is.I changed it to a link is that ok? I'm genuinely asking
np at all broYes it is.
Thanks for observing the rules.
.
Serpent? Fruit? Are you basing this apology on folklore?The serpent proposed an experiment: Try the forbidden fruit and see if it makes you like God yourself. Adam and Eve performed the experiment, and failed to disprove the null hypothesis. It really wasn't very good science (there were no double blind controls for the effects of permitted fruits, for instance), but it was science, nonetheless.
There is nothing scientific about people with physical bodies which live forever, nothing scientific about talking snakes, and nothing scientific about apples changing the laws of physics such that suddenly physical creatures go from being immortal to ageing decaying and dying.The serpent proposed an experiment: Try the forbidden fruit and see if it makes you like God yourself. Adam and Eve performed the experiment, and failed to disprove the null hypothesis. It really wasn't very good science (there were no double blind controls for the effects of permitted fruits, for instance), but it was science, nonetheless.
the mystery is in the telling of the story.....But where is the 'science' in Genesis? Science, as a methodology, wasn't to be invented for 2,000 years.
Genesis is folklore, and you're being apophenic. You can always find some true statements, or statements that can be interpreted to refer to some later scientific discovery, in folklore. There's no mysterious insight here.
you're on to it.....but not quiteThe serpent proposed an experiment: Try the forbidden fruit and see if it makes you like God yourself. Adam and Eve performed the experiment, and failed to disprove the null hypothesis. It really wasn't very good science (there were no double blind controls for the effects of permitted fruits, for instance), but it was science, nonetheless.
Serpent? Fruit? Are you basing this apology on folklore?
Experiment? What hypothesis had been proposed for testing?
Making choices and experiencing the results isn't science, it's just life. My cat does it all the time, but I wouldn't call her a scientist.
There is nothing scientific about people with physical bodies which live forever, nothing scientific about talking snakes, and nothing scientific about apples changing the laws of physics such that suddenly physical creatures go from being immortal to ageing decaying and dying.
He argues from the assumption that the folklore is authoritative and correct.
I guess I thought Valjean was just playing along at first--but it appears that a lesson on science is in order.
Anytime someone tries something and observes the results, they are doing science (in its most rudimentary form). Rigorous science requires additional controls and replications, but at it's root, science is the practice of observing the effects of some action.
So Noah was doing science when he tested the hypothesis that he was one day going to need a really big boat. Cain was doing science when he tested the hypothesis that God would be more accepting of his sacrifice if he got rid of his competition (Abel). Eve was doing science when she tested the hypothesis proposed by the serpent; namely, that she would become like God if she ate the forbidden fruit. Lot's wife was doing science when she tested the hypothesis that she could defy God's command to not look back upon the destruction of Sodom and Gamorrah without something really bad happening. So there is all kinds of science in Genesis.
Whether these were real people and/or real events is irrelevant, since we're not talking about science in the real world, we're talking about science in Genesis. If we were talking about science in Cinderella, we could point to the prince testing the hypothesis that whoever's foot fit the golden slipper was the hottie-boom-bottie who made his night at the prom.
Anytime someone tries something and observes the results, they are doing science (in its most rudimentary form). Rigorous science requires additional controls and replications, but at it's root, science is the practice of observing the effects of some action.
Oh, I wouldn’t be too sure of that.Making choices and experiencing the results isn't science, it's just life. My cat does it all the time, but I wouldn't call her a scientist.
I like science....I really do....So Noah was doing science when he tested the hypothesis that he was one day going to need a really big boat. Cain was doing science when he tested the hypothesis that God would be more accepting of his sacrifice if he got rid of his competition (Abel). Eve was doing science when she tested the hypothesis proposed by the serpent; namely, that she would become like God if she ate the forbidden fruit. Lot's wife was doing science when she tested the hypothesis that she could defy God's command to not look back upon the destruction of Sodom and Gamorrah without something really bad happening. So there is all kinds of science in Genesis.