Author:
Wade A. Tisthammer
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 03/24/03 11:03am
In reply to:
Ben
's message, "Thoughts from closed-minded Ben" on 03/19/03 9:41am
>Jennifer,
>
>Hello, and welcome back. I haven't had much time for
>the board lately, but your comments are certainly
>welcome here. When I have the time, I will respond to
>them.
>
>>1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the
>>earth.
>>
>>One of the things I read on this board,(I think it was
>>Wade who waid it)is that God is above time. He exists
>>outside of time. So when it says "in the beginning,
>>this is not God's beginning, but earth's/man's
>>beginning.
>
>Well, just because Wade said it doesn't make it true,
>of course.
Ah sure it does (TIC, I'm being a tad sarcastic).
>For the Christian, God's "existing outside
>of time" is very convenient, because it solves a lot
>of problems.
Forming a theory of philisophical theism that "solves problems" isn't a bad thing for that theory. Indeed, it's the most rational way to go for any philisophical theory.
>But no, I don't think that God exists
>outside of time, because I don't think it is possible
>to do so.
I don't see how it's not possible. It is logically possible as far as I can see, albeit qualitatively different from what we are normally used to.
>>I have always seen this description of the "heavens"
>>as the universe, and not Heaven where God reigns. So
>>basically, outerspace. Could this be a possibility,
>>or are you so close minded that you can only see it
>>your way?
>
>Well, back then, they didn't know there was a
>"universe." They thought the lights in the sky were
>fixed above the earth in the "firmament," which was
>just above the earth. If you don't believe me, do
>some research on your own.
From the web page:
Genesis 1
1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
...
[snipped some text so I could get to the point at hand]
Anyone who now tells you that this passage somehow referred to stars the way we now understand them is kidding himself. When they said “heaven”, they meant the little canopy around the earth which (some believed) included little holes through which God’s glory shone. They had zero understanding of what those little points of light really were, and I don’t blame them. It is unreasonable to expect people who lived then to understand that. But, of course, the problem here is that if God wrote this, then one would definitely expect him to understand it.
The problem is that there's no reason to think He didn't in this passage. Genesis was rather unspecific when it comes to the contents of the heavens here (heavens = all that stuff above the Earth). The author could have believed in mistaken or correct beliefs on the heavens in the passage you speak of, but we just don't know because he didn't write much about it.
You've made quite a few speculations as to what the author believed here. Now perhaps some people reading the passage of Genesis (long after it was written) shared the beliefs you described (God's glory shone through via stars), but the passage itself does not tell us what the stars are made of etc. Bottom line, what you've said just doesn't speak against what Genesis actually says.
>I have changed my beliefs on these issues... I used to
>think the Bible was God's perfect word to mankind.
>The fact that I changed my mind shows that I do not
>have a closed mind.
Strictly speaking, that isn't necessarily true. It is logically possible for you could have a closed mind now when it comes to the truthfulness of Christianity. Whether or not this is true I can only speculate, though I suppose I could determine that to my satisfaction by asking "A Question for the non-Christians" again.
>I am also willing to change my
>mind in the future if sufficient evidence is offered.
>Are you?
Disputable point: what is sufficient evidence?
Your mind may not change if sufficient evidence is presented according to Jennifer, because for her some set of data is sufficient for her but not for you. The same holds true for me (data I perceive to be sufficient evidence may not seem sufficient to you).
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 