Moved Another step towards answering the question of life's origins - religion

[Elixir]

Supposing things “by language” is not the best idea.

* nothing is better than heaven
* a ham sandwich is better than nothing
* “by language” a haM sandwich is better tha heaven

 

[Learner]

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder then what the issue would be, between the plants and the sun being created just a mere day apart?

 

[Lion IRC]

G

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder what the issue would be between the plants and the sun being created a day apart?

Genesis 1:3 Let there be light.
Genesis 1:11 Let the earth bring forth vegetation.

Pretty sure 11 comes after 3 not before.
Pretty sure there's people growing certain plants without sun light.

 

[Learner]

Supposing things “by language” is not the best idea.

* nothing is better than heaven
* a ham sandwich is better than nothing
* “by language” a haM sandwich is better tha heaven

Language is necessary in any dialogue between individuals. Stating the obvious: individuals speaking the same language is key for mutual conversational understanding.

 

[bilby]

G

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder what the issue would be between the plants and the sun being created a day apart?

Genesis 1:3 Let there be light.
Genesis 1:11 Let the earth bring forth vegetation.

Pretty sure 11 comes after 3 not before.
Pretty sure there's people growing certain plants without sun light.

Yeah, the authors of Genisis clearly thought that daylight was a phenomenon independent of the sun.

Which leads to the question "Why didn't God have the Sun come up at night, when its light would be more useful?"

It's ignorance all the way down.

Don't get your information about reality from pre-scientific texts, unless you enjoy being wrong about stuff.

 

[lostone]

What Jarhyn said.

Creating it in the lab is natural.

Then humans are natural. Duh.

Natural then facilitates the ability for humans to purposely think in the mind, creating things for their personal interest. I suppose then by the language when God does it on a collosal scale, aptly then it's super duper natural.

Then 'God' is simply another aspect of nature?

 

[Learner]

What Jarhyn said.

Creating it in the lab is natural.

Then humans are natural. Duh.

Natural then facilitates the ability for humans to purposely think in the mind, creating things for their personal interest. I suppose then by the language when God does it on a collosal scale, aptly then it's super duper natural.

Then 'God' is simply another aspect of nature?

I don't go by your 'reduction' of God illustration: the"simply another aspect of nature..etc". That would be a no.

In terms of God being the source & creator of nature itself - this portrays a different perspective i.e. God can not be restrictively bound by his creation etc.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder then what the issue would be, between the plants and the sun being created just a mere day apart?

Right....so a day was 24 hours before the sun existed.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

G

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder what the issue would be between the plants and the sun being created a day apart?

Genesis 1:3 Let there be light.
Genesis 1:11 Let the earth bring forth vegetation.

Pretty sure 11 comes after 3 not before.
Pretty sure there's people growing certain plants without sun light.

You guys are ridiculous. The sun is older than the earth.

 

[bilby]

The sun is older than the earth.

[citation needed]

 

[Learner]

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder then what the issue would be, between the plants and the sun being created just a mere day apart?

Right....so a day was 24 hours before the sun existed.

Some believers apply here the verse which says: one day is like a thousand days to God etc, but .. Genesis literally says days.
Morning,evening,days and nights so yeah,to be consistent with the context of the theology... it would be quite a doddle for an Almighty God!

 

[Learner]

G

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder what the issue would be between the plants and the sun being created a day apart?

Genesis 1:3 Let there be light.
Genesis 1:11 Let the earth bring forth vegetation.

Pretty sure 11 comes after 3 not before.
Pretty sure there's people growing certain plants without sun light.

You guys are ridiculous. The sun is older than the earth.

Many believers are used to the charge.

The writers understood nature and it's cycles. Understanding various plants grow in various seasons. They understood that without the sun and rain, they wouldn't live or grow.

To convince (or convert) the reader by putting the plants before the sun in the 'creation sequence',while these verses still remain in scripture today throughout all of it's revisions - without anyone at all emitting or altering these apparently conflicting verses...is certainly not a good plan! (if we're to consider these to be made up stories of course)

With little effort why not go the 'whole hog' being deceitful with the luxury of "make believe"? Interestingly though, there seems to be some alternative reason for not making any "corrections" as I just mentioned, there doesn't seem to be any attempts to alter or emit these apparently "conflicting"verses, but instead it seems, they would prefer to be "counter productive" against the Biblical Cause,so to speak - which instead, sounds as if this was um..like a true thing or sumink.What on earth were these people thinking?

Anyway.. atheists have often argued that theists aren't consistent with their scripture knowledge or faith. To be consistent here - many believers view the Almighty God concept as being a God who can create 'in which ever order' he wishes because his creation would be made to function.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder then what the issue would be, between the plants and the sun being created just a mere day apart?

Right....so a day was 24 hours before the sun existed.

Some believers apply here the verse which says: one day is like a thousand days to God etc, but .. Genesis literally says days.
Morning,evening,days and nights so yeah,to be consistent with the context of the theology... it would be quite a doddle for an Almighty God!

Since this is the Natural Science forum and not the Goddidit forum, perhaps you could supply some physical evidence for the sun being younger than plants?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

G

You mean... to see if they could deliberately recreate the ingredients and conditions which the bible refers to where God says..."let the earth bring forth".

You forgot the rest of the sentence... the alleged grass and fruit-bearing trees that were allegedly created before the sun was allegedly created.

Plants can survive several days without sunlight. One could wonder what the issue would be between the plants and the sun being created a day apart?

Genesis 1:3 Let there be light.
Genesis 1:11 Let the earth bring forth vegetation.

Pretty sure 11 comes after 3 not before.
Pretty sure there's people growing certain plants without sun light.

You guys are ridiculous. The sun is older than the earth.

Many believers are used to the charge.

The writers understood nature and it's cycles. Understanding various plants grow in various seasons. They understood that without the sun and rain, they wouldn't live or grow.

To convince (or convert) the reader by putting the plants before the sun in the 'creation sequence',while these verses still remain in scripture today throughout all of it's revisions - without anyone at all emitting or altering these apparently conflicting verses...is certainly not a good plan! (if we're to consider these to be made up stories of course)

With little effort why not go the 'whole hog' being deceitful with the luxury of "make believe"? Interestingly though, there seems to be some alternative reason for not making any "corrections" as I just mentioned, there doesn't seem to be any attempts to alter or emit these apparently "conflicting"verses, but instead it seems, they would prefer to be "counter productive" against the Biblical Cause,so to speak - which instead, sounds as if this was um..like a true thing or sumink.What on earth were these people thinking?

Anyway.. atheists have often argued that theists aren't consistent with their scripture knowledge or faith. To be consistent here - many believers view the Almighty God concept as being a God who can create 'in which ever order' he wishes because his creation would be made to function.

Again....Natural Science forum. Where's the physical scientific evidence?

 

[Elixir]

Natural Science forum. Where's the physical scientific evidence?

THERE ISN'T ANY.
Why this hasn't been moved to the "Religious Bullshit" forum, I have no idea.
It obviously has nothing to do with science; it's pure lame apologetics. And there is no apology sufficient to excuse the dishonesty of creos pretending they are presenting science.

 

[Swammerdami]

Since this is the Natural Science forum and not the Goddidit forum, perhaps you could supply some physical evidence for the sun being younger than plants [the Earth]?

Isn't this similar to the Abortion debate: "Does life begin at conception?"

The Sun thrives on hydrogen, virginal hydrogen left over from the Big Bang. Fresh virginal hydrogen, which perhaps never suffered under the alchemist's lust. And the Sun wasn't born until the hydrogen atoms began to fervently copulate in the nascent Sun's interior about 4.6 billion years ago.

The Earth, on the other hand, is mostly Iron created by stars late in their lives, stars that disappeared long before the Sun was even a glint in Hydrogen's eye. So, depending on your stance on the "Does life begin at conception?" question, it is the Earth that is older.

The Earth also contains elements heavier than Iron, e.g. Tin, Barium, Lead, and . . . Gold! Yes, that gold whose record-setting INTRINSIC value now exceeds $2000/oz. I'll leave the origin of these metals to the experts.

 

[lostone]

Since this is the Natural Science forum and not the Goddidit forum, perhaps you could supply some physical evidence for the sun being younger than plants [the Earth]?

Isn't this similar to the Abortion debate: "Does life begin at conception?"

The Sun thrives on hydrogen, virginal hydrogen left over from the Big Bang. Fresh virginal hydrogen, which perhaps never suffered under the alchemist's lust. And the Sun wasn't born until the hydrogen atoms began to fervently copulate in the nascent Sun's interior about 4.6 billion years ago.

The Earth, on the other hand, is mostly Iron created by stars late in their lives, stars that disappeared long before the Sun was even a glint in Hydrogen's eye. So, depending on your stance on the "Does life begin at conception?" question, it is the Earth that is older.

The Earth also contains elements heavier than Iron, e.g. Tin, Barium, Lead, and . . . Gold! Yes, that gold whose record-setting INTRINSIC value now exceeds $2000/oz. I'll leave the origin of these metals to the experts.

So God is an ancient space alien? Such as Olaf Stapleton's Star maker? Some have suggested it may someday be possible to create entire universes in a lab. I'm not certain how much control those who propose that idea think that the makers of those universes would have over their creations,

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Natural Science forum. Where's the physical scientific evidence?

THERE ISN'T ANY.
Why this hasn't been moved to the "Religious Bullshit" forum, I have no idea.
It obviously has nothing to do with science; it's pure lame apologetics. And there is no apology sufficient to excuse the dishonesty of creos pretending they are presenting science.

Imagine, if, in every other natural science or social science thread, we had "goddidit" as the second post. Language as a clue to prehistory? Tower of Babel. Goddidit! Eclipse 2024? It's a sign. Goddidit! Please explain quantum tunneling. Goddidit!

 

[Lion IRC]

You guys are ridiculous. The sun is older than the earth.

I just cited you the two verses - in the correct order - which show that there was light...a light source, before vegetation on earth.

 

[bilby]

You guys are ridiculous. The sun is older than the earth.

I just cited you the two verses - in the correct order - which show that there was light...a light source, before vegetation on earth.

...and before the Sun existed.

If there was vegetation on Earth before the Sun existed, it follows that the Earth existed before the Sun existed, and therefore that the Earth is older than the Sun.

You're a self-declared follower of "the science". "Science says" that the Earth is younger than the Sun; Genesis says that the Sun is younger than the Earth.

Which do you think is true, and why?