How much clearer can it get?

[oxmixmudd]

I've been here at TWeb for at least 12 years - perhaps longer (?).

Do you have any idea how many times I've done what you say above I have "not" done?

I cannot re-invent the wheel every time a skeptic pokes his head into the room, Truthseeker.
Surely you can grasp what I'm saying. The best I can do is point you to several sites that
contain literally hundreds of articles answering what you ask. There are also scores of books.
One of my favorites is Coming to Grips with Genesis edited by Mortenson and Ury.
In short, what you ask has been more-than-adequately answered many, many times before.
The upshot is that the 'yom' argument is used by the ignorant or the intellectually dishonest.
There is no third alternative.

Jorge

There is no way to escape that when the Bible, in Psalms, tells us that, in the context of creation, a thousand years is like a day to the Lord, that the scriptures themselves open the door to the possibility these days of creation are "God days" and therefore of a symbolic or metaphorical nature, not necessarily to be reckoned from an overly literal or human perspective. Given that and the physical evidence being what it is, only a fool would proclaim the days of Genesis MUST refer to literal 24 hour periods of actual, historical, humanly perceived time.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

Got'ta love the way you simply ignore the substance of my post. Here it is again:

Yeah, sure, I remember all-too-well your "... writings of a primitive culture" schtick.

I always get a kick out of you guys. The Bible is "primitive" every time it disagrees with your Evolutionary presuppositions --- otherwise the Bible is "God's Holy Word". Not even among hardcore Atheists do I find a more blatant exhibition of hypocrisy.

What I mean is, at least Atheists are consistent in their rejection of the Bible - they 'spit out' the entire Text. Theistic Evolutionists want their cake and eat it too -- embracing whatever they deem "acceptable" in Scripture and rejecting everything else. It's got to be seen to be believed!

If I were an Atheist I would be sneering behind the backs of TEs -- temporarily accepting them in the spirit of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" -- employing them as useful idiots to create dissension, doubt and chaos. Later, when they were of no more use, I'd toss them out with yesterday's garbage.

You perform in that role extremely well, O-Mudd.


Enjoy!

Jorge

There is no substance, just accusations that have no bearing on reality.

In specific: You characterize my position as some sort of trivial, personal preference motivated random dismissal of certain sections of the Bible. Such an idiotic and cynical portrayal doesn't deserve the time of day. The fact is my position has been painstakingly derived over a period of more than 10 years and represents literally 1000's of hours of study of both science and theology. And each step has been undertaken with much prayer and a sincere desire to maintain both Faith in Christ and an absolute and ruthless honesty with the facts and the data.


Jim

[Roy]

I've been here at TWeb for at least 12 years - perhaps longer (?).

12 years, 2 months. But with 3 insult-filled posts per day it certainly seems longer.

[JonF]

Perhaps you forgot the suggestion that you are reading the Bible wrong.

Back on the old TWeb Jorge stated (in response to someone's question) that his interpretation is infallible.

[Jorge]

There is no way to escape that when the Bible, in Psalms, tells us that, in the context of creation, a thousand years is like a day to the Lord, that the scriptures themselves open the door to the possibility these days of creation are "God days" and therefore of a symbolic or metaphorical nature, not necessarily to be reckoned from an overly literal or human perspective. Given that and the physical evidence being what it is, only a fool would proclaim the days of Genesis MUST refer to literal 24 hour periods of actual, historical, humanly perceived time.

Jim

You know perfectly well that I have addressed this point numerous times
so why do you continue to bring it up? Is your goal to tell or insinuate to the
readers that "Jorge has never responded to this issue"?

And if you're interested in the truth, a quick search at the AiG, CMI, ICR sites -
to name just a few - will provide HUNDREDS of papers/articles that address the
matter. You just don't care about the truth, admit it to yourself.

Jorge

[Jorge]

There is no substance, just accusations that have no bearing on reality.

In specific: You characterize my position as some sort of trivial, personal preference motivated random dismissal of certain sections of the Bible. Such an idiotic and cynical portrayal doesn't deserve the time of day. The fact is my position has been painstakingly derived over a period of more than 10 years and represents literally 1000's of hours of study of both science and theology. And each step has been undertaken with much prayer and a sincere desire to maintain both Faith in Christ and an absolute and ruthless honesty with the facts and the data.

Jim

You can continue deceiving/lying to yourself 'til the day you die of old age.
Or you can admit that the "scientific facts" - the ones that continuously change -
are the ones that dictate how you interpret God's Word and thus begin the path
of Truth. It's completely your choice.

Jorge

[oxmixmudd]

You know perfectly well that I have addressed this point numerous times
so why do you continue to bring it up? Is your goal to tell or insinuate to the
readers that "Jorge has never responded to this issue"?

And if you're interested in the truth, a quick search at the AiG, CMI, ICR sites -
to name just a few - will provide HUNDREDS of papers/articles that address the
matter. You just don't care about the truth, admit it to yourself.

Jorge

Your paranoia is legendary.

My point stands. The idiotic arguments used by you and others to try to negate the point have no bearing on the point itself. The fact remains that the Bibl itself uses the thousand years is as a day in a context that makes the kind of pedantic linguistic small mindedness that forms the basis of the arguments meaningless.

Jim

[Truthseeker]

Whose mind existed in the time before Adam and Eve? God's. Why not try to see through his eyes, figuratively speaking? So, a day to him might be a billion years to us.

[Jorge]

Back on the old TWeb Jorge stated (in response to someone's question) that his interpretation is infallible.

Prove that claim or retract it. I am here calling you out as a LIAR, JonF.

Jorge

[Jorge]

Your paranoia is legendary.

My point stands. The idiotic arguments used by you and others to try to negate the point have no bearing on the point itself. The fact remains that the Bibl itself uses the thousand years is as a day in a context that makes the kind of pedantic linguistic small mindedness that forms the basis of the arguments meaningless.

Jim

"Paranoia"??? Is that what you call someone that points out your errors and blasphemies, time after time after time? If it makes you feel better then go ahead, O-Mudd. The facts remain the same regardless of what you wish to call others.

Try Coming To Grips With Genesis edited by Mortenson and Ury.
Become educated for once in your life.

Stop going against the plainly-written Word of God.
Stop imposing your will over God's.
You do realize that you will have to answer for that, right?

Jorge

[Jorge]

Whose mind existed in the time before Adam and Eve? God's. Why not try to see through his eyes, figuratively speaking? So, a day to him might be a billion years to us.

ANY phrase or verse taken (1) out of context and/or (2) by itself could be made to mean something other than was intended. Scripture cannot be interpreted that way - it would be a faulty interpretation.

BY ITSELF what you suggest is possible. But in the context of ALL Scripture what you suggest holds not a drop of water.

Read Coming To Grips With Genesis edited by Mortenson and Ury for some education on the subject.

Jorge

[JonF]

Prove that claim or retract it. I am here calling you out as a LIAR, JonF.

Jorge

Wanna bet? Hee hee hee hee.

Call me out as anything you want, it doesn't change reality.

[oxmixmudd]

"Paranoia"??? Is that what you call someone that points out your errors and blasphemies, time after time after time? If it makes you feel better then go ahead, O-Mudd. The facts remain the same regardless of what you wish to call others.

Try Coming To Grips With Genesis edited by Mortenson and Ury.
Become educated for once in your life.

Stop going against the plainly-written Word of God.
Stop imposing your will over God's.
You do realize that you will have to answer for that, right?

Jorge

We ALL have to answer for our sins Jorge in one form or another. Your own willingness to write and stand behind open deception concerning the multiple asteroid impacts in the Earth's past is one you'll have to answer for. But I doubt any of us will fare particularly well that day except for the grace and provision of Jesus Christ.

That said, the Bible plainly tells us a thousand years is as a day to the Lord in the direct context of the age of the mountains as they were created.

Source: Psalm90:1-6, NIV

Lord, you have been our dwelling place
throughout all generations.
2 Before the mountains were born
or you brought forth the whole world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are GodA thousand years in your sight
are like a day that has just gone by,
or like a watch in the night.

© Copyright Original Source

This is the Bible commenting on itself. The correlation to the days in Genesis has long been almost an immediately correlated response to those that discover the Earth is billions, not thousands of years old. The linguistic pedantry you and others engage in to try to dismiss that obvious correlation misses the forest for the trees. Genesis can be and by all the existing evidence IS using the word yom metaphorically and in a way consistent with this Psalm. So of course it means a day linguistically - THAT is the metaphor. But it is easily and justifiably seen as a 'God' day, a period of work from His perspective, and as we see from the Psalm, such a 'day' can be nothing at all like the kind of literal 24 hour day from the human perspective you insist is MUST be. The implication from it and Peter is that eons of time can and are perceived by God as not any 'longer' than a day is to us. That God could have used such a metaphor to describe is billion year creation process is an obvious alternative to anyone that prefers truth over tradition.



Jim

[flowers92]

Science of all eras always presupposed a philosophy or had some sort of systematic theology which told them how to make conclusions. You'll should read about the issues Galileo had.

[Jorge]

Wanna bet? Hee hee hee hee.

Call me out as anything you want, it doesn't change reality.

Okay, so you did not prove your claim and so you remain a LIAR.

If you have no problem carrying that label then so be it.

Jorge