Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Hondo · 06-05-2003, 02:03 PM

Hello to all of the excellent minds in this forum. The quote below is from a friend I've been communicating with for quite some time. We are currently dicussing the origins of the universe with his emphasis being that, "without God outside of the METS box (matter, energy, time, and space) we are stuck in a naturalistic world, that is in his opinion, "unlivable".

The other day he unloaded this quote on me.

"There is one that mentions
ALL
14 of the initial and sequential steps noted by scientists in the 20th
century, AND only one gets them ALL in the correct sequence: The
Genesis
account. How did Moses 1. come up with the 14 steps and 2. how did he
put
them in the correct order! What a GREAT guesser he was!"

For the life of me I don't see anything in Genesis that can even come close to modern cosmology with the exception of "Let there be light, and there was light." This one has always struck me as a possibility, it is similar to what happened at the instant of the big bang. Although, it is quite obvious to any resonable person, that light was a prerequisite in it's many forms, for any life as we know it to exist.

Am I missing something here? Does Moses, if he was indeed the true author of Genesis come close to explaining the origins of the universe as we know it today?

Hondo

caravelair · 06-05-2003, 02:06 PM

since he made the claim, the burden of proof is on his shoulders. why don't you just ask him what verse(s) he is referring to?

Grumpy · 06-05-2003, 02:51 PM

As I understand Big Bang cosmology, the early universe was very dark. While energy was abundant, it had no way to penetrate the super-dense matter.

If this is so, it would nullify Step 1 of the Genesis creation scheme -- apart from the rest of this argument being plainly silly.

Dr.GH · 06-05-2003, 02:59 PM

Just for fun, what are the 14 steps they think happened? A few years ago I wrote up a piece on the 6 days of creation compared to current science. Not a good match. Maybe their 14 points have a new version.

Mecha_Dude · 06-05-2003, 04:33 PM

I've seen a lot of double posts but never a triple post....

GunnerJ · 06-05-2003, 05:11 PM

T MECHA: NATCH!

missus_gumby · 06-05-2003, 11:33 PM

Some creationists are fond of asking:

Quote:

How do you know? Were you there?

Now you can turn the tables and ask your friend:

Quote:

How did Moses know? Was he there?

Martin

Jack the Bodiless · 06-06-2003, 02:47 AM

I have seen this claim before. It's contrived nonsense, based on blatant distortion of Genesis.

For instance, "the Earth" supposedly isn't the Earth at all, but the "brane" that features in some theories as a precursor to the Big Bang. But this means that the creation of this planet isn't mentioned at all: a major oversight in a creation myth, wouldn't you say?

Similarly, the "creation" of the Sun amd Moon supposedly refers to their becoming visible from Earth when the atmosphere thinned and became transparent.

You might ask why everything listed as being created on Day 3 (grass, herbs, fruit trees) actually evolved after "Day 6", the appearance of land animals. There were land plants by then, but not those. And life didn't begin with photosynthesis, so "plants" didn't come before "animals" anyhow.

And then there are the whales and birds, appearing before the land animals they evolved from.

ps418 · 06-06-2003, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hondo
"There is one that mentions
ALL
14 of the initial and sequential steps noted by scientists in the 20th
century, AND only one gets them ALL in the correct sequence: The
Genesis
account. How did Moses 1. come up with the 14 steps and 2. how did he
put
them in the correct order! What a GREAT guesser he was!"

That's right. How did Moses know that the earth was created before all the other lights (stars) in the sky, in perfect agreement with modern science, or that several days, evening and morning, passed before the sun itself was created, or that the whole shebang was accomplished in the course of a few evenings and mornings? Its spooky how modern science has just confirmed how right Moses was.

Patrick

Hondo · 06-06-2003, 09:30 AM

Mecha_Dude and GunnerJ sorry for the triple post, I will try to stay more focused and concise in the future. The triple post distinction is all mine.

To all of the others, thank you for your responses.

My take on the creation account in Genesis, is that it's author was in very poor fashion, speculating on the obvious, something any person could with reasonable observational and reasoning skills could have done. Moses took a shot, and missed the mark. In my opinion, nice try, no cigar, end of story. Ah, if were only so easy when dealing with fundamentalists.

Your thoughts and ideas are most appreciated.

I will post my friends response to the 14 sequential steps in Genesis, so that you can see where modern xtian scientific thought (oxymoron to be sure) is headed.

Thanks

Hondo

06-05-2003, 02:03 PM	#1
Hondo Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Ca Posts: 51	Does Genesis correctly peg the creation of the universe? Hello to all of the excellent minds in this forum. The quote below is from a friend I've been communicating with for quite some time. We are currently dicussing the origins of the universe with his emphasis being that, "without God outside of the METS box (matter, energy, time, and space) we are stuck in a naturalistic world, that is in his opinion, "unlivable". The other day he unloaded this quote on me. "There is one that mentions ALL 14 of the initial and sequential steps noted by scientists in the 20th century, AND only one gets them ALL in the correct sequence: The Genesis account. How did Moses 1. come up with the 14 steps and 2. how did he put them in the correct order! What a GREAT guesser he was!" For the life of me I don't see anything in Genesis that can even come close to modern cosmology with the exception of "Let there be light, and there was light." This one has always struck me as a possibility, it is similar to what happened at the instant of the big bang. Although, it is quite obvious to any resonable person, that light was a prerequisite in it's many forms, for any life as we know it to exist. Am I missing something here? Does Moses, if he was indeed the true author of Genesis come close to explaining the origins of the universe as we know it today? Hondo

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-05-2003, 02:06 PM	#2
caravelair Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: toronto Posts: 420	since he made the claim, the burden of proof is on his shoulders. why don't you just ask him what verse(s) he is referring to?

06-05-2003, 02:51 PM	#3
Grumpy Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Alaska, USA Posts: 1,535	As I understand Big Bang cosmology, the early universe was very dark. While energy was abundant, it had no way to penetrate the super-dense matter. If this is so, it would nullify Step 1 of the Genesis creation scheme -- apart from the rest of this argument being plainly silly.

06-05-2003, 02:59 PM	#4
Dr.GH Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Dana Point, Ca, USA Posts: 2,115	Just for fun, what are the 14 steps they think happened? A few years ago I wrote up a piece on the 6 days of creation compared to current science. Not a good match. Maybe their 14 points have a new version.

06-05-2003, 04:33 PM	#5
Mecha_Dude Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Everywhere... I'm Watching you... Posts: 1,019	I've seen a lot of double posts but never a triple post....

06-05-2003, 05:11 PM	#6
GunnerJ Banned Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: a place where i can list whatever location i want Posts: 4,871	T MECHA: NATCH!

06-06-2003, 02:47 AM	#8
Jack the Bodiless Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: UK Posts: 5,815	I have seen this claim before. It's contrived nonsense, based on blatant distortion of Genesis. For instance, "the Earth" supposedly isn't the Earth at all, but the "brane" that features in some theories as a precursor to the Big Bang. But this means that the creation of this planet isn't mentioned at all: a major oversight in a creation myth, wouldn't you say? Similarly, the "creation" of the Sun amd Moon supposedly refers to their becoming visible from Earth when the atmosphere thinned and became transparent. You might ask why everything listed as being created on Day 3 (grass, herbs, fruit trees) actually evolved after "Day 6", the appearance of land animals. There were land plants by then, but not those. And life didn't begin with photosynthesis, so "plants" didn't come before "animals" anyhow. And then there are the whales and birds, appearing before the land animals they evolved from.

06-06-2003, 09:30 AM	#10
Hondo Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Ca Posts: 51	Mecha_Dude and GunnerJ sorry for the triple post, I will try to stay more focused and concise in the future. The triple post distinction is all mine. To all of the others, thank you for your responses. My take on the creation account in Genesis, is that it's author was in very poor fashion, speculating on the obvious, something any person could with reasonable observational and reasoning skills could have done. Moses took a shot, and missed the mark. In my opinion, nice try, no cigar, end of story. Ah, if were only so easy when dealing with fundamentalists. Your thoughts and ideas are most appreciated. I will post my friends response to the 14 sequential steps in Genesis, so that you can see where modern xtian scientific thought (oxymoron to be sure) is headed. Thanks Hondo

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.