Indeed, to say everything God commanded was fulfilled on those six days explicitly contradicts the “traditional” YEC interpretation of Genesis. God said (to the humans), “be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth…” so, if a literal interpretation insists that everything God said in the days of Creation happened immediately by divine fiat, we must conclude that by the end of the sixth day, humans had multiplied and filled the earth.
And it was “very good.”
Regarding rabbits and speciation. I agree that we need to be clear on what a species but lets also be clear that is is not really possible to have a absolute criterion for species. Scientists have been searching for a single species definition for 200 years and have yet to come up with one that applies to all organisms.
With respect to rabbits/finches. Inability to interbreed is not an absolute criterion of the speciation “creation.” Reduction of gene flow - which is the reduction of interbreeding - is a very important part of the speciation process. Wolves and coyotes are species by almost all definitions but they can - and have - interbreed. However, they don’t interbreed very often and thus the gene pools of each species are not mixed enough for the two species to lose their identifies as separate species.
Some people think that the six creation days were not sequential, but scattered out in time. And Lynn_Munter gave a great example of why we know that the fulfillment of commands is NOT restricted to the same day as the command.
Remember: the original text is not in English. Is this perhaps a Hebrew idiom that is lost to us? Or was it an idiom in a language preceding Hebrew? Perhaps it is simply an idiom which means “from start to finish, that was the Nth day.”
Personally speaking, I believe Genesis 1 is a HYMNIC TRIBUTE, six verses, each followed by a repeating chorus. It is a hymnic tribute to the Creator. The domains of the world (e.g, fish of the sea, birds of the air, the waters) are NOT governed by individual gods and goddesses in a pantheon. No, God is sovereign over ALL of them. Israel’s God is supreme over all.
And there too we see the difference between science and theology. We can study the material using the scientific method. We can’t do that with the theological realm. We can’t detect God and other spirits. They are not subject to falsification testing.
Glad to hear that you find this interesting. Perhaps your son would also be interested in these topics.
Hey there! I am hoping you are in the mood to reflect on what you wrote about God’s sense of time. It had a very poetic aspect about it … and poetic tone can make ideas seem magnificent. But sometimes it doesn’t make for coherence.
If you’ll just take a moment here, I’ll try to explain what I mean.
You point out that if someone was a photon, he could travel 13 billion miles and by the General Theory of Relativity, it could feel like a moment! I think that’s a perfectly fine observation.
However, in that time, planets and life forms in places not traveling at the speed of light, would have evolved and changed beyond recognition, right? So you are actually making a profound argument In Favor of God’s days being millions (if not billions) of years of human time!
Are you following what I’m saying here? You should not be a YEC … you should believe in a very ancient Earth - - from the human perspective… which is what the Bible is relating to. The Bible is not for God to read… it is for us to read.
So why aren’t you an Old Earther?
Regarding the soul of man, we can study the relationship between brain and mind, and consciousness and soul. But that is a whole other area of discussion. Animal rights advocates probably disagree, but there is only one species on the planet that is self-aware and has a soul.
Yes I am following what you are saying. I actually agree with the scientific evidence that the earth appears to be very old based on our current time reference looking backward. If that makes me an “old earther”, then so be it. While the bible is met for us to read, I suggest that Genesis 1 is describing God’s acts, and as such God’s days as if we were with him when he did it and in a way we were.
I used to be of that opinion. Now I must admit that I just don’t know. For example, consider the “stories” told by apes taught human sign language. What they communicate sure sounds like a “self-aware” mind. (And yes, that is a very controversial position and the scientists disagree with one another on this.)
I certainly believe humans are unique because they are created to have the Imago Dei. But despite my theological background, I can’t say that I know exactly what the Image of God means. (I do know for certain that the Image of God is not some sort of resemblance to God in terms of our physical body. I probably shouldn’t have to say that but I still talk to Young Earth Creationists now and then who do think there is some sort of “anatomical resemblance” to God which leads them to declare that humans couldn’t have evolved. Those tend to be the same people who tell me that God literally breathed the breath of life into Adam and it was like a mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. They also claim that when Genesis 1 quotes God as saying “Let there be light!”, an actual voice was heard in the universe. So apparently they think God has actual vocal cords and lungs. Those kinds of interactions keep reminding me just how much our Christian brethren can be coming from very different worlds and thinking.)
And I would like to tack an observation onto @Socratic.Fanatic’s excellent explanation. Simply, all of us do the same thing in everyday life that the scientist does, regardless of our belief (or disbelief) in God.
Suppose that you are in the living room and hear a knock on the door. You go to the door and open it, but no one is there. What is your first reaction? Do you close the door and conclude that since no cause was observed, the knock must have been caused by God? Of course not. You will assume that the knock was caused by some natural, physical means. Even as a Christian, you will search for some “natural” explanation.
Let’s make it even more obvious. You are in the living room and hear a bang at the back door. You go to the door, open it, and find the screen door unlatched. Further, you observe a strong wind blowing. Now, unless you are delusional, you attribute the banging noise to physical causes, not to supernatural forces. Regardless of your belief in God, after you have discovered the physical cause of the phenomenon, you do not feel the need to take the additional step of acknowledging God’s role in the process.
Scientists are doing nothing different than you and I do every day. They observe a phenomenon, and they seek to explain it by natural causes. This is how we all operate. The only difference is that they have developed “rules” to help them in this endeavor, while you and I are free to make up the rules as we go along, and occasionally conclude that “God did it” is the only proper response.
Bravo! Imagine going to a doctor with a painful, red throat. Instead of swabbing it and sending it to the lab, he sends you for an exorcism.
Well stated, Jay313! And the fact that you looked for a natural explanation for the knock on the door did not mean that you were “siding with the atheists” or “denying God’s existence”—and neither are the scientists (Christian and non-Christian) who investigate origins. That drives me nuts when someone like Ken Ham calls those who define science according to methodological naturalism “compromising Christians.”
Indeed, Ham is also claiming that the correct definition of science is “knowledge” because of the meaning of the Latin word SCIENTIA. It is the “etymology=lexicography fallacy.” Of course, he does this so that he can label his own ideas as “science”. Yet, if I asked him if an expert on witchcraft—one having lots of occult knowledge—is therefore a scientist, I doubt if he would stick with his pseudo-definition! That is an example of where AIG consistently lies to its followers. They regularly manufacture their own definitions out of thin air, and this is especially damaging to children who are thereby set up for later turning against the dishonesty of that background in the church. (I always wince when I hear another repetition of their “Were you there?” nonsensical retort that leads to the humiliation of vulnerable children.)
Have you ever read any of the books by Amit Gotswami, such as the Self Aware Universe. Paraphrasing him a bit, He is a quantum physicist that is trying to shake up the scientific world by suggest that a non-local consciousness observes quanta and creates reality by this choice. We get to the Einstein Bohr debate about causation versus choice and how disruptive quantum physics is to the cause and effect principles of classical physics… “God would not play dice with the universe” says Einstein, versus “Don’t tell God what to do” answers Bohr.
This is where I am heading on the above. If Gotswami is correct, and I believe he is, then God’s will is active in the universe and affects reality per quantum physics. If you base a theory on this not happening, you end up in a dead end and cannot explain the origin of the universe and other observations such as dark energy and dark matter. Looking at this biblically, God the Father can see past, present and future and all possible choices, and makes the choices per His will, with the knowledge of the truth of the Son, who guides the Holy Spirit to make it happen. AMEN!
That sounds vaguely like these movie documentaries:
What the #$*! Do We (K)now!? (2004 or so??)
What the Bleep!?: Down the Rabbit Hole (a few years later as a sequel)
I am not at all aware of the Gotswami book (so I can’t render an opinion) but these bizarre movies tried to combine a lot of unrelated philosophy and physics into… well… something.
Hadn’t heard of Goswami, but a little bit of Google turns up a lot of pseudoscience. Not to rain on your parade, but he’s a darling of the New Age mystics who somehow think quantum physics proves their own religious worldview. It’s all represented fairly well in the 2004 film “What the Bleep Do We Know?” A suitable counterpart to the pseudoscience of “Is Genesis History?”
As far as your concluding biblical summary sentence, I will agree with that.
And according to the reasoning of Answers in Genesis carried to its logical conclusion, the refusal to recommend an immediate investigation of non-natural causes is proof that the doctor is ruling out the existence of God and is either a “compromising Christian” or an atheist.
He is not a Christian but believes Jesus was connected to Him, and does not believe the bible is the perfect Word of God either. But I still concur with his theory about the existence of God.
I smiled when I read beaglelady’s example, as I have used a plumber as illustration ( as you actually do have people who look for miraculous healing, and I do not totally rule it out, but that is another topic): “What would you do if your pipes were clogged and sewage backing up, and the plumber looked at your plumbing as said it must be demonic, and probably the result of sin.”
Regarding natural or supernatural explanations, I suggest there is not supernatural and that God acts in the world per rules of science. The uncertainty principle of quantum physics gives God the scientific latitude to implement His will per these laws of science.
God is sovereign and all is under His control, be it banging or not. He gives us the ability to use so-called “natural law” to heal, but in some cases Jesus healed by the power of the Holy Spirit per rules of quantum physics observation of different reality.
Sounds wacko perhaps, but so is the quantum tunneling used by you when you touch an Iphone. Miracle of science some might say.
Peace.
Great! Once you state this, then it becomes possible to see God (in “His” 6 days of time), as using Evolution to create humanity.
Can you see that? If you don’t agree, but you can believe the Earth is Very Old (in human terms), what is preventing you from accepting the natural evidences of this Old Earth-style Speciation and Evolution?
This to me is merely a difference in terminology. I suppose some Physicists (or others) might oppose your scenario … because they might think it is playing fast & loose with quantum physics, but to me it’s just another way of describing the advanced use of Natural Law by God.
Fine. I accept that God uses advanced techniques of natural law. This is much better than saying God created Eve by taking Adam’s rib and doing a > Poof !! < [i.e. miracle].
I think God uses that same power to create crucial mutations in the millions of years of life’s evolution on the Earth.
Join me in that belief!
George
I am working on it except for the humanity part. Just seems that too many species were created in too short of a time frame to be just normal evolutionary processes. This period was one of creating order. I suggest that quantum tunneling (by God) of significant protons mutated DNA to create multiple species during the Cambrian period, After this then perhaps came the affects of entropy as species became environmentally separated leading to creation of more species and extinctions.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.