The 6 days of creation

[davidmartin]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Speculative?

Some claim it is speculative to say Jesus did not believe in the Creation/Flood Accounts based on the fact they never read the Bible.

but not everyone feels the bible is inerrant, others see it as reflecting beliefs of the authors along with Jesus, so see it as a guide maybe but not literally exact in things. this is very common then the debate should be on this maybe, but for sure if it is totally accurate your right but you know not all feel that it is

Originally Posted by Honza

The physical plane is apparently only in our minds. It is a mutable reality. We have no idea how old the 'earth' really is because it may not even be real at all. Scientific evidence may just be our mind tricking itself.

More or less correct IMO. The physical plane arises within our awareness when a conscious observer interacts with the quantum field. This is the lesson of the double slit experiment. Prior to observation, there as a quantum probability wave of potential events oscillating in Hilbert space. When we make an observation/measurement of the field we see it as a physical particle in four dimensional space-time, but I suspect the particle is created by the observer within their own consciousness, the quantum wave and all its potential variations continues unchanged. What we call "real" is just one potential outcome (usually the most probable) that consciousness selects from an infinity of possible outcomes. The earth is "real" within your consciousness because you have made it so.

[Starman]

I think faith is very important but sometimes faith can lead to speculation. I was reading this morning about a
Christian woman who drove her car the wrong way, facing traffic, on a highway to test her faith that God
would protect her.

Fortunately there were no accidents and no one got hurt but she was arrested, and she told the police that she
wanted to test her faith. The report said alcohol nor other drugs were involved. I really do not need to test my
faith because life frequently, and automatically, tests my faith for me.

Whether or not the world was created in 6-days, or how long humans have lived on this Earth, are irrelevant
to my faith in God. Spiritual teachings, like the Bible, are as a cook book, giving us a recipe to prepare a meal.
The recipe can sound very tasty and we can be inspired by it, but we actually have to cook the meal to be
filled up. We have to live it.

The Bible, in my opinion, directs us but I am of the opinion that everyday should be a Sabbath, a holy day,
or holiday, to worship and serve God. Because I have formed a connection with the pure divinity God has
placed in me, the Bible comes alive for me when I read it. It is a living testament that can be applied to
the here and now.

My mind can remain curious about it and what it says but it is my heart that partakes in the meal prepared
by its recipe. Time is actually irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Time on a cosmic scale is a lot
different than time as measured by humanity. God is timeless, and while creation is captured in time, past,
present, and future, those constraints do not apply to God.

Originally Posted by Starman

I think faith is very important but sometimes faith can lead to speculation. I was reading this morning about a
Christian woman who drove her car the wrong way, facing traffic, on a highway to test her faith that God
would protect her.

Fortunately there were no accidents and no one got hurt but she was arrested, and she told the police that she
wanted to test her faith. The report said alcohol nor other drugs were involved. I really do not need to test my
faith because life frequently, and automatically, tests my faith for me.

Starman,

Of course one thinks immediately of Matthew 4:7...…"Jesus answered him(the devil), "It is also written; 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.' "

Originally Posted by Molearner

Starman,

Yes, this is true. But here is the thing: People argue whether the Bible is literal or symbolic. IMO it is both. The literal is for the religious.....the symbolic is for the spiritual. And, by the way, people themselves can be both spiritual and religious just as the Bible is.

Echoing Starman’s response to this post...

I don’t read the Bible, but I see this in most (what I consider) genuine spiritual traditions.

Thank you for astutely pointing this out. I guess I’d almost assumed “why can’t some people sense the true meaning rather than clinging to the literal?”

Of course, revelations are different and the course of spiritual progress is different

Rambling but fwiw

Jl

Originally Posted by Molearner

BigJohn,

So basically you are saying that there are many names for God and many pronunciations of the name. Also your fascination with many translations. None of this, however, explains the importance and meaning of these differences and how they impact our understanding of the Bible. Even in prayer I personally use different names for God. It never occurs to me that He might not hear me if I do not use a certain name.

Ditto,

Jl

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

The second creation account does not mention the first 6 creative days.

The first creation account does not mention Eden nor the Garden of Eden.

The first creation account cites Elohim 35 times.

The second account introduces Yahweh and cites Yahweh 11 times.

The two creation accounts appear to be seperate accounts written by 2 different person(s). These accounts resonate more with opinions which resonate as a style preceding the writing style of the Talmuds.

So which account did Jesus believe?




BigJohn BigJohn is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: I live in a house with a door. The house out in back is the dawg's house.
Posts: 2,999
BigJohn's Avatar



Did he believe the creation account and the flood account as being literal: He certainly did.
__________________

I think Starmans #63 post is reasonable and agreeable.

I think the "day" referred to in the Creation account is a time frame
and not a solar 24hr. day.
It says to me God ordered it and brought it about orderly and
I can rest assured that it is GOOD. It must be it has lasted this long
through the many cycles of Life and death and rot and new Life.
I take it for the writing it is.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by sky123

So which account did Jesus believe?




BigJohn BigJohn is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: I live in a house with a door. The house out in back is the dawg's house.
Posts: 2,999
BigJohn's Avatar



Did he believe the creation account and the flood account as being literal: He certainly did.
__________________

Go google your questions. Why ask me?

Better yet, why not look into the Bible for your own answer.

Whatever I write, you will disagree.

by the way, what does this have to do with proxies and aliases?

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Go google your questions. Why ask me?

Better yet, why not look into the Bible for your own answer.

Whatever I write, you will disagree.

by the way, what does this have to do with proxies and aliases?

I was curious as you Posted that Jesus took the creation story literally, I was wondering which account he would literally believe.


I doubt Jesus would be concerned with ' proxies and aliases '