Evolution versus Creationism

Evolution or Creationism?


  • Total voters
    174
Doesn't explain why God would need rest. Which was my question. Jesus sitting down at the right hand is not the same as God needing a break to rest. I understand that the writers of the Bible really digged the number 7 and had something special in mind for that day, but they didn't expect people to question what they wrote, so they weren't being the most vigilant in making the story consistent.

So, why did God need to rest the 7th day?
There is a name for it I just don't remember it. Often in scriptures a physical description is given to describe a spiritual attribute of God. As God rested, His eyes goes to and fro among the earth, creation is His finger work, the arms of God, He got the whole world in His hands,etc.
 
There is a name for it I just don't remember it. Often in scriptures a physical description is given to describe a spiritual attribute of God. As God rested, His eyes goes to and fro among the earth, creation is His finger work, the arms of God, He got the whole world in His hands,etc.
Metaphor?

I get the whole metaphor bit, and it would work too as an explanation to me. It just stops working when Creationism insists that the metaphor of God creating the world in 7 days (well, 6 actually) is fact. If one insist that on day 1 he creates Heaven and Earth, 2 the beas and the birds, etc, At that moment, you cannot fall back on, "yeah, the last day bit is a metaphor". How do you determine whether what happens the first 6 days is not metaphorical as well? Just doing so, because otherwise we'd have a problem with God resting is not it.
 
Agreed. To say that the bible is in part metaphor to avoid being cut down in argument, then to claim that the metaphors are fact, is stupid
 
I'm more worried about God needing the 7th day to rest.

Why would God need rest?
Why are you assuming God doesn't need rest to begin with??? Again, the idea that He is perfect and all-powerful is something we came up with.

Wehn somebudy makes a bunch of tipografikal errers in a post, it's not a problim with the CFC web sight. It's a problem with BasketCase's typing. :D
 
Why are you assuming God doesn't need rest to begin with??? Again, the idea that He is perfect and all-powerful is something we came up with.
Yeah, that what you think, and that's what I think. Yee olde Bible writers which were many, weren't concerned about the credibility of the ancient myths they were copying. There weren't many people around to criticize the content.

But when 1.500 to 2.000 years after the fact people claim Genesis is fact, well, it needs some explaining :)

Smidlee has an, in my opinion, accurate explanation. It's just a (collection of) stories. But I'm not sure if that's what he meant to say, so I'll wait whether he confirms my reply to him.
 
Doesn't explain why God would need rest. Which was my question. Jesus sitting down at the right hand is not the same as God needing a break to rest. I understand that the writers of the Bible really digged the number 7 and had something special in mind for that day, but they didn't expect people to question what they wrote, so they weren't being the most vigilant in making the story consistent.

So, why did God need to rest the 7th day?

For a pattern for how we should live our lives. He gave us the 7 day week so that for six days we work and one day of the week is left for resting from work. This is explained in the Ten Commandments. God did not "need" to rst, he could have done everything in one day, but he chose to do it that way.
 
I think that it's because there were 7 planets that the ancients could see, and that there are four lots of 7 days from full moon to full moon.
 
For a pattern for how we should live our lives. He gave us the 7 day week so that for six days we work and one day of the week is left for resting from work. This is explained in the Ten Commandments. God did not "need" to rst, he could have done everything in one day, but he chose to do it that way.
Alright, rephrase question. How does an entity which is outside of time, and which does not get tired by definition, rest?

If we dealt with this question, I'm going into God being happy, sad, angry, etc :)
 
Alright, rephrase question. How does an entity which is outside of time, and which does not get tired by definition, rest?

If we dealt with this question, I'm going into God being happy, sad, angry, etc :)

Suppose he doesn't rest because he is tired, but instead because he is done?

Genesis2 said:
2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested [a] from all his work. 3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

There was no world building left to do, so he declared it a holiday and left it at that.
 
Suppose he doesn't rest because he is tired, but instead because he is done?



There was no world building left to do, so he declared it a holiday and left it at that.

your post makes it sound as if he should rest for the rest of time..... but no, he had some people to kill and towns to raze, and , oh, that turn-into-salt thingy. Yep, sounds like he is really 'resting from work', not 'has finished work', I'd say! Which, btw, fits nicely with the non-omniscient, non-prescient, very human OT god.
 
If there is a god, then to portray him as a human places limits on him, which would be against the whole nature of Him, so any attempt to describe him in human terms can only, at best, describe one aspect of him. The passage, therefore, is an analogy; his 'creative' side rested for one day, since his work was complete. That's my 2p.
 
If there is a god, then to portray him as a human places limits on him, which would be against the whole nature of Him, so any attempt to describe him in human terms can only, at best, describe one aspect of him. The passage, therefore, is an analogy; his 'creative' side rested for one day, since his work was complete. That's my 2p.

And how do you then explain all the vile, brutal, immoral stuff god does throughout the OT? :confused:


Would it not be smarter to simply accept that the entire bible is simply stuff written by humans alone, and thus (humanely) wrong, instead of wrapping this position into a theoretical musing on a special aspect of god's god-ness, just so that you can inject him (or her, you Sexist Pig? ;)) into the process of text creation?

And why do you assume that people who wanted to write that 'his creative side rested' (why, btw? and why only then, and not forever? cause afterwards god didn't really create much, did he?) were too dense to actually write 'his creative side rested'?
:crazyeye:
 
And how do you then explain all the vile, brutal, immoral stuff god does throughout the OT? :confused:

Personally, I don't - to me, the evil in the world proves that there is no God. However, for there to be a Coventry Cathedral there must be Nazis; there can be no Good Samaritan without a gang of thugs. Without evil, there would be no good.

Would it not be smarter to simply accept that the entire bible is simply stuff written by humans alone, and thus (humanely) wrong, instead of wrapping this position into a theoretical musing on a special aspect of god's god-ness, just so that you can inject him (or her, you Sexist Pig? ;)) into the process of text creation?

As I said, you can't describe a God in anything, because to do so places limits on him. The bible is written by humans, as an attempt to explain a fiendishly complicated idea.

And why do you assume that people who wanted to write that 'his creative side rested' (why, btw? and why only then, and not forever? cause afterwards god didn't really create much, did he?) were too dense to actually write 'his creative side rested'?
:crazyeye:

It's an analogy. To write in terms of aspects would have looked like polytheism, which was banned. Hinduism does that, and you get a lot of them who believe in lots of gods, which is not the point.
 
Amen, Flying Pig! Chalk up two points for me for the assist.


;)
 
Back
Top Bottom