Re: Interesting contradiction in Genesis...
Dick Eney (firstname.lastname@example.org)
29 Jan 1995 21:08:03 -0500
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.950128200246.387A-100000@tiger>,
Cory Sellers <email@example.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 22 Jan 1995 MSIMONS@husc.harvard.edu wrote:
>> In article <firstname.lastname@example.org> email@example.com. (Chris Woodward (PSY)) writes:
>> >If God didn't create the sun until day 4, then how did He keep
>> >track of days 1-3 (since a literal day was measured by the sun)?
C'mon, what's the use of being omniscient if you can't tell time?
>This is a good point. Unfortunately nobody but the United States really
>cares about how many days it took God to create.
The United States does not care, nor do the vast majority of its
citizens. Certain religious kooks, who despite your assertion are not
restricted to the United States, have the idea that the legends of the
Jews and early Christians are relevant to the real world. Another of
their illusions is that they should impose their deductions from this
idea on civilized human beings. Both impressions are in error.
>A day can mean amost anything. It is most probably used as term to
>signify a time period. What that time was is unknown.
The time period is explicitly described as consisting of an evening and a
morning, i.e., one standard solar day. Sorry, but you don't get to pick
and choose when you start defending superstition.
>The important issue is that God created not how he created.
No; the important issue is _whether_ "god" created. Since that notion
has long been discredited, you are simply wasting band width...why don't
you try arguing something _really_ important, like whether insanity is
caused by people accidentally sleeping where the light of the moon can
fall on them? Mental health, now, that's an important issue in the
-- Dick Eney
patiently waiting for somebody to defend the phlogiston theory...