religious dogma

[low_delta]

If you had a choice between interpreting the Bible in a way the goes along with accepted scientific views, and a way that doesn't, why would you choose the one that doesn't?

Let's talk about Creationism. You can either believe that God created the universe in six periods of time that correspond to what later became a full rotation of the Earth, or you can believe that the Bible is not necessarily to be taken literally. (I can come up with a whole bunch of plausible theories on why those words came to be, but it's not important at this moment.) Compare those two separate beliefs and then think about scientific evidence. Now tell me why the belief in either The Bible or in science should preclude belief in the other.

I can't imagine why someone would choose the literal interpretaion. I mean, if God runs the show, why couldn't he make species evolve? And the scientific description of the big bang and the formation of the Earth and the life on it sounds an awful lot like the story in the beginning of Genesis.

Or you could believe that a god would have created everything instantaneously, so there must be no God.

Comments

[ravenfeather.livejournal.com]

sorry.. I can't argue with this, I came to this conclusion waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back.


However.. I always looked at it as SEVEN periods of time.. "on the seventh day God rested" including the one we are in now.

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

Well, yeah, you could look at it that way. :-)

And, yeah, I can't imagine I'm the only one who has realized this.

[kingseyeland.livejournal.com]

I've always thought that God is the architect behind evolution, just as I've always thought that Allah and God are one in the same.

Simple-minded people make it too complicated. Irony?

[dwivian]

The 'day' cannot correspond to the concept of revolutions of earth, merely because the Sun wasn't installed until day four... (Gen 1:14-19)

[low-delta.livejournal.com]

I'm going to delete this comment because I don't think it's a good idea to leave one's e-mail address lying around where robots and such can pick it up. But here's the text of your reply:

You pose some interesting thoughts, not new to me but it's nice to see someone thinking for themself along the same lines that I have. For now, I'll just throw the thought out that God is a convenient word to use for what I call "The Prime Mover."
I'm not talking about the Biblical sense of God, but instead the creative force that caused the laws of physics and math, biology and even so far as socialogy and pshychology that we experience on an everyday basis. Mythology could be included in that list also. Many different sorts of the latter, scientific or theistic. Too many to discuss here and now!

I'd enjoy getting into an honest and open-minded discussion about these topics with you!

With Interest,

Lister

When I have to leave my e-ddress, I usually spell out the word "at" and leave some spaces in. You can reach me at my LJ address.

I wouldn't argue against your interpretation. Actually, I wouldn't take issue with many descriptions, because who am I to argue with someone about their understanding of their god? But that aside...

Do you believe that this Prime Mover is an entity?