"...it matches the astronomical and fossil record perfectly".
Does it? Perfectly?
Genesis 1:6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning-the second day.
Are we to believe here that the earth was a solid ball of water
with no atmosphere at one point?
Genesis 1:9 - And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.
Here are we to believe that land only appeared after there
was nothing but water? My science references claim the earth
was molten at one time which would lead me to believe that
at best we had water vapor present. As the earth cooled
enough, then it was possible for water to collect.
Also, in Genesis 1:1 god said let there be light....but in genesis 1:14 he creates the sun and moon. Hmmmmm....
I could go on, but in any case, we certainly cannot
refer to this as "perfect" by any means.
There is another issue which bothers me. You seem to imply
that if mythical story happens to match modern knowledge, then
this is rational reason enough to believe the mythical story must
be true. I disagree.
I could simply produce a religion with a more accurate series
of events, and then would expect you to be my first follower.
I could lie and say my religious text is 5,000 years old, and
has been kept secret forever...blah blah....
You would also have to review ALL OTHER RELIGIONS known
to man to make absolutely SURE their creation stories are
not a better match. Have you done this??
A third problem I have is this. The bible is KNOWN to have
numerous contradictions and problems with modern knowledge.
Usually these are argued away with some very creative
interpretation by theists. But a book which is so ambiguous
that not even the religious leaders can ever agree on the
"true' meaning of it, could never hold up to the standard
of evidence for a belief so grand.
In another post, you said:
"...but I am saying it is an amazing "coincidence" and it is the only creation story that I know about that even comes close to matching the scientific record"
Here you admit "that you know of", and secondly, it does not
match the scientific record.
We could claim it was close at best, and sounds like it was
written by a poorly educated man, in very simple terms.
Think about it... if you were the original author of a creation
myth, knowing what ancient man knew, how would you write it?
I would write it like this:
1) God snaps finger, earth appears (since im aware of the earth I must explain it)
2) God snaps finger, the lights turn on (since ive already seen light I must explain it)
3) God snaps fingers, ocean appears (since ive seen the ocean, I must explain it
4) God snaps fingers, fish appears, animals...man and so on and so on...
Now this begs the question:
Why doesn't the list look a little more realistic. For example:
1) God snaps fingers, basic building blocks of mass and energy appear
2) God snaps finger, Sun 1 appears
...skip a few steps....
174,343,534) God Snaps fingers Sun # 384,764,234,768 appears
174,343,535) God snaps fingers, Milkyway galaxy forms
...skip a bunch of steps....
...and finally......
556,234,667,998,553,113) God snaps fingers and creates planet #454,678,673,290,003,466 called EARTH
Isn't it interesting that the ONLY things which appear in this
simple creation story ARE THINGS WHICH a simple ancient
man would ALREADY BE AWARE of???
Coincidence?
The simplicity of the story, and the contradictions of order
which I already pointed out, lead me to believe that this
is actually just another run of the mill creation story.
peace
axeman
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:
Well, here's why I believe in the JudeoChristian version: it matches the astronomical and fossil record perfectly. Here is the order it gives in Genesis (keeping in mind that the vantage point of the observer/writer of Genesis is given in verse 1 as on the surface of the earth):
1. Creation of the physical universe. (1:1)
2. Transformation of the earth's atmosphere from opaque to translucent. (1:3)
3. Formation of a stable water cycle. (1:7)
4. Establishment of continents/oceans. (1:9)
5. Transformation of the atmosphere from translucent to transparent, i.e. sun, moon and stars became visible on the earth for the first time. (1:14-16)
6. Production of small sea animals. (1:20)
7. Creation of sea mammals (nephesh as gms likes to point out). (1:21)
8. Creation of birds.
9. Making of land animals (nephesh). (1:24)
10. Creation of man. (1:26)
Coincidence? I think not...
