Nostr Web Client

Replying to

hodlbod

No, pedantry is nitpicking, not intelligent criticism.

Red Tower 2y ago

First annotation. To the point and scientifically reasoned.

> In the beginning (1:1-2:3)

> Compare with Gen 2:4-25 in which the order of events is entirely different.

> The Genesis 1 account conflicts with the order of events that are known to science.

> The earth and "heaven" are created together "in the beginning," whereas according to current estimates, the earth and universe are about 4.6 and 13.8 billion years old, respectively.

> Also in the first creation account, the earth is created before light, sun and stars; birds and whales before reptiles and insects; and flowering plants before any animals. The order of events known from science is in each case just the opposite.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

hodlbod 2y ago

This ignores millennia of Christian thought that addresses exactly these problems. You think we're unaware of these questions? It's honestly insulting.

In brief,

1. Genesis is poetry, not scientific literature, inconsistency is often intentional and for a particular literary purpose (read Through New Eyes for details, chiasms often play a part). Old vs young earth is a valid debate, but both are consistent with the Biblical narrative because it features a transcendent God who is not bound by the laws of nature.

2. Science is often wrong (at best it's a method of inquiry, not a set of doctrines). Estimates about the age of the earth depend on the doctrine of uniformitarianism which Genesis explicitly denies. Likewise, the doctrine of evolution is just that, a doctrine.