Yes, teach all THREE ideas...if honesty is the policy.

"Day" in Hebrew means ANY duration of time. The Christians know this. Peter said a YOM is a 1000 years to the lord.YOM = DAY = Era of millions of yearsTeach this interpretation of Genesis and the Fundamentalists, and the scienctific. Let the truth be in the mind of the children. Equal handedness is HONESTY:Gen. 1:1 In the beginning God, (The Universal Power) created the heaven and the earth.Gen. 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God, (the Natural Laws) moved upon the face of the waters.Gen. 1:5 And God, (The Universal Power), called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first YOM,( the Azoic Era). (1)Gen. 1:8 And God, (The Universal Power) called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second YOM, (the Archeozoic Era). (2)Gen. 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third YOM, (the Proterozoic Era). (3)Gen 1:14 God, (The Universal Power ), said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and for (24 hour) days, and (365 day) years:
Gen. 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth YOM, (the Paleozoic Era). (4)Gen. 1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth YOM, (the Mesozoic Era). (5)Gen. 1:31 And God, (the Universal Power), saw every thing that it was good and that was the evening and the morning of the sixth YOm, (the Cenozoic Era). (6)Gen. 2:3 And God, (the Universal Power), blessed this present YOM, (7)
and God, (the Universal Force), rested, (no more evidence of evolution apparent)....see what I'm saying?[This message has been edited by kofh2u, 04-06-2004]

I think this discussion should be moved to the Bible thread.

To me, the topic seems like an odd sort of "Dates and Dating" topic. Perhaps a strange topic, but I don't recall such a variation of ideas having come up before. A FRESH CONCEPT OF A TOPIC?!Adminnemooseus

---

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

Thread moved here from the Education and Creation/Evolution forum.

Yes, but when used with numbers and articles, the term "day" means 24 hour day. See this article: Missing Link | Answers in Genesis Right. II Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." So you see, if you finish the verse, the concepts kinda cancel each other out.Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to shoot down your idea of teaching this idea to the kids. Just don't leave these facts out when making your presentation.

Yes, that's my suggestion. 'Teach all the present concepts so no one will get their toes stepped on! That's the ticket.The Pope for instance, in 1998, stated that there is just too much support for Evolution to maintain an argument from Genesis. An argument which actually acknowledges a step by step unfolding of an evermore complexity in living things. Close enough. The Jesuits will attest to their concurrence in this, also.That a large body of the membership in other twelve major denominational churches do not dispute the process of God in the context of Evolution should be expressed in the classroom. These church people are still able to maintain that God, ultimately through Natural law, is the founder of the creations we investigate in Evolution.It should be emphasized as strongly, that it is the minority opinion of the Fundamentalist who see Creationism as truthful. These are bible people who most recently, in the last century, developed the concept of Literalism as a means to argument concerning scriptural differences with others,.With this said, the article you bring to my attention supports the idea on "yom" being defined by the use within the context of the sentence.The suggestion and argument concerning the intransient denotation of yom, that whenever a number is associated with it MUST mean 24 hours, seems weaken by the fact, that EXACTLY where the "yom" definitely infers 24 hours, no number IS used.And, more important, in the context of that verse, Genesis 1:14, not only is no number is associated with that word, but it explicitly is the place where it DOES MEAN 24 HOURS.Gen. 1:14 And God said, Let there be LIGHTS in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for SIGNS, and for SEASONS, and for DAYS, and YEARS:Furthermore, this verse suggests strongly that the previous use of Yom was different in intent. Here, after four "yoms" of time, God finally makes a yom. He finally creates a day of 24 hours. This seems to clearly imply that it most certainly was NOT 24 hours before, or why mention it?And, it also specifically implies, that is, it is explicit, that the first four yoms could not be the "day" that is related to the rotation that exposes us to the sun. For the sun and the moon itself is created on the fourth yom.Though the semantical argument here may be debated back and forth concerning the meaning of yom, the logical observation can not.The 24 hour day and the 365 day year were "invented" in this literature of Genesis long after the term had been applied in the previous verses to some other idea of time, otherwise, it would not have been necessary to re-invent it. True?[This message has been edited by kofh2u, 04-08-2004]

quote:

---

see what I'm saying?

---

What I see you saying, is that there is an (at least rough) correlation between the days of creation, and the ages of the universe (and more specifically, the geologic eras of the Earth). That is why I moved the topic to "Dates and Dating". As such, a better topic title might be "The Days of Creation in Relation to the Geologic Eras of the Earth".This, however, is probably not the line of discussion you actually are trying to pursue.Adminnemooseus

Oh, my fault.I thought we were talking about teaching biology.In that I felt we were at the right thread since that was the title.I was just demonstarting the the curriculum is too small in comparing Evolution with Fundamentalistic Creationism.I am suggesting that we also add that yom = day = bio-geological time = seven Eras.I'll drop out. other threads may be more open to discussions with greater boundaries and limits.

Not all ideas are equally valid. Scietific progress is made by finding the models and theories that best describe the observable workings of the universe. Anything that doesn't meet scietific standards shouldn't be discussed as scietific. Scientific eduacation isn't about making people feel good, its about teaching them the estabished and supported ideas of science. Religious support or lack there of makes no difference to the scientific endevour. The support of a church no more validates scietific theories than the disapproval would amount to discreding scientific theories. If the pope and others wish to view scientific theories int the light of their personal beliefs, that is fine. However, it doesn't mean that the theories somehow are now tied to those beliefs. Creationism and a literal interpretation are most certainly NOT a creation of the last hundred years. Both creationism and literism were common belief for thousands of years. Many of the conflicts you see repeatidly with science and religion is that teh evidence repeatadly pointed to theories that didn't agree with the literal interpreation of the bible. Literism and creationism have waned in support for the very reason that the belief struture conflicted with the known evidence. However, there are elements of various faiths which continue to adher to a literist account, and disregard the scietific achievements of the last several centuries to maintain that belief.As for the rest, what does a semantic arguement about the words of the bible have to do with science, and why should it ever come withint ten yards of a science class when it is obviously not science?

The info of message one seems to be showing up in other topic(s), such as message 47, of the "The Roman Catholic Church and Evolution" topic.Let's pursue it in this topic.Adminnemooseus

---

WHERE TO GO TO START A NEW TOPIC (For other than "Welcome, Visitors!", "Suggestions and Questions", "Practice Makes Perfect", and "Short Subjects")Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

As long as this crap is not taught in science class. You can teach kids to grasp at straws when it comes to making the bible fit the facts, but don't pretend it has anything to do with science.

How did that contribute to the discussion, exactly?

Easy. This is the quote that prompted my response:

quote:

---

Teach all the present concepts so no one will get their toes stepped on! That's the ticket.

---

I just wanted to clarify that this is acceptible if it does not mean teaching in science class. The above is nearly identical to a common creationist/theist argument. They argue, why can't we just teach both sides in science class and keep everybody happy? Because one clearly has nothing to do with science, and it would be an absurd waste of time to push this in the classroom. However, anything outside the classroom is fair game.On that note, what happened to the "reply with quote" link?This message has been edited by Beercules, 05-05-2004 08:18 PM

1. The whole context of the Bible teaches a 24 hour day after the sun was created on day four. The earth's revolutions in conjunction with the sun became the standard for the measurement of the day.2. Peter did not say that to God a day is a thousand years. He said it was AS a thousand years -- big difference. His implication was simply that to one who's been around forever, time is not relevant. So many take this statement and run in every whichy direction, destroying truth by distorting it. The little two letter word, as should not be removed in order to promote a false premise.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 05-07-2004 07:45 PM

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

Rev. 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich (a large denominational church), and increased with goods (accumulated art treasure, land, and income from tithes), and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched (without secularly acceptable scripture confirmations), and miserable, (entrapped in erroneous doctrine and blind dogma), and poor (in a declining membership), and nake (and unprotected from the ever growing Age of Enlightment):