Scientifically Impossible

[YEC]

SCIENTIFICALLY IMPOSSIBLE

Often we read where Christians deny the possibility of the events pertaining to the six day creation or the world wide flood of Noah. The major reason for this denial is due to claims that modern science has disproved the accounts presented within Genesis. Genesis is no longer scientifically feasible.
Despite the many scientific evidences pointing to a recent creation and a world wide flood as told in the accounts of Genesis there is still this nagging need to deny the accounts of Genesis yet believe the other scientifically impossible portions of the bible.
For those who choose not to believe in the accounts of Genesis an allegory must be drawn up to explain the verses.

Below are 9 scientifically impossible events that the bible presents as truth. Why is it that some of the events get dismissed and allegorized by “Theistic Evolutionist” while some of the other events are held on to and presented as the literal truth by these same “Theistic Evolutionist” despite their obvious scientific impossibilities?
If the answer is “miracles” then why can’t all the scientific impossibilities be miracles?
Why is it that the events such as a recent creation and the flood which actually have scientific data to support them become allegories while the others with no scientific support are still up held as fact?

• The creation of the world in six days did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: Genesis 1-2

• The creation of Adam from the dust then Eve from his side did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: Genesis 2:7 , 2:22

• The world wide flood of Noah did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: Genesis 6-8

• Men living to long ages did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: Genesis 9:29

• Moses staff turning into snakes did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: Exodus 4:3

• The sun standing still for Joshua did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: Joshua 10:13

• Peter walking on the water with Jesus did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: Matthew 14:29

• Jesus turning water into wine did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: John 2: 1-11

• Jesus Christ rising from the dead did not happen because it disagrees with popular scientific beliefs.
  They claim it has been shown to be scientifically impossible.
  REF: John 20,21

Perhaps it’s best to allegorize the resurrection of Jesus Christ along with the six day creation....after all, both are scientifically impossible. Dead dead people can’t rise from the grave on day 3.
That would be the natural “scientific” interpretational tendencies. Allegorize.

The above questions make me think of the following question:
Why is it the Theistic Evolutionist can believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ which is scientifically impossible, yet deny the six day creation performed by Jesus Christ as written in the accounts of Genesis...which is also considered as scientifically impossible?

I believe the bottom line of biblical translation for the Theistic Evolutionist is as follows:
If it relates to the flood or creation, it's an allegory.
Of course there is a danger in presenting this kind of a watered down scientifically impossible pick and choose your miracle bible .....salvation may be easly lost.

[harvey1]

The fact of the matter is that creationists have hijacked the Bible into a fundamentalism that was never really a part of Christianity. Jesus departed from the teachings from "Thus saith the Lord", so did Paul, and, in fact, Christians took Old Testament scriptures out of context and allegorized them, something which your faith would never have started had they not done so.

I would love to hear how creationist have hijcked the bible. After all it is the bible that says Adam was formed from the dust THEN Eve was made from Adams rib....your claim is that this is not so, but it is what the bible says. The OT as well as NT authors tell us man was made from the dust and not from animals..once again this is not evolutionism. It is crystal clear that making a woman from a mans rib is not evolutionism.

It is not crystal clear that it is a rib. The Hebrew word for rib is "Tsela`" and it can mean a number of different things, but the word is most often used for 'cell', that is, basic building component used in a building. Stick with the most used meaning.

I don't really thin the word "Tsela`" (Strongs 6763) means cell.http://www.jcsm.org/StudyCenter/kjvstrongs/STRHEB67.htm
You will need to present a reference that shows cell was the correct intention.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Heb ... ersion=kjv

"c. side-chambers or cells (of temple structure)"

Here are scriptures which show the same word is properly translated:

Eze 41:5 After he measured the wall of the house, six cubits; and the breadth of every side chamber, four cubits, round about the house on every side.
Eze 41:6 And the side chambers were three, one over another, and thirty in order; and they entered into the wall which was of the house for the side chamber s round about, that they might have hold, but they had not hold in the wall of the house.
Eze 41:7 And there was an enlarging, and a winding about still upward to the side chambers: for the winding about of the house went still upward round about the house: therefore the breadth of the house was still upward, and so increased from the lowest chamber to the highest by the midst.
Eze 41:8 I saw also the height of the house round about: the foundations of the side chambers were a full reed of six great cubits.
Eze 41:9 The thickness of the wall, which was for the side chamber without, was five cubits: and that which was left was the place of the that were within.
Eze 41:11 And the doors of the side chambers were toward the place that was left,

Now, here is the definition of a cell (www.dictionary.com):

"The smallest structural unit of an organism that is capable of independent functioning, consisting of one or more nuclei, cytoplasm, and various organelles, all surrounded by a semipermeable cell membrane"

[Corvus]

The fact of the matter is that creationists have hijacked the Bible into a fundamentalism that was never really a part of Christianity. Jesus departed from the teachings from "Thus saith the Lord", so did Paul, and, in fact, Christians took Old Testament scriptures out of context and allegorized them, something which your faith would never have started had they not done so.

I would love to hear how creationist have hijcked the bible. After all it is the bible that says Adam was formed from the dust THEN Eve was made from Adams rib....your claim is that this is not so, but it is what the bible says. The OT as well as NT authors tell us man was made from the dust and not from animals..once again this is not evolutionism. It is crystal clear that making a woman from a mans rib is not evolutionism.

It is not crystal clear that it is a rib. The Hebrew word for rib is "Tsela`" and it can mean a number of different things, but the word is most often used for 'cell', that is, basic building component used in a building. Stick with the most used meaning.

I don't really thin the word "Tsela`" (Strongs 6763) means cell.http://www.jcsm.org/StudyCenter/kjvstrongs/STRHEB67.htm
You will need to present a reference that shows cell was the correct intention.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Heb ... ersion=kjv

"c. side-chambers or cells (of temple structure)"

Here are scriptures which show the same word is properly translated:

Eze 41:5 After he measured the wall of the house, six cubits; and the breadth of every side chamber, four cubits, round about the house on every side.
Eze 41:6 And the side chambers were three, one over another, and thirty in order; and they entered into the wall which was of the house for the side chamber s round about, that they might have hold, but they had not hold in the wall of the house.
Eze 41:7 And there was an enlarging, and a winding about still upward to the side chambers: for the winding about of the house went still upward round about the house: therefore the breadth of the house was still upward, and so increased from the lowest chamber to the highest by the midst.
Eze 41:8 I saw also the height of the house round about: the foundations of the side chambers were a full reed of six great cubits.
Eze 41:9 The thickness of the wall, which was for the side chamber without, was five cubits: and that which was left was the place of the that were within.
Eze 41:11 And the doors of the side chambers were toward the place that was left,

Now, here is the definition of a cell (www.dictionary.com):

"The smallest structural unit of an organism that is capable of independent functioning, consisting of one or more nuclei, cytoplasm, and various organelles, all surrounded by a semipermeable cell membrane"

Sorry, harvey1, although I admire your attempts to show the bible keeps up with progress, I have to disagree with your interpretation. That a side-chamber means cell in English, and a cell can also mean the smallest structural part of an organism, does not mean the Hebrew word for cell can also mean the smallest part of an organism. It would also mean that should tsela be translated into another language where a side chamber does not equate to a biological cell (Greek or Latin perhaps?), then the argument fails. The only way the argument could be saved is by appealing to providence by stating the Hebrew word for side chamber anticipated the English word for cell, which is unproveable. We would expect a passage to be timeless, and its revelations not dependent on the linguistic nuances of whatever time it is being read in. In brief; a homonym in one language does not equate to a homonym (or synonym) in another.

[harvey1]

It is not crystal clear that it is a rib. The Hebrew word for rib is "Tsela`" and it can mean a number of different things, but the word is most often used for 'cell', that is, basic building component used in a building. Stick with the most used meaning.

I don't really thin the word "Tsela`" (Strongs 6763) means cell.http://www.jcsm.org/StudyCenter/kjvstrongs/STRHEB67.htm
You will need to present a reference that shows cell was the correct intention.

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Heb ... ersion=kjv "c. side-chambers or cells (of temple structure)" Here are scriptures which show the same word is properly translated:
Eze 41:5 After he measured the wall of the house, six cubits; and the breadth of every side chamber, four cubits, round about the house on every side.
Eze 41:6 And the side chambers were three, one over another, and thirty in order; and they entered into the wall which was of the house for the side chamber s round about, that they might have hold, but they had not hold in the wall of the house.
Eze 41:7 And there was an enlarging, and a winding about still upward to the side chambers: for the winding about of the house went still upward round about the house: therefore the breadth of the house was still upward, and so increased from the lowest chamber to the highest by the midst.
Eze 41:8 I saw also the height of the house round about: the foundations of the side chambers were a full reed of six great cubits.
Eze 41:9 The thickness of the wall, which was for the side chamber without, was five cubits: and that which was left was the place of the that were within.
Eze 41:11 And the doors of the side chambers were toward the place that was left,

Now, here is the definition of a cell (www.dictionary.com):

"The smallest structural unit of an organism that is capable of independent functioning, consisting of one or more nuclei, cytoplasm, and various organelles, all surrounded by a semipermeable cell membrane"

Sorry, harvey1, although I admire your attempts to show the bible keeps up with progress, I have to disagree with your interpretation. That a side-chamber means cell in English, and a cell can also mean the smallest structural part of an organism, does not mean the Hebrew word for cell can also mean the smallest part of an organism. It would also mean that should tsela be translated into another language where a side chamber does not equate to a biological cell (Greek or Latin perhaps?), then the argument fails. The only way the argument could be saved is by appealing to providence by stating the Hebrew word for side chamber anticipated the English word for cell, which is unproveable. We would expect a passage to be timeless, and its revelations not dependent on the linguistic nuances of whatever time it is being read in.

Firstly, the only time Tsela is translated as 'rib' is..... you guessed it, Gen.2:21-22. The other cases where 'rib' is translated from Hebrew, there is no Hebrew word used, the reference is to being stabbed in the fifth - which the word 'rib' is added.

So, right away, suspicions should be raised as to whether rib is the best translation for 'tsela'. When we look up the other places where 'tsela' is used, it is almost always referring to a temple room (i.e., side chamber) or materials used to support the temple or build an altar. It is almost bizarre how other words are used for building materials except when it refers to a temple, in which the building materials are talking about 'tsela' materials, or a 'tsela' chamber. There's a couple of references that mean side of a human, but the only incidences I found it was talking figuratively, not literally, such as:

Job 18:12 "Hungry is his sorrow, And calamity is ready at his side"

So, whoever is getting you to believe that scripture is referring to Adam's rib, I think, is pulling the wool over your eyes. It is talking about adamah as a 'temple' and some material was taken from the adamah to split the adamah into male and female. 'Cell' is a stretch to some degree, but since many translations of 'tsela' are talking about a small cubicle, the term 'cell' is fitting. In actuality, though, all that is important with regard to 'tsela' is that some kind of material to build was taken from the adamah.

I suggest people use the Young's concordance, and look up every incident of the word, in Hebrew, as I did.

[harvey1]

"but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." (Gen. 2:17) The human manifestation of adamah (i.e., "Adam") died many years later after this command was given to him by God. Surely he ate the fruit on a specific day, but the effects took time. The first effect was the shame of their nakedness. So, likewise, you can be consistent with Genesis 1 (and six '24-hour' days) by saying, for example, on Day 3 God uttered that life would occur, and life occurred that day. Afterall, there has to be a first day of life on this planet, why not the day that God uttered it to be so?

In this instance Adam did die that day. It was a spiritual death and the process of physical death began that day.

So, allegorical interpretation takes priority over the real physical meaning of the term?

[harvey1]

"These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the heaven and the earth" (Gen.2:4)

Lets contine with the usage of the word day..yom.
GEN 31:40 This was my situation: The heat consumed me in the daytime and the cold at night, and sleep fled from my eyes.
Once again the same word YOM is used, but added to "time" which suggest a time period of when the sun was shining...not some long age when the sun was shinning. Yom in Genesis 1 was added to morning and night in a similar fashion which also strongly suggest a defined amount of time and not a lont age. Just for the record, the word day you presented in Gen 2:4 is better understood to mean "at the time"

'Yom' can be a regular day, you have to look at the context and what other scriptures say. In the case of Genesis, all that we know from the context is that a night and evening followed God's command. As you said about God's proclamation that Adam would die the day he eats the fruit, it could mean something allegorical, such as, a period of extinction or setback ('darkness') following God's commands. If literal, it could mean that God finished the command on a specific day. Gen.2:4 Does add information. It suggests that God created the universe in a long ago age.

Gensis 1 might be playing off the Hebrew word for 'beginning' which ends in 'shith' (six). Therefore, 'beginning' altogether means 'create six'. If 'beginning' means 'create six', then it is logical that 6 is used as a play on words. If you look up 'shith' in the Strong's dictionary, it points you to #8337, 'shishshah' meaning beyond five or the fingers of the hand. So, perhaps, Genesis' use of six days is a subtle way of saying that it took a long time to create, i.e., beyond what you can count on one hand.

In any case, you shouldn't rule out Gen.2:4 so quickly as giving the depiction of the creation timeframe....

[Corvus]

Firstly, the only time Tsela is translated as 'rib' is..... you guessed it, Gen.2:21-22. The other cases where 'rib' is translated from Hebrew, there is no Hebrew word used, the reference is to being stabbed in the fifth - which the word 'rib' is added.

But still we have only one instance where the word is used to describe biological architecture instead of ecclesiastic architecture. I must admit, however, the correlation between sacred structures, body and temple, is significantly compelling (and the comparison between temple and body causes me to wonder what impact applying that view to all we see would have on the much over-used word "secular", but that's a part of my mind's insane wanderings, and not the current discussion)

So, whoever is getting you to believe that scripture is referring to Adam's rib, I think, is pulling the wool over your eyes.

Er, well, as an unbeliever, I'd like to think no one is deceiving me as to what the translation of tsela should be, and that I can arrive at the conclusion by independent reasoning. My reasoning perhaps has something to do with my opinion that the bible is not divinely inspired, and that a primitive society could not know that cells placed under a microscope could possibly look like many interconnected chambers.

[YEC]

Here are scriptures which show the same word is properly translated:

Eze 41:5 After he measured the wall of the house, six cubits; and the breadth of every side chamber, four cubits, round about the house on every side.
Eze 41:6 And the side chambers were three, one over another, and thirty in order; and they entered into the wall which was of the house for the side chamber s round about, that they might have hold, but they had not hold in the wall of the house.
Eze 41:7 And there was an enlarging, and a winding about still upward to the side chambers: for the winding about of the house went still upward round about the house: therefore the breadth of the house was still upward, and so increased from the lowest chamber to the highest by the midst.
Eze 41:8 I saw also the height of the house round about: the foundations of the side chambers were a full reed of six great cubits.
Eze 41:9 The thickness of the wall, which was for the side chamber without, was five cubits: and that which was left was the place of the that were within.
Eze 41:11 And the doors of the side chambers were toward the place that was left,

Now, here is the definition of a cell (www.dictionary.com):

"The smallest structural unit of an organism that is capable of independent functioning, consisting of one or more nuclei, cytoplasm, and various organelles, all surrounded by a semipermeable cell membrane"

Harvey, that is such a stretch it's almost funny.

Please go back, re-read the strongs definition. That's what the words really means.

Certainly the verse above has nothing to do with the smallest structural unit of an organism.

[YEC]

"but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." (Gen. 2:17) The human manifestation of adamah (i.e., "Adam") died many years later after this command was given to him by God. Surely he ate the fruit on a specific day, but the effects took time. The first effect was the shame of their nakedness. So, likewise, you can be consistent with Genesis 1 (and six '24-hour' days) by saying, for example, on Day 3 God uttered that life would occur, and life occurred that day. Afterall, there has to be a first day of life on this planet, why not the day that God uttered it to be so?

In this instance Adam did die that day. It was a spiritual death and the process of physical death began that day.

So, allegorical interpretation takes priority over the real physical meaning of the term?

Allegorical interpretation????

Adam literally died spiratually and then literally began to die physically....nothing allegorical about the event.

[harvey1]

Here are scriptures which show the same word is properly translated:

Eze 41:5 After he measured the wall of the house, six cubits; and the breadth of every side chamber, four cubits, round about the house on every side.
Eze 41:6 And the side chambers were three, one over another, and thirty in order; and they entered into the wall which was of the house for the side chamber s round about, that they might have hold, but they had not hold in the wall of the house.
Eze 41:7 And there was an enlarging, and a winding about still upward to the side chambers: for the winding about of the house went still upward round about the house: therefore the breadth of the house was still upward, and so increased from the lowest chamber to the highest by the midst.
Eze 41:8 I saw also the height of the house round about: the foundations of the side chambers were a full reed of six great cubits.
Eze 41:9 The thickness of the wall, which was for the side chamber without, was five cubits: and that which was left was the place of the that were within.
Eze 41:11 And the doors of the side chambers were toward the place that was left,

Now, here is the definition of a cell (www.dictionary.com):

"The smallest structural unit of an organism that is capable of independent functioning, consisting of one or more nuclei, cytoplasm, and various organelles, all surrounded by a semipermeable cell membrane"

Harvey, that is such a stretch it's almost funny. Please go back, re-read the strongs definition. That's what the words really means.
Certainly the verse above has nothing to do with the smallest structural unit of an organism.

Hebrew is an ancient language. The connection we have with that language is its usage. By far (over 90%), the most common used term for 'tsela' is a small side-chamber for a holy building (or something used to build a holy building). I didn't make that up. Go look in the Young's concordance and you can see every usage of 'tsela' and you'll see that it's usage is related to a structure.

Of course, that doesn't mean that biological cell is the correct translation, but it could be the correct meaning. But, it doesn't matter from my perspective. The correct translation is "something used in the building of a structure". My point is that you won't buy into the correct meaning because you want Genesis to say 'rib' when it doesn't.

[harvey1]

"but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." (Gen. 2:17) The human manifestation of adamah (i.e., "Adam") died many years later after this command was given to him by God. Surely he ate the fruit on a specific day, but the effects took time. The first effect was the shame of their nakedness. So, likewise, you can be consistent with Genesis 1 (and six '24-hour' days) by saying, for example, on Day 3 God uttered that life would occur, and life occurred that day. Afterall, there has to be a first day of life on this planet, why not the day that God uttered it to be so?

In this instance Adam did die that day. It was a spiritual death and the process of physical death began that day.

So, allegorical interpretation takes priority over the real physical meaning of the term?

Allegorical interpretation???? Adam literally died spiratually and then literally began to die physically....nothing allegorical about the event.

Show me in Genesis where it says that Adam underwent some spiritual death the same day. Again, you are adding words that aren't there just so that you don't have to admit that the commands in Genesis 1 could be fulfilled in full after the day of the command. That is, there is a partial fulfillment and a remote fulfillment. Adam's death is just a one example, there are many.