Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
In Genesis, we see established understanding of the cycles between day and night, of the differentiation between "kinds" of animal, of the distinction between the solid ground and the ocean. The understanding and organization of time, distinguishing "days" by the passing of the sun. Reserving the seventh day for recuperation shows imposed meaning on certain measurements of the day cycle. These are simple concepts to us, but remember that this is humankind as it achieves understanding and innovation, as it makes sense of the world.
In this story, humans live within nature, naive and innocent, until insatiable curiosity drives them to take knowledge from nature and as consequence, are made separate from nature. They are made naked, they are unnatural. They craft unnatural things from the flora and fauna, inventing clothes, an essential so ingrained in human society that we don't even think of it as technology.
It is a tribal metaphor of ascent into sapience, that resonates through to modern cultural standards of "decency".
I'm not suggesting these ancient tribal folk were actually talking about evolution or sapience when they told these stories to their fellows, but I can see a metaphor that emerges from this superstitious myth thousands of years later.
It's a tribal myth preserved by the Hebrew tribe from around the beginnings of recorded history, the work of humans trying to make sense of the world. The imaginings of a single band of uneducated, unenlightened, ignorant tribal warlords has made our culture as it is, it has affected every aspect of our lives and our society, regardless of our belief in a god. And this tribe was one among countless others, thousands of other faiths and superstitions and claims to absolute truth.
I don't think we really ever consider exactly how the traditions of a single obscure bronze age tribe have affected all of society. Cause and effect, measured in centuries, are the laws of tradition.
I think that even while arguing from the position of science and reasoning, we can in ways be blinded by our cultural bias. We have been manipulated to think of "God" as an abstract, as something that we can't disprove, as something people can believe in without reason, because as they say, God exists outside of reason.
But "God" does not exist outside of reason, "God" is just a concept, it's just an idea, information passed down from one generation to the next.
rocketman Wrote:We know what your mythology says about A&E. We know how Bishop Ussher calculated the 6000 years based on the geneaology of the "begats".
What we're telling you is that we know there were not two people on earth 6000 years ago, but millions. The cities of Jericho, and Çatal Höyük are over 9000 years old. And the cities of Uruk, Eridu, and Ur (the homeland of Abram) were all founded by the time you're claiming Adam was the lone man in the Garden.
Ur... No.
That's not what I said. All bishop whatever proved was that it's been 6000+ years since the explusion from the Garden. Because in order to 'begat' someone their needs to be a child. Adam and Eve did not 'begat' anyone till AFTER they were evicted from Garden life.
While I did say Adam was the first man, I did not say he was the only one.
Quote:I have to confess, I have not heard this argument before.
I'm doing my best to get the message out there. I even wrote a letter to the pope. (Truthfully did)
Quote:But it begs a question. If humans waited, in a state of eternal life, while everything else evolved and diversified into modern life, why do we show every sign of evolving (shared genetic markers in our noncoding DNA like viral-infection scars, for instance) the same way as everything else on earth? Why would it be necessary to fake the appearance that we evolve the same way as everything else?
Because again, Man outside the garden evolved at their own rate. Created Man/Adam was made unique in that God breathed into Him a soul. Man evolved from whatever primate/monkey science now says is the one, evolved without a soul.
So pre flood Their were soul-less monkey men and Man made in the image of God co-existing to one degree or another. Then post flood, only man with a soul remained. (meaning we all have souls)
(September 28, 2015 at 10:43 am)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: In Genesis, we see established understanding of the cycles between day and night, of the differentiation between "kinds" of animal, of the distinction between the solid ground and the ocean. The understanding and organization of time, distinguishing "days" by the passing of the sun. Reserving the seventh day for recuperation shows imposed meaning on certain measurements of the day cycle. These are simple concepts to us, but remember that this is humankind as it achieves understanding and innovation, as it makes sense of the world.
In this story, humans live within nature, naive and innocent, until insatiable curiosity drives them to take knowledge from nature and as consequence, are made separate from nature. They are made naked, they are unnatural. They craft unnatural things from the flora and fauna, inventing clothes, an essential so ingrained in human society that we don't even think of it as technology.
It is a tribal metaphor of ascent into sapience, that resonates through to modern cultural standards of "decency".
I'm not suggesting these ancient tribal folk were actually talking about evolution or sapience when they told these stories to their fellows, but I can see a metaphor that emerges from this superstitious myth thousands of years later.
It's a tribal myth preserved by the Hebrew tribe from around the beginnings of recorded history, the work of humans trying to make sense of the world. The imaginings of a single band of uneducated, unenlightened, ignorant tribal warlords has made our culture as it is, it has affected every aspect of our lives and our society, regardless of our belief in a god. And this tribe was one among countless others, thousands of other faiths and superstitions and claims to absolute truth.
I don't think we really ever consider exactly how the traditions of a single obscure bronze age tribe have affected all of society. Cause and effect, measured in centuries, are the laws of tradition.
I think that even while arguing from the position of science and reasoning, we can in ways be blinded by our cultural bias. We have been manipulated to think of "God" as an abstract, as something that we can't disprove, as something people can believe in without reason, because as they say, God exists outside of reason.
But "God" does not exist outside of reason, "God" is just a concept, it's just an idea, information passed down from one generation to the next.
So... for you it is far more plausible to know what a man/men thought 6000+ years ago about the world around them, than for their to be an actual God...
(The irony being if you could know what men thought 6000 years ago that would make you a God.)
(September 23, 2015 at 12:32 pm)SofaKingHigh Wrote: Bones/Fossils, if your going to indulge in semantics, what the fuck is a bone "perserve?" You knew damn well what I meant.
So.. Mr. Science needs Mr. religion to explain the difference between a preserved bone and a fossil? You know by not knowing that their is a difference between a preserved bone and a fossilized bone, everything you conclude that is based on the age of a given bone is now in question...
A preserved bone is actual 100% bone material that has been kept from decay.
A fossilized bone is when minerals from the surrounding substrate leach into the bone fortifying or even replacing the bone material completely, turning the sample into a bone/mineral hybrid. Fossilized bones are much harder to date, that is why their are such big swings/Date ranges when ever a fossil is found
Quote:Now, as it seems my point has totally flown over your empty head, I shall attempt to slow it down.
I love it when you guys make such critical errors and don't even know it. whats even better is when your arrogant about your own stupidity. Well done sir, well done. My only wish is that you remain obstinate about what you understand even after I serve you up some crow to eat.
Quote:Adam and Eve supposedly were the first Human beings on Earth. They were here 6,000 years ago. We have found Human fossils (just for you) that are over 100,000 years old.
Ah... No.
Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden 6000 years ago.. we have no record of how long they were in the Garden. We know by Genesis 2 that the garden was complete long before the earth was completely formed, we also know the Garden was a picture of what the world looked like at the time of the fall, but again we have no idea how long the Garden existed with Adam and Eve living immortally in it with God. It could have been a week month, a year or even 5 billion years or maybe even a bazillion years. (truly who cares)
So where do we get 6000 years? if we count back the number of generations from Christ to Adam and add 2000 from now to Christ. But seeings how A&E did not have children in the garden, the most accurate thing we can say is it's been 6000 years since the exodus from the Garden. Because again counting back from Christ to Adam was 4000 years (supposedly, I've never actually counted)
Quote:Are you getting there Drichy? Has that big ol' penny dropped yet?
you tell me sport. Your the noob with his foot in his mouth right now. Do you get it? Do you get the garden was a protected preserve that COULD have housed Adam and Eve the 5 billion years 'science' says Evolution took place? and upon the fall of man and his explusion the world outside the garden had time to 'evolve' to the point that Adam and his decendents would have been compatible with the food sources and people? Or do you need further explaination?
Quote:How are we finding remains that are 94,000 years older than the first Humans who supposedly set foot on Earth?
Adam was the first man made in the image of God (Which means he was the first man with a soul.) and Adam existed long before Monkey/man 'evolved.' So technically again he was the first man. That said.. Nothing in the bible says Adam was the only Man. In fact it would suggest otherwise. For instance where did the city of Nod Cain was banished to come from? A city then and now is not based on buildings but a given population in a region/community. Who were the people that Adam and Eve's Children marry? The bible makes no claims of incest, it seems to assume that we know that what went on in the garden was not a picture of what was going on outside it's boarders. As Genesis 1,2& 3 focous on the goings on in the garden Anything like say IDK EVOLUTION could have happened outside of it!
Quote:Now, take your time. Make sure you read this, then re-read it, re-read it again and maybe get an adult to read it back to you before replying.
I don't ask simple questions because I don't understand what you maybe saying. What I'm doing is making you commit to your broken logic, and reasoning. so when I begin to up root and proceed to break your fundamental (3rd grade sunday school) understanding of Christian origins and how the relate to 'science' you have no where to go when I start force feeding your ignorance back to you.
One more simple question sport:
Do you like apples??
You believe in Adam and Eve and have just used the insult "noob."
September 28, 2015 at 11:02 am (This post was last modified: September 28, 2015 at 12:32 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(September 28, 2015 at 10:53 am)Drich Wrote: So... for you it is far more plausible to know what a man/men thought 6000+ years ago about the world around them, than for their to be an actual God...
Yes, actually, that sounds way more plausible.
But I never said I was right, it's just an interpretation, and as I said, the people who told these stories probably didn't see the underlying metaphors, they took these myths as literal truth.
rocketman Wrote:We know what your mythology says about A&E. We know how Bishop Ussher calculated the 6000 years based on the geneaology of the "begats".
What we're telling you is that we know there were not two people on earth 6000 years ago, but millions. The cities of Jericho, and Çatal Höyük are over 9000 years old. And the cities of Uruk, Eridu, and Ur (the homeland of Abram) were all founded by the time you're claiming Adam was the lone man in the Garden.
Ur... No.
That's not what I said. All bishop whatever proved was that it's been 6000+ years since the explusion from the Garden. Because in order to 'begat' someone their needs to be a child. Adam and Eve did not 'begat' anyone till AFTER they were evicted from Garden life.
Quote:While I did say Adam was the first man, I did not say he was the only one.
Quote:I have to confess, I have not heard this argument before.
I'm doing my best to get the message out there. I even wrote a letter to the pope. (Truthfully did)
Quote:But it begs a question. If humans waited, in a state of eternal life, while everything else evolved and diversified into modern life, why do we show every sign of evolving (shared genetic markers in our noncoding DNA like viral-infection scars, for instance) the same way as everything else on earth? Why would it be necessary to fake the appearance that we evolve the same way as everything else?
Because again, Man outside the garden evolved at their own rate. Created Man/Adam was made unique in that God breathed into Him a soul. Man evolved from whatever primate/monkey science now says is the one, evolved without a soul.
So pre flood Their were soul-less monkey men and Man made in the image of God co-existing to one degree or another. Then post flood, only man with a soul remained. (meaning we all have souls)
Isn't it a miracle how Adam spoke English and even had an English name?
(Truthfully did)
Well done sir, well done. My only wish is that you remain obstinate about what you understand even after I serve you up some crow to eat.
you tell me sport. Your the noob with his foot in his mouth right now. Do you get it? Do you get the garden was a protected preserve that COULD have housed Adam and Eve the 5 billion years 'science' says Evolution took place? and upon the fall of man and his explusion the world outside the garden had time to 'evolve' to the point that Adam and his decendents would have been compatible with the food sources and people? Or do you need further explaination?
