Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 133

Thread: Top 10 problems with the theory of evolution.

  1. #41
    Team Gunsnet Platinum 06/2016 ltorlo64's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Back in the Pacific Northwest!
    Posts
    8,174
    Quote Originally Posted by N/A View Post
    The six time periods cited in the scriptures as "day"
    Were not the 24 hour days we have now. Those periods could have been a year long, or ten million years long. Time is nothing to God, but "day" was the only way the translators of the Bible knew how to label those periods. Consider, that time means nothing to God, for all we know he might still be in the "7th day" of rest.
    You are right that God is outside of time and to Him a day not the same as a day is to us (Ps. 90:4, 2 Peter 3:8), but one of the first things God did in the creation story was give us a reference.

    Genesis 1:3-6, And God said "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

    While there are many important parts of these verses, for time determination the last sentence is operative. The evening and the morning, a 24 hour period, was determined to be the first day. Most people say that all God created on the first day was light, but that is not true. The other thing that God created on the first day was time.
    "Nothing ever gets so bad that government "help" can't make it worse." Pat Garrett, March 22, 2014

    "HATE IS GOOD, WHEN ITS DIRECTED AT EVIL." PROBASCO, April 20, 2012

    I tried to push the envelope, but found that it was stationery.

    Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They're making head lines!

    NRA Endowment Member

  2. #42
    Senior Member JTHunter's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5,021
    In the genetics classes I took in college, one of the things that fascinated me was the professor's lectures and demonstrations on the fact that over 30% of human genes currently have no known function.
    We were taught that science didn't know if these were leftovers from earlier branches on the evolutionary "tree" (like the crap you get when you upgrade a computer OS w/o removing the old one) OR for things we would eventually need!

    Homo sapiens (us) have 23 pairs of chromosones. So did Homo cromagnus, Homo neanderthalus, and even Homo erectus and habilus! Over 2 million years and the same number of chromosones.
    Go figure.
    “I have little patience with people who take the Bill of Rights for granted. The Bill of Rights, contained in the first ten amendments to the Constitution, is every American’s guarantee of freedom.” - - President Harry S. Truman, “Years of Trial and Hope”

  3. #43
    Senior Member Oswald Bastable's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere In The Troposhpere
    Posts
    7,419
    Quote Originally Posted by ltorlo64 View Post
    Believing evolution to be a fact, I believe, puts limits on the Creator.
    Doesn't believing it not part of God's plan, also put limitations upon him? To create anything requires the implementation of laws that bind the creation, as far as physical aspects, whether it be the mechanical and chemical laws for creating a car, or all the multi-faceted laws from sub-atomic physics, chemical, biological, etc., etc., etc., in creating a universe and populating it.

    Personally I don't believe we should "limit" God in either direction. I can not determine whether God did or didn't use evolution as part of his plan...He's not given me that insight.
    If we refuse to rule ourselves with reason, then we shall be ruled by our passions.

    He, Who Will Not Reason, Is a Bigot; He, Who Cannot, Is a Fool; and He, Who Dares Not, Is a Slave. -Sir William Drummond

    There are some things I will not abide within my sight!

  4. #44
    was_peacemaker
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by N/A View Post
    A couple of thoughts. We aren't born afraid of heights. Watch any little kid, untill he learns by experience or example, they aren't afraid of heights.

    The six time periods cited in the scriptures as "day"
    Were not the 24 hour days we have now. Those periods could have been a year long, or ten million years long. Time is nothing to God, but "day" was the only way the translators of the Bible knew how to label those periods. Consider, that time means nothing to God, for all we know he might still be in the "7th day" of rest.
    Very good point on phobias, and such. I also agree with your explanation of the days in this context.

    Psalm 139:12: ESV
    "12:even the darkness is not dark to you;
    the night is bright as the day,
    for darkness is as light with you."

    Even though it says that light was separated from darkness and it created a "day". The tools God used to create a way of telling time "sun and the moon" was not until the fourth day. So there has to be another explanation.

  5. #45
    Registered User LAGC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,655
    Quote Originally Posted by FunkyPertwee View Post
    Naive is not realizing that you have less experience in a Bio lab than myself, and suggesting that I take a beginners course.
    Any high-school drop-out can be a lab monkey and follow simple orders. But to actually concoct and direct experiments usually requires some understanding of the subject material at hand.

    Every question you posed in Page 1 of this thread is fully answered in any 2nd semester college-level biology course, which is the only reason I suggested checking it out if you are really curious as to what current scientific consensus has to say on the subject.
    "That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E

  6. #46
    Registered User LAGC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,655
    Quote Originally Posted by N/A View Post
    A couple of thoughts. We aren't born afraid of heights. Watch any little kid, untill he learns by experience or example, they aren't afraid of heights.
    Oh?



    Eleanor Gibson and Richard Walk devised this miniature cliff with a glass-covered drop-off to find out whether crawling infants can perceive depth. Even when coaxed, most infants refuse to climb onto the sturdy glass over the cliff.

    You were saying?
    "That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E

  7. #47
    Registered User LAGC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,655
    Quote Originally Posted by ltorlo64 View Post
    You just can't, or won't, fathom that this more intelligent being could be the God that you refuse to acknowledge exists.
    Oh, I can fathom that if there was any sort of "intelligence" behind the Big Bang in the beginning, that "intelligence" has been completely hands off ever since.

    It's only this idea of a "personal god" intervening and causing "miracles" and wanting people to get on their knees and worship and what not that I take issue with.

    The reasons for our senses could not be because an all powerful creator wanted His creation to enjoy life, or that this same all powerful creator wanted to provide a way for His creation to be protected from danger. I think creation provides a pretty good, actually a much better and more likely explanation than chance, especially when we see how the whole body works together.
    Seems kind of odd that a creator would put such strict limits on our senses, if that was part of the plan.

    I mean, why can we humans only visually perceive such a small range of the electromagnetic spectrum as visible light? Why can we only hear sounds within very narrow ranges?

    Why do most dogs hear and smell so much better than we humans do?

    All of these questions can be answered by evolution, but not so much an "intelligent designer."

    Again, the reason we are afraid of heights could just be that the Creator put that fear into us as a protection. It could also be the reason why poison is distasteful. In fact, it makes more sense than chance mutations being passed from one generation to the next when you take a look at how often beneficial mutations are passed from one generation to the next.
    Then why didn't God make the "forbidden fruit" distasteful to Adam and Eve then? Might have saved our species from a lot of grief.

    This is the funniest thing I have read today. You have more faith in evolution, something that cannot be proven, than most religious people have. You have so much faith that when evidence is provided that other evolutionists have serious questions with evolution, or at least with the current timeline, you attack the messenger instead of looking at the source of the message. I have provided you with a better theory, as has Funky, but you refuse to look at the issue critically. That is unfortunate.
    Any schmoe can throw up a web-site titled "EvolutionNews" and pretend they are some sort of authority on the matter.

    But when every single one of those ignorant questions is so easily explained in any intro-level biology textbook, then yes: you can attack the messenger.
    Last edited by LAGC; 10-26-2014 at 05:43 AM.
    "That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E

  8. #48
    Team Gunsnet Platinum 06/2016 ltorlo64's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Back in the Pacific Northwest!
    Posts
    8,174
    Quote Originally Posted by Oswald Bastable View Post
    Doesn't believing it not part of God's plan, also put limitations upon him? To create anything requires the implementation of laws that bind the creation, as far as physical aspects, whether it be the mechanical and chemical laws for creating a car, or all the multi-faceted laws from sub-atomic physics, chemical, biological, etc., etc., etc., in creating a universe and populating it.

    Personally I don't believe we should "limit" God in either direction. I can not determine whether God did or didn't use evolution as part of his plan...He's not given me that insight.
    Believing what He said, that the world was created in 6 days, is not me placing a limit on God, it is God placing a limit on Himself (if you want to think about it that way). Me, deciding the Creator does not know what He is talking about and making it into something I can understand definitely places a limit on Him.

    God did give us the insight to determine if we evolved. Genesis 1 and 2 provide all the insight we need, but we have to believe He is truthful. If we say that God created the world, but he did it in millions, if not billions, of years, then we show that we believe God is a liar and cannot be trusted. If He cannot be trusted to tell us how the earth and everything else came to be how can we trust Him in anything else, most importantly that He will come again to take us away from this place that has been ruined by our not trusting Him (Genesis 3)?
    "Nothing ever gets so bad that government "help" can't make it worse." Pat Garrett, March 22, 2014

    "HATE IS GOOD, WHEN ITS DIRECTED AT EVIL." PROBASCO, April 20, 2012

    I tried to push the envelope, but found that it was stationery.

    Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They're making head lines!

    NRA Endowment Member

  9. #49
    Team Gunsnet Platinum 06/2016 ltorlo64's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Back in the Pacific Northwest!
    Posts
    8,174
    Quote Originally Posted by was_peacemaker View Post
    Very good point on phobias, and such. I also agree with your explanation of the days in this context.

    Psalm 139:12: ESV
    "12:even the darkness is not dark to you;
    the night is bright as the day,
    for darkness is as light with you."

    Even though it says that light was separated from darkness and it created a "day". The tools God used to create a way of telling time "sun and the moon" was not until the fourth day. So there has to be another explanation.
    Or the explanation is as simple as the God creating day and night, as is described in Genesis, on the first day and he did not create the sun and moon until the fourth day. The time period given, "and the evening and the morning" stays the same for both.
    "Nothing ever gets so bad that government "help" can't make it worse." Pat Garrett, March 22, 2014

    "HATE IS GOOD, WHEN ITS DIRECTED AT EVIL." PROBASCO, April 20, 2012

    I tried to push the envelope, but found that it was stationery.

    Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They're making head lines!

    NRA Endowment Member

  10. #50
    was_peacemaker
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ltorlo64 View Post
    Or the explanation is as simple as the God creating day and night, as is described in Genesis, on the first day and he did not create the sun and moon until the fourth day. The time period given, "and the evening and the morning" stays the same for both.
    I like to look at the days in Genesis as analogies.

    1st day light is created and separated from darkness. - 4th day Sun, Moon, and stars created.
    2nd day water and air was created,-5th day fish and the birds are made.
    3rd day earth was created,-6th day land dwelling creatures.
    7th Sabbath. An end to creation.

    So if you notice the first three days are like a plan and then every three after prior to the Sabbath is an action of the related day. 1 is to 4, 2 is to 5, and 3 is to 6.

    So looking at the 1 to 4 example. God separated light from darkness on the first day. Now the universe only exists because light matter out numbers dark matter by a ratio of 1001/1000 there for creating a realm were the space-time continuum can hold functioning time telling tools such as the sun, moon and stars.

  11. #51
    was_peacemaker
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by LAGC View Post
    Seems kind of odd that a creator would put such strict limits on our senses, if that was part of the plan.

    I mean, why can we humans only visually perceive such a small range of the electromagnetic spectrum as visible light? Why can we only hear sounds within very narrow ranges?

    Why do most dogs hear and smell so much better than we humans do?

    All of these questions can be answered by evolution, but not so much an "intelligent designer."
    With all that said we are on top of the food chain. It says that we were created in the "image" (zelem) of God in His "likeness" this is not anthropomorphic it is stating that the intellectual and spiritual properties of mankind are fashioned after God. Which in this part of Genesis is referred to (Elohim) and in this context is plural for God and the Hosts of heaven, meaning other supernatural creatures were involved in creation. God being the top being in charge. This becomes relevant in the second creation story in Genesis 2:4b-2:25. I have explained that on this forum before. And I cover what the forbidden fruit is and the purpose of man's creation. [/QUOTE]



    [/QUOTE]Then why didn't God make the "forbidden fruit" distasteful to Adam and Eve then? Might have saved our species from a lot of grief. [/QUOTE] I have covered this on the forum before



    [/QUOTE]Any schmoe can throw up a web-site titled "EvolutionNews" and pretend they are some sort of authority on the matter.

    But when every single one of those ignorant questions is so easily explained in any intro-level biology textbook, then yes: you can attack the messenger. [/QUOTE]

    Many members here like to compare and contrast religion and science, that is why I brought it up. What you just made an accusation of in that above quote is what you, yourself do when you make statements about the Bible or religion.
    Last edited by was_peacemaker; 10-26-2014 at 11:13 AM.

  12. #52
    Contributor 02/2014 FunkyPertwee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    11,163
    So, anybody come up with the origin for new genetic information besides random mutations?

    No?
    "I'm fucking furious, I'm violently angry, and I like it. If you don't know what that feels like then I feel bad for you"

  13. #53
    Registered User LAGC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,655
    Quote Originally Posted by FunkyPertwee View Post
    So, anybody come up with the origin for new genetic information besides random mutations?
    Yeah, actually, and I didn't even learn about this until just this semester in my Cell Biology class. Are you familiar at all with epigenetics?

    Here's a good primer: http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/

    Basically, not only does our DNA pass along hereditary information, but our epigenome (methyl groups and histone modifications to our DNA) can also work as a master regulatory switches, either enabling or suppressing gene expression on a massive scale.

    Experiments in mice show just how important a mother's diet is in shaping the epigenome of her offspring. All mammals have a gene called agouti. When a mouse's agouti gene is completely unmethylated, its coat is yellow and it is obese and prone diabetes and cancer. When the agouti gene is methylated (as it is in normal mice), the coat color is brown and the mouse has a low disease risk. Fat yellow mice and skinny brown mice are genetically identical. The fat yellow mice are different because they have an epigenetic "mutation."

    When researchers fed pregnant yellow mice a methyl-rich diet, most of her pups were brown and stayed healthy for life. These results show that the environment in the womb influences adult health. In other words, our health is not only determined by what we eat, but also what our parents ate.


    http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/conte...ics/nutrition/

    Pretty mind-blowing stuff. Not only does genetics determine so much of who we are, but also environmental factors on the parts of our parents, grandparents, and so on up the line, can be passed down to offspring as well.
    "That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E

  14. #54
    Team GunsNet Silver 12/2011 N/A's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Texas...at the intersection of I-20 and the Korean War Veterans Memorial Higheway
    Posts
    5,427
    Quote Originally Posted by LAGC View Post
    Oh?



    Eleanor Gibson and Richard Walk devised this miniature cliff with a glass-covered drop-off to find out whether crawling infants can perceive depth. Even when coaxed, most infants refuse to climb onto the sturdy glass over the cliff.

    You were saying?
    Lol, those are the atheist/scientist babies. They fear the unknown. Normal babies have no fear of the unknown.
    No enemy of America would have ever been killed if they didn't show up to be killed. HDR

  15. #55
    Registered User LAGC's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,655
    Quote Originally Posted by N/A View Post
    Lol, those are the atheist/scientist babies. They fear the unknown. Normal babies have no fear of the unknown.
    Okay, you win the thread. I concede. Atheist babies are scaredy-cats.
    "That tyranny has all the vices both of democracy and oligarchy is evident. As of oligarchy so of tyranny, the end is wealth; (for by wealth only can the tyrant maintain either his guard or his luxury). Both mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms." -- Aristotle, Book V, 350 B.C.E

  16. #56
    was_peacemaker
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by LAGC View Post
    Oh?



    Eleanor Gibson and Richard Walk devised this miniature cliff with a glass-covered drop-off to find out whether crawling infants can perceive depth. Even when coaxed, most infants refuse to climb onto the sturdy glass over the cliff.

    You were saying?
    This has less to do with phobias and more to do with depth perception. In other words even a person who is not afraid of heights knows not to step off a mountain cliff. This has more to do with proving humans as babies have depth perception rather than a found phobia for heights by nature.

    See if you can follow along.

    1. N/A is implying that we are not born with a phobia of heights we develop it.

    2. You are implying that this experiment proves that we have a natural born fear of heights.

    If what you are saying is true than no kid would climb a ladder to go down a slide, or swing on a jungle gym, or climb trees. All your video showed us, was that humans are born with enough sense to not walk off a cliff, but does not prove a phobia.
    Last edited by was_peacemaker; 10-26-2014 at 02:11 PM.

  17. #57
    Team Gunsnet Platinum 06/2016 ltorlo64's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Back in the Pacific Northwest!
    Posts
    8,174
    Quote Originally Posted by LAGC View Post
    Oh, I can fathom that if there was any sort of "intelligence" behind the Big Bang in the beginning, that "intelligence" has been completely hands off ever since.
    Two questions. What empirical, non-contested data is there to prove “the Big Bang?” What empirical, non-contested data is there to prove that this intelligence that started this “bang” has been hands off?

    It's only this idea of a "personal god" intervening and causing "miracles" and wanting people to get on their knees and worship and what not that I take issue with.
    Why?

    Seems kind of odd that a creator would put such strict limits on our senses, if that was part of the plan.

    I mean, why can we humans only visually perceive such a small range of the electromagnetic spectrum as visible light? Why can we only hear sounds within very narrow ranges?

    Why do most dogs hear and smell so much better than we humans do?

    All of these questions can be answered by evolution, but not so much an "intelligent designer.
    Not really. Dogs were created to do different things than humans and humans were created to do different things than dogs. We also don’t have the ability to breath underwater but fish do. Why? Because fish were created to live in the water and humans were created to live on land. It is perfectly reasonable that different things, being created to do different things, would have different abilities with our senses.

    Then why didn't God make the "forbidden fruit" distasteful to Adam and Eve then? Might have saved our species from a lot of grief.
    How could God have made the “forbidden fruit” more distasteful? He explained to Adam and Eve that to eat the fruit would lead to death, the ceasing of life in a world where nothing died. What could be more distasteful than that? He gave Adam and Eve everything they needed to live, safe comfortable lives. By giving them the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil He gave them everything they needed to truly love, freedom. And, through deception, they chose the distasteful option and brought death (instant separation from God), shame, fear, pain, and physical death (two animals who had done nothing wrong were killed in Adam and Eve’s place to cover their shame). I do not know how it could have been more distasteful.

    Any schmoe can throw up a web-site titled "EvolutionNews" and pretend they are some sort of authority on the matter.
    Good try. My information came from National Geographic and Discovery, two publications that hate creation almost as much as you do. The articles I quoted from showed that Tiktaalik did not fit in the fossil record where evolutionists expected so it was not the transitional fossil they were hoping. To this you explained to me how my math, actually the math of the PhDs that wrote the articles for National Geographic and Discovery, was wrong. You have to believe so much that when people who have studied this their whole lives say it doesn’t work you attribute that to me. These PhDs still believe in evolution, they just admit that Tiktaalik does not help, or actually hurt, their argument.

    But when every single one of those ignorant questions is so easily explained in any intro-level biology textbook, then yes: you can attack the messenger.
    The questions are only answered if you do not critically think about the information provided. Especially since many of those entry level biology text books are using information that has been shown to be wrong or interpreted incorrectly. To not think critically about the evidence provided is real ignorance.
    "Nothing ever gets so bad that government "help" can't make it worse." Pat Garrett, March 22, 2014

    "HATE IS GOOD, WHEN ITS DIRECTED AT EVIL." PROBASCO, April 20, 2012

    I tried to push the envelope, but found that it was stationery.

    Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They're making head lines!

    NRA Endowment Member

  18. #58
    Team Gunsnet Platinum 06/2016 ltorlo64's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Back in the Pacific Northwest!
    Posts
    8,174
    Quote Originally Posted by was_peacemaker View Post
    I like to look at the days in Genesis as analogies.

    1st day light is created and separated from darkness. - 4th day Sun, Moon, and stars created.
    2nd day water and air was created,-5th day fish and the birds are made.
    3rd day earth was created,-6th day land dwelling creatures.
    7th Sabbath. An end to creation.

    So if you notice the first three days are like a plan and then every three after prior to the Sabbath is an action of the related day. 1 is to 4, 2 is to 5, and 3 is to 6.

    So looking at the 1 to 4 example. God separated light from darkness on the first day. Now the universe only exists because light matter out numbers dark matter by a ratio of 1001/1000 there for creating a realm were the space-time continuum can hold functioning time telling tools such as the sun, moon and stars.
    I have heard this before, many times, that the creation story is an analogy. There are a few reasons I do not think that is true.

    First, the Bible does not go from analogy to reality and back to analogy without some sort of transition. For example "the word of the Lord came to (fill in the name of the prophet," or "an oracle of _______," or "a great and wondrous sign appeared." There is always an introduction to separate either the analogy from reality, and there is no change from what people want to be analogy, the creation story, to the reality of the fall of Adam and Eve and their family story.

    The second reason is how the Bible treats the creation story. In Exodus 20:8-11 we are given the Sabbath commandment. In Exodus 20:11 we are told that the reason for the Sabbath because "For in 6 days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them." The writer of Exodus did not consider the creation story or the time frame given, 6 days, as an analogy.

    Last, while it is true that Jesus never addressed the time frame given in the creation story, the time He discussed creation, and the stories given in the first 5 books, He spoke of them as truth, not as analogy.
    "Nothing ever gets so bad that government "help" can't make it worse." Pat Garrett, March 22, 2014

    "HATE IS GOOD, WHEN ITS DIRECTED AT EVIL." PROBASCO, April 20, 2012

    I tried to push the envelope, but found that it was stationery.

    Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They're making head lines!

    NRA Endowment Member

  19. #59
    Guns Network Lifetime Member #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    8,845
    Not sure where you get handsoff LAGC? Let's take parting the red sea for example, didn't recently chariots and such been found at the bottom of the sea? The great flood is told in many religions and is fact it happened.

  20. #60
    was_peacemaker
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ltorlo64 View Post
    I have heard this before, many times, that the creation story is an analogy. There are a few reasons I do not think that is true.

    First, the Bible does not go from analogy to reality and back to analogy without some sort of transition. For example "the word of the Lord came to (fill in the name of the prophet," or "an oracle of _______," or "a great and wondrous sign appeared." There is always an introduction to separate either the analogy from reality, and there is no change from what people want to be analogy, the creation story, to the reality of the fall of Adam and Eve and their family story.

    The second reason is how the Bible treats the creation story. In Exodus 20:8-11 we are given the Sabbath commandment. In Exodus 20:11 we are told that the reason for the Sabbath because "For in 6 days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them." The writer of Exodus did not consider the creation story or the time frame given, 6 days, as an analogy.

    Last, while it is true that Jesus never addressed the time frame given in the creation story, the time He discussed creation, and the stories given in the first 5 books, He spoke of them as truth, not as analogy.
    I will cover the Exodus commandment later but, the Bible has two creation stories. The one from Genesis 1:1 to Gen. 2:4A is a different story than the one from Genesis 2:4b to Genesis 2:25.

    Sorry...this is going to be a long read, also I can go further into why there are two creation stories.


    Often times when we think of ourselves we think of the guy that we see in the mirror. Or we think of "the body" as the self. Yet, the body is only one aspect of the self and not the real "you". One might think of the mind as "the self" but just like the body it is only a part of the self and not the real "you". To take it a bit further some my insist that their soul is the "real self" but there again just like the body and the mind it is a part of but not the core of the self. So now the concept of self hood has become difficult to define. If you try to think about it while reading this, then you have tapped into the self without knowing it. In order to read and comprehend or to think and react one needs to tap into the "will", that which is not defined by body, soul, or mind.

    To understand this further...we can look at the Hebrew word for "I" which is "ani" when one re-arranges the letters a bit...it spells the Hebrew "ayn" or "ayin" which means "Nothingness".

    It doesn't mean the real you is nothing. What it means is the real you can't be consciously categorized. To take body, mind, and soul away and still have a spark of something that is the real you. The nothingness that "wills" yourself to act do and think, is beyond the human imagination. Where did this concept come from?

    One can take a quick look at Genesis 1:26. From the Jewish Publication Society Tanakh/Bible.

    Gen 1:26-28 " And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. They shall rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the cattle, the whole earth." 27: And God created man in His image, in the image of God He created him male and female He created them. 28:God blessed them and God said to them, "Be fertile and increase, fill the earth and master it; and rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and all the living things that creep on the earth."

    Now reading this from the Western literal perspective it isn't to hard to understand. Yet, we can find out out what this "self" is....or this defined "will" which we can not define we must look a little further.

    First off in the first creation story Gen 1:1-Gen 2:3...God's name is Elohim which by definition is usually plural. I will cover the second creation story of Gen. 2:5-2:25 and the intermission verse of 2:4 at another time.

    In general term it is normally singular in its Hebrew usage. The story starts of Gen 1:1 as Be-reshith bara Elohim" or mechanically translated as "In the beginning created gods". Yet in the Hebrew grammar when a action like "bara" (created) comes before a plural pronoun like Elohim...often times that plural pronoun becomes a singular possessive of the action. That is how we get "In the beginning God created" in our modern Bibles. So the story starts off with one monotheistic God.

    Now when we end up in 1:26 we see this "Let us make man in our image".

    Who is this us that Elohim is referring to? Is it the Christian Trinity? Is it God and Jesus? Is it God and the heavenly hosts? Here we see a plurality for the first time Elohim. Ok, now lets make some sense of this. Who was created in the image of God? Man or the Hebrew "ah-adam" meaning mankind. What makes up human kind? From 1:27 "...male and female He created them." So both male and female were created in the image of God, in the context of when Elohim was used in the plural.

    Ok but does this mean God has the anthropomorphic attributes of both?!? The answer would be no. As this is not talking about a physical image at all. In fact this is talking about the source for "self". How is it about self and not physical image you may ask? Well...lets look at two key words here. Image, and likeness. In this case "image" is translated from the Hebrew word "zelem" and "likeness" from the Hebrew word "demut". You can get a bit of an idea about these words from Strong's Concordance but often times Strong's leaves out the usage of words in how the are utilized.

    Lets start with "zelem" which usually means image as in the perception of a thing. For example it wasn't the physical image of the wood and stone that pagans worshiped it was what the perceived "zelem" that they thought it represented.

    In other words "zelem" or the "image" we are created in has more to do with the intellectual and spiritual perception of a human and not so much his physical attributes. We can see this as the Hebrews had better words for physical images like "toar". Also the word for likeness "demut" is often used in the abstract. Meaning our spiritual and intellectual image was made in the abstract spiritual and intellectual nature of God. That both masculinity and the feminine are derived from the same source, and therefore all have the same source for "self" or "will".

    In verse 28 you see God commanding man to multiple and dominate the world. Think of this more or less like writing the software before its put into the hardware. This is the advanced consciousness or the undefined "self" of each of us being created as more than just an instinctive animal. In the abstract likeness of the Creator. Since both concepts of male and female were created in this abstract likeness then it does well for this verse to utilize Elohim in the plural...even though it is the same one God still creating.

    Now an interesting thing to remember is that after God created light, sky, sea's, land, plants, fish, birds, and animals he looked and said that all of them were good. In the case of human being he did not say that at all? Why is that? Was the creation of the perceived spiritual and intellectual image and likeness not completed? We have an answer the second time God says "us" in reference to the Divine after the fall of Adam and Eve.

    Genesis 3:22 "Now the Lord God said, "Now that man has become like one of us, knowing good and bad, what if he should stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever!" (NJPS)

    Now we see mankind unlike other creatures. A thinking advanced being that was not declared good or bad initially but after making a conscious decision to do what they were ordered not to do they were declared good and bad. Because that was the path they chose, where the animals act more out of instinct. The mystery of this even can be behind the deception of the serpent at the tree. In Gen 2:5-Gen 2:25 God's name is not Elohim but the "Tetragrammaton" commonly translated as Jehovah.

    Yet, when the serpent is tempting Eve he is careful not to say you will be like Jehovah, instead he cleverly tells Eve she and Adam will be like Elohim...because he even knows what image they were created in. The lie that was told was a half truth...he didn't inform her (them) to eat from the Tree of Life in order to save them from death.

    That is why God said in Gen 3:22 that "Now that man has become like one of us, knowing good and bad...". It wasn't until we acted on "free will" that we were noted as good or bad, but in this case both.

    So the real "self" is the undefined "free will" that is beyond our comprehension and is from the same source. Beyond the grasp of our imagination. Like the energy that is powering your PC. You can see its working but you can't actually look at the chip and see the flow of the energy.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •