Adam and Eve and evolution - Page 2 - Religion, God, and Theology

First, fabricate isn't the right word exactly. I didn't mean the historical accounts are made up out of thin air--not all of them anyways--but it isn't history in the sense that we would think of it. There's a few courses on these online in various places.

Old Testament:
http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studie...class-sessions

Wikipedia "history and the bible" probably has good information and links. Most of it appears up in the air either way though.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 03:14 AM

#27

Aaron W.

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 30,132

Quote:

Originally Posted by vixticator

First, fabricate isn't the right word exactly. I didn't mean the historical accounts are made up out of thin air--not all of them anyways--but it isn't history in the sense that we would think of it.

Okay. This was more or less what I was going to get at.

Quote:

There's a few courses on these online in various places.

Old Testament:
http://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studie...class-sessions

I'm not quite sure what the connection between your original claim and this class is.

Quote:

Course Description: This course examines the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) as an expression of the religious life and thought of ancient Israel, and a foundational document of Western civilization. A wide range of methodologies, including source criticism and the historical-critical school, tradition criticism, redaction criticism, and literary and canonical approaches are applied to the study and interpretation of the Bible. Special emphasis is placed on the Bible against the backdrop of its historical and cultural setting in the Ancient Near East.

Unless all you're saying is that you shouldn't read the Old Testament like a history textbook, in which case I doubt you'll get much disagreement from anyone.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 03:51 AM

#28

vixticator

clutch

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 117,339

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aaron W.

Unless all you're saying is that you shouldn't read the Old Testament like a history textbook, in which case I doubt you'll get much disagreement from anyone.

I'm saying the accounts of history in the Bible are something between fabrication and history. If you have a word to suggest for me...

Quote

11-07-2009 , 04:20 AM

#29

NotReady

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 10,519

Quote:

Originally Posted by rizeagainst

I'm sorry, I didn't realize that 'clay' is a synonym for single celled organisms.

There you go again, trying to make the circle fit into the square. Smash it some more.

So that imminent theologian, Carl Sagan, was just full of it when he said:

http://www.zazzle.com/star_stuff_at_...37982666236071

Quote

11-07-2009 , 04:35 AM

#30

All-In Flynn

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 10,923

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotReady

that imminent theologian, Carl Sagan,

When do you expect him?

And Jib - 'not incompatible with' is really the best you can hope for; why not be happy with it? 'Remarkably like' is just LOL.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:20 AM

#31

rizeagainst

banned

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,179

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotReady

So that imminent theologian, Carl Sagan, was just full of it when he said:

http://www.zazzle.com/star_stuff_at_...37982666236071

once again, i don't know if i need to speak to you like ******s but

clay != star stuff
clay != single cell life
clay = clay

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:37 AM

#32

rizeagainst

banned

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,179

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Evil Polka Man

I mean, there is a middle ground.

So in other words, something could be both reality and myth?

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:49 AM

#33

vixticator

clutch

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 117,339

Quote:

Originally Posted by rizeagainst

So in other words, something could be both reality and myth?

Most history is this, no? Some more one than the other of course.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:52 AM

#34

rizeagainst

banned

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,179

Quote:

Originally Posted by vixticator

Most history is this, no? Some more one than the other of course.

Uh no. Something either happened or it didn't. It didn't both happen and not happen. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:54 AM

#35

rizeagainst

banned

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,179

I will provide a cliffs at this point once again, the theists greatest points in this thread to prove to you that adam and eve, and evolution are compatible are:

1) The bible says adam and eve were made from clay
2) Carl Sagan once said that people are made of star stuff which I would like to be considered as "clay" in order to make my point

Quote

11-07-2009 , 05:59 AM

#36

vixticator

clutch

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 117,339

Quote:

Originally Posted by rizeagainst

Uh no. Something either happened or it didn't. It didn't both happen and not happen. That makes no sense whatsoever.

History is a bit more than this happened, that happened, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography

Quote

11-07-2009 , 06:29 AM

#37

rizeagainst

banned

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,179

Quote:

Originally Posted by vixticator

History is a bit more than this happened, that happened, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography

When historical events begin to break scientific and natural laws (such as adam and eve popped out of nowhere because of yahweh's magic) then we really have no choice but to reject this claim

Quote

11-07-2009 , 06:34 AM

#38

vixticator

clutch

Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 117,339

Quote:

Originally Posted by rizeagainst

When historical events begin to break scientific and natural laws (such as adam and eve popped out of nowhere because of yahweh's magic) then we really have no choice but to reject this claim

Are we talking about the same thing? Adam/Eve is not a historic account of anything except to dumb people.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 09:13 AM

#39

starvingwriter82

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 7,793

FWIW, the Bible has two creation stories, which are not identical. Even to someone reading or hearing the stories thousands of years back would have known quite obviously that the stories were allegorical in nature.

I hope time travel is invented someday. That way, someone angry can go back in time, find an ancient Jew.

Modern Man: "OMFG, this story has contractions, there's no way it could have literally happened like this!!"

Jew: "No ****."

Some days, I wish people had to take a 60 minute course on any given topic before they started arguing about it. Seriously, it's about all it would take.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 11:10 AM

#40

loK2thabrain

Tiger > Jack

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 23,203

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jibninjas

THE BIBLE IS NOT MEANT TO BE A SCIENCE TEXT BOOK!!!!!!! How many times does this have to be said? Seriously, this is absurd.

Why would God waste time explaining abiogenesis or anything else to people 5k years ago? What does that have to do with salvation?

BUT IT EASILY COULD HAVE BEEN A SCIENCE TEXT BOOK AND UNDOUBTEDLY MORE SOULS WOULD HAVE BEEN SAVED!!!!! How many times does this have to be said? Seriously, this is absurb.

Why would God wait billions of years, then decide to drop his knowledge on a bunch of desert dwellers knowing just blinks of time would pass before future humans would understand, and greatly benefit both in this life and for all eternity?

So actually, it has has a whole hell of a lot to do wit salvation.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 11:10 AM

#41

NotReady

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 10,519

Quote:

Originally Posted by starvingwriter82

FWIW, the Bible has two creation stories, which are not identical.

No it doesn't.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 11:27 AM

#42

evilempire

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,352

Quote:

Originally Posted by starvingwriter82

FWIW, the Bible has two creation stories, which are not identical. Even to someone reading or hearing the stories thousands of years back would have known quite obviously that the stories were allegorical in nature.

I hope time travel is invented someday. That way, someone angry can go back in time, find an ancient Jew.

Modern Man: "OMFG, this story has contractions, there's no way it could have literally happened like this!!"

Jew: "No ****."

Some days, I wish people had to take a 60 minute course on any given topic before they started arguing about it. Seriously, it's about all it would take.

So people 2000 years ago could figure this **** out but we've got millions of creationists running around that don't have a clue?

Quote

11-07-2009 , 11:27 AM

#43

evilempire

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,352

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotReady

No it doesn't.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_c...e_in_the_Bible

no?

Quote

11-07-2009 , 11:37 AM

#44

Cherry MrMisty

grinder

Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 632

The Genesis creation story is obviously not literal, to most intelligent people, so I'll skip that part.

My question is this - What would you call the "primordial ooze" that the first single-celled organism came from? Maybe something like, oh, I don't know, clay?

Or would you say that it just appeared out of nowhere?

Quote

11-07-2009 , 12:05 PM

#45

evilempire

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,352

If a christian believes in evolution doesn't that lend to the idea that humans aren't special? When did our ancestors start having a soul and be loved by christ/etc?

Quote

11-07-2009 , 12:59 PM

#46

starvingwriter82

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 7,793

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotReady

No it doesn't.

Yes, it does.

Quote

11-07-2009 , 01:01 PM

#47

starvingwriter82

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 7,793

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilempire

If a christian believes in evolution doesn't that lend to the idea that humans aren't special? When did our ancestors start having a soul and be loved by christ/etc?

Humans not being special is only relevant if you think evolution was a natural process, unaided by anything (and even then you could still argue for humans being special, I suppose).

If a God designed a universe to use evolution to bring about humanity, how would that make us less special?

Quote

11-07-2009 , 02:16 PM

#48

evilempire

old hand

Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,352

I'm not saying we would be less special if that is the case. I know some christians believe animals don't have souls/aren't special or whatever. When do our ancestors become special? In other words at what point do humans become humans along the evolutionary tree?

Quote

11-07-2009 , 02:54 PM

#49

rizeagainst

banned

Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,179

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherry MrMisty

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Quote

11-07-2009 , 06:48 PM

#50

Justin A

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 9,010

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherry MrMisty

My question is this - What would you call the "primordial ooze" that the first single-celled organism came from? Maybe something like, oh, I don't know, clay?

Either you have no idea what clay is or you have no idea what the primordial ooze is hypothesized to have been.

Quote

Page 2 of 5

First

1 2 3 4 5

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 2 of 5

First

1 2 3 4 5

Last