Log in

View Full Version : Genesis


LastLordOfTheSevenTowers
August 14th, 2008, 04:05 PM
I would like to start out by saying sorry if this is in the wrong section XD.

I would like ya'lls thoughts on this.

We've all heard the story of Adam and Eve. I was, however, recently speaking with a cousin of mine would used to be a minister in a Baptist church and he had a very interesting view on Genesis. He said that most, if not all, Christians did not take the bible the way it was meant to be taken. The bible is a book of parables (not too hard to believe seeing as how their son of god liked to use them a BUNCH). He believed that Genesis was simply an extremely simplified version of how everything actually happened and was meant to be interpreted as "Yes...it happened..." But it was not to be taken literally.

Adam and Eve. Adam, meaning man, and Eve, meaning woman. God created Adam and Eve. Translation? God created man and woman...So according this, my cousin drew the conclusion that it was not just two people...because if you believe that, then Adam and Eve had only sons...leading to the question of where did the next generation come from when the only girl that was present was there mother....WOOT INCEST (which by the way would be forcing his people to break a commandment that he would later give...hypocritical? Bible's full of that stuff...I digress). If that were true we'd all have a bunch of birth defects and the Special Olympics would be called simply "The Olympics." Rather, he stated, it was a great many people...meaning a population. Here's where I started drawing parallels.

Using this path of thought, which is actually logical, I found a way for Evolution and Intelligent Design to coexist VERY easily. One can conclude that because a day is dependent upon the one rotation of the planet on its axis, this time being relative to the size of the planet, how close it is to its sun, how massive the sun is, etc...the "seven days" that the creation allegedly occurred on could have been according to whatever the Intelligent Designer decided. Meaning that, life could have started in the oceans and gradually, through mutation and adaptation, evolved due to natural selection into the homo sapiens you see today. And that that these "savants" we all hear about with the ability to read two pages of a book at once or something similar, are nothing but another degree of humans along the evolutionary chain. He had some very interesting insights into the rest too, but that was my favorite one.

There. Creationists can stop BITCHING about how Evolution is completely contrary to all their beliefs because I just drew parallels between the two that OBVIOUSLY coexist. And we can stop having to sit there and say "Nice doggy" while we try to find a rock.


Then again...you can lead a mule to water but to make it drink sometimes you have to hold its head under the water...even then sometimes it decides to drown...

sudikics
August 14th, 2008, 05:14 PM
I was, however, recently speaking with a cousin of mine would used to be a minister in a Baptist church and he had a very interesting view on Genesis. He said that most, if not all, Christians did not take the bible the way it was meant to be taken. The bible is a book of parables (not too hard to believe seeing as how their son of god liked to use them a BUNCH). He believed that Genesis was simply an extremely simplified version of how everything actually happened and was meant to be interpreted as "Yes...it happened..." But it was not to be taken literally.
I'm glad some Christians understand that taking the Bible 100% literally is wrong.
Adam and Eve. Adam, meaning man, and Eve, meaning woman. God created Adam and Eve. Translation? God created man and woman...So according this, my cousin drew the conclusion that it was not just two people...

Using this path of thought, which is actually logical, I found a way for Evolution and Intelligent Design to coexist VERY easily.
I'm going to stop you right there for a moment. Evolution teaches that humans were not created, they evolved slowly out of mutations and genetic drift from other species. "Creating" humans goes against that: were it instead to say that God made life and created humans out of that life, then the two ideas might be mergeable. Otherwise, no.
One can conclude that because a day is dependent upon the one rotation of the planet on its axis,
It's not dependant, that is in fact the definition of a day. But go on.
this time being relative to the size of the planet, how close it is to its sun, how massive the sun is, etc...the "seven days" that the creation allegedly occurred on could have been according to whatever the Intelligent Designer decided.
Just because a lot of factors alter soemthing does not imply that that thing is easily altered.

Scientists have traced back our planet's orbital formation back to our planet's beginning. In order for some Designer to have altered the length of those days, he would have had to alter the laws of physics, and then cover his tracks by altering current day measurements.

Occam's Razor does the rest.
And that that these "savants" we all hear about with the ability to read two pages of a book at once or something similar, are nothing but another degree of humans along the evolutionary chain.
Those savants are also very limited in other abilities. Were we all like them, society would probably crumble.
There. Creationists can stop BITCHING about how Evolution is completely contrary to all their beliefs because I just drew parallels between the two that OBVIOUSLY coexist. And we can stop having to sit there and say "Nice doggy" while we try to find a rock.
Look. Science has suggested how certain events took place. In order for some things that creationists say to be right, God would have had to performed those acts and then covered his tracks so scientists would never know.

Again, think of Occam's Razor.

bouchie
August 14th, 2008, 05:24 PM
No, they cannot coexist, even with this liberal intepretation of the Bible. Evolution, at it's core, is unguided, whereas ID requires a plan, a design. And for it to have a design, the idea assumes the existence of a supreme designer. So, we know there is a designer because we know nature is designed and we know nature is designed because there is a designer.

Conclusion: Descartes made this same type of mistake about 400 years ago - why has the lesson not been learned?

As for the interpretation from your ex-minister, I have this to say: although it is more liberal than most intepretations I've heard, it can still be refuted by this argument.

It is stated that God created Adam and Eve - man and woman in this case. Okay, fine. God also created man and woman in His image. Okay Plato, let's look at this more closely. God is a perfect being - all-powerful, all-knowing, blah blah. Humans are not. How, then, can a perfect being create something that is imperfect? Also, if He created us in His image, does that mean He has form? If so, how do you reconcile that with His perfectness? How can something with form be perfect?

sudikics
August 14th, 2008, 05:26 PM
[Note: playing devil's advocate to you, bouchie]
For your last paragraph, bouchie: what happens if God isn't perfect? Why must God be perfect?

bouchie
August 14th, 2008, 05:38 PM
[Note: playing devil's advocate to you, bouchie]
For your last paragraph, bouchie: what happens if God isn't perfect? Why must God be perfect?

Doesn't the Bible say that God is perfect? Or is that an interpretation from later scholars, like, Augustine, Aquinas and Descartes?

As for what happens if God isn't perfect - it just throws out a whole lot of arguments made for his existence and the theologians need to take their existence proofs back to the writing board.

sudikics
August 14th, 2008, 05:42 PM
Doesn't the Bible say that God is perfect? Or is that an interpretation from later scholars, like, Augustine, Aquinas and Descartes?
I don't remember that ever being said in the Bible.
As for what happens if God isn't perfect - it just throws out a whole lot of arguments made for his existence and the theologians need to take their existence proofs back to the writing board.
I'm fine with that...:rolleyes:

LastLordOfTheSevenTowers
August 14th, 2008, 05:47 PM
Doesn't the Bible say that God is perfect? Or is that an interpretation from later scholars, like, Augustine, Aquinas and Descartes?

As for what happens if God isn't perfect - it just throws out a whole lot of arguments made for his existence and the theologians need to take their existence proofs back to the writing board.

I don't think it says he's perfect I think that was added on, but I'm no expert, haha.

And Oh well...I tried...No shame in failing where...everyone...failed...horribly...

Edit:

Personally, I think that religion is simply the byproduct ignorance. This view of the bible however, as you said, being very liberal, leaves room for broadening the spectrum even further as time progresses.

Side note: the whole savant thing was kind of a side rant that really had nothing to do with anything haha. And I wasn't suggesting that we should all be like that, just that it shows that the very conceited notion that the human race is done evolving is just that: conceited.