Its all just one big show anyway. Just make sure you are thrilling enough so that you may live long and happy life...
Questions About Adam and Eve
- Thread starter Berzerker
- Start date
Its all just one big show anyway. Just make sure you are thrilling enough so that you may live long and happy life...
History_Buff
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2001
- Messages
- 6,529
Wait, so God didn't make the early Hominids, but they did exist? How and when did they exist then?
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
Why are we even putting evolution in the mix? Even a thousand year day is not long enough for evolution to work.
Adam seems like a very stuck up person to me. Perhaps having freedom and then it all being taken away from him, was too much. He was not the first human any more than there was a first fish or first cow or first bird. There were multiple humans created in one instant. Either they each contained both sexes, or they were created in two groups with males in one and females in the other.
There were other humans and they were spread out over the face of the whole earth. That God chose one of these and allowed him to name the animals was God giving Adam the authority over the animals. I am not sure why sex is such a huge issue. Attraction and feelings were all changed after the curse on all of creation.
That Adam was the zoo keeper while all the other humans got to do as they please makes for a more interesting story. Perhaps all the twitter feeds going on (at the time) did cause Adam to feel estranged and left out. That Adam called Eve the mother of all living is a hyperbole since living in a zoo tends to give one that feeling.
God is there at every sexual encounter, since that seems to be the method he uses to replenish the earth instead of bringing it into existence using his word, except for the word to Mary about a certain human savior.
Adam seems like a very stuck up person to me. Perhaps having freedom and then it all being taken away from him, was too much. He was not the first human any more than there was a first fish or first cow or first bird. There were multiple humans created in one instant. Either they each contained both sexes, or they were created in two groups with males in one and females in the other.
There were other humans and they were spread out over the face of the whole earth. That God chose one of these and allowed him to name the animals was God giving Adam the authority over the animals. I am not sure why sex is such a huge issue. Attraction and feelings were all changed after the curse on all of creation.
That Adam was the zoo keeper while all the other humans got to do as they please makes for a more interesting story. Perhaps all the twitter feeds going on (at the time) did cause Adam to feel estranged and left out. That Adam called Eve the mother of all living is a hyperbole since living in a zoo tends to give one that feeling.
God is there at every sexual encounter, since that seems to be the method he uses to replenish the earth instead of bringing it into existence using his word, except for the word to Mary about a certain human savior.
You cant really left out the process of evolution out of this since its closer to outward truth which we are seeking then anything literally interpreted from the Bible. Besides anything in Universe happens by some process only at the time of writing the Bible there were not know as such and in such a detail as is our present knowledge. So a day may simply represent some stage limited by time.
Even some plants have both sexes. Its only natural to think that man is product of evolution. And if you believe in spiritual you can add to it involution(of soul/spirit)as well. The story of Adam and Eve in this context is just methaphorical revelation of some of the relation between God and first religious man and human psychology at that time which was necessary for mans survival.
The naming of animals and declaring superiority is only creating psychological advantage in times where human life was under pressure from to great extent hostile enviroment.
What in the Book is called curse is a simple evolutionary necessity. The development of conscious human mind. Man has lost the innocence of an animal but eventually can through spiritual process regain the innocence of God.
Yes, we are all men but we are God as well.
RobAnybody
Emperor
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,952
holophobic.
MagisterCultuum
Great Sage
He didn't really.
As a Jew who inherited Roman citizenship from his father, he would have been given both a Hebrew and a Roman name as an infant.
His Hebrew name was Sha'ul, which means "prayed for" and was quite a common name among his tribe of Benjamin. (The only king to ever come from that tribe bore that name.) His Roman name was Paullus, which means "small." This was relatively common as either a Praenomen or Cognomen, particularly among the Gens Aemilia.
He went by the name Sha'ul among fellow Jews, both before and after becoming a Christian. When he was among Greeks he seems to have preferred being called Paulos, the Hellenized version of his Latin name.
Some say that he preferred to use his Roman name around gentiles in order to put them at ease. I suspect that he might have had as much to do with being annoying at how horribly they mispronounced his Hebrew name; neither the Greek nor Latin languages contained the "sh" sound. Paulos sounds a lot like Paullus, but Saulos doesn't actually sound very much like Sha'ul.
Simon should actually be Shim'on (meaning "he has heard"), but was Hellenized as like Simeon. Simon also happens to be a Greek name meaning "flat-nosed."
Adam and Eve should actually be Adam and Chawa.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
k so I used to be Christian, and that's never how the story was told to me. Is there a Biblical quote that backs this up?
Darkflight
Prince
Not really, there is just nothing that says he didn't. Genesis 1:27 says he creates man in his image as male and female, but no specific numbers are mentioned. Genesis 2 deals more intimatly in the creation of Adam and Eve, but there isn't really any way to say that Adam and Eve was the only humans he created. The entire story is so unspecific about this that you can believe whatever you want to. The multiple humans created idea is the only logical way that Cain and Seth had any women to have children with, unless you go with the "women weren't worth mentioning so this story is filled with icky incest" idea. I believe most christians go with the first one since the second one isn't exactly a fun idea for most people.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
When I was brought up it was heavily hinted that Cain and Abel had sisters that they got it on with, but it wasn't exactly openly discussed either.
Berzerker
Deity
No, they evolved from earlier critters - the Hobbits of Flores may have lived very recently, possibly a few centuries ago. And they appear to be of the erectus line that became isolated by rising seas when the last ice age ended. The people living there have stories about them.
Its now known hominids and anatomically modern humans co-existed, this may be the origin of myths about earlier, more "primitive" peoples.
Maybe they misunderstood and thought they were supposed to do their math homework and didn't want to... /sarcasm
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
It is more than just a logical explanation for Cain and Seth. People just interpret Genesis 1:27 wrong. There is an established civ that Cain found. There were the sons of God who could not logically be angels even though we have been taught that as a fact. There was a populated world that was completely wiped out and it was not just the offspring of Adam. The story of Genesis was not about all the other humans. It was about the blood line from Adam to the twelve tribes of Israel. I realize that most seem to think the Bible is void of women, but they are mentioned quite a lot. I was taught that Adam sinned on the 7th day, but that is not logically possible. Nor does not accepting that go against any other scripture.
Humans have made up thousands of stories about how the old world was and what happened during that time frame. Some make sense and other's don't, but I am sure they make sense to some people. It makes sense to me that some have made up metaphors to describe what actually happened back then, since many claim that the Bible is just a metaphor to them.
Rashiminos
Fool Prophet
The race of "man" created according to the quoted section in the OP is not the same race as Adam and Eve.
I'm just going to say that at the particular part of the story being discussed, sex was very much okay. Okay doesn't even really describe it.
Be 'fruitful'.. 'Multiply.' Euphemisms.
I'm just going to say that at the particular part of the story being discussed, sex was very much okay. Okay doesn't even really describe it.
Be 'fruitful'.. 'Multiply.' Euphemisms.
How so?
No. Made in someone's image means something else here.
In several manners of speaking.
One of the manners in question.
Yes and no.
Prior to a certain event they knew better.
classical_hero
In whom I trust
http://creation.com/genesis-contradictions
This my last post here in this thread.
This my last post here in this thread.
I suppose external guidance is possible, but that begs the question why it failed so much in preventing all these contradictions.
Visited the site and got preached to by some guy on a chair.
The Bible makes a lot more sense if you allow the idea of fallible, multiple authors. The Qur'an makes a lot more sense, too. So does 'scientific literature'.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
No. I don't buy it. And for half the time he was talking he wouldn't look at me. Did you notice he put "inverted commas" round the word "science" but not round the word religion? Significant, eh?
What I can't figure out (though I don't try hard enough, probably) is why anyone would prefer the Genesis story to the amazingly complex story of evolution. The details of which are still being discovered.
Maybe this is Forma?
That is actually something the guy explains. As in, if you want eternal life, better believe the Bible is true, and better believe that Genesis is true.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
When I was growing up in a very religious society, the emphasis was very much on the lessons learned from the stories, and not so much "This stuff actually happened". But I'm sure some people here and there actually believed that the garden of eden actually existed. I bet you the older of a person you asked, the more likely it would be for them to agree with that.
To be totally fair that isn't really a post, but more like a driveby link post.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Ah yes he does, you're right: In that totally clear explanatory way they have of making some bold unsubstantiated assertion and then expecting it to be clear to you how that works. How could I be so stupid?
