Who believes in Adam & eve?
Who believes that they were the start of man kind?
|
Who believes in Adam & eve?
Who believes that they were the start of man kind?
I'm more of an evolution man - primordial soup, humans from apes, that whole thing. I find hard to believe that humans and all other living things just "appeared" out of nowhere.
I somewhat agree you needkarma totally!
But want to hear what other people think about it.
Adam and eve? Please. I think the closest that it can come to truth is in a metaphore for "evolution".
Just like with other religious things, that were written when things couldn't be proven, people believed them, and put their faith in them, and now they are turning out to be untrue.
Evolution, has been proved, and yet people still going on about adam and eve, and then make that whole "its not adam and steve" joke. Then I remind those people that we evolved from creatchers that were once a-sexual.
Evolution baby! Sorry than it wasn't a contrasting argument :D
I believe in Evolution myself.
I come from a catholic background and my brother went to a Private Catholic school and in religion classes they also finally brought up the topic about evolution. Which is good.
As people who believe in Adam & Eve, need to think that it goes against what religion believe in.
Adam & Eve, had 2 children, Kane and Abel.
2 boys... right... OK...
So for people who people in Adam & Eve, then how did their family carry on?
That's the question.. Did Eve sleep with one or two of her boys.
Doesn't make any sense does it?
That is also another point that was recently my msn name!
If you believe in adam and eve, you also believe in incest.
Precisely
Which goes against any form of religion.
HEy, let people do what they want lol, but it's not something I personally would do, and Im sure my sister would agree. So, yes, adam and eve just seems to be a story... and by the looks of things that trend might continue. What is interesting however, is that, I think as I said before, that a lot of what is said may be metaphoric for other things, or actually, just complete stories.
And I have a funny feeling if you are "jedi" incest isn't frowned upon too much, because Luke and Liear (sp) nearly got jiggy in one of the side plots.:D hehe
Sorry, that post was really badly phrased :( what I metn was its interesting to think of things as metaphores... not that I'm interesting.
Has anyone said you're not interesting? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ndx
I thought I came across as big headed! And I don't want that, because I'm really not!
I wrote my point wrong, but thank you for that, and your interesting too :)
My favorite description of the Bible is that "It is a book of myths that at some point, people started believing were facts." --unknown (er... it's probably know to someone, I just don't remember who said it.)
I think it's a bit wacky to say evolution doesn't exist when the evidence is so abundant. However, evolution in and of itself is not a creation theory. It is a "how we got from A to B" theory. Personally, I don't have problems with theories of Intelligent Design, as I don't feel that they necessarily contradict evolution.
I do not believe the story of Adam and Eve to be fact, but as others said, myth used to explain what no living person ever could (and maybe never will).
Yes, allot of religion is putting god as the answer to things that people couldn't answer at the time. Your right in saying that evolution is a from a to b theory, but, due to evolution it has been possible to trace back to where we DID come from, and what a was, and that was to my knowledge, that was bacteria. Beyond that, it was just a biological accident, that many web pages describe in more detail the correct bonding of atoms to make protein's etc, and so on making in the long run, cells, bla bla, blabla.
When I think god, I think the beginning of the universe. And to say god placed us on earth, as in god the "person", and us as a human race is one of the most self centred conclusions, and closed minded ones too. IMO of course.
Of course the story of Adam and Eve is true. The Bible, which is the inerrant and inspired Word of God, tells us it is so. If people would read and really study their Bible, they would realize they can trust in what it says. Let's face it, most people are lazy and have never read it cover to cover--yet they feel qualified to judge it. They have not done their homework and will not pass "their final exam." It's similar to when I was in engineering school and discussing differential equations with someone who has not taken advanced Calculus--it doesn't go very far and accomplishes little. A tremendous part of the Bible concerns prophecy. Over 900 prophecies have been fulfilled already, showing us that the Bible is trustworthy and that God is in control. Ignore the Bible at your own risk. Through Adam and Eve, God shows us where we came from and how sin entered the world. The rest of the Bible is pointing us sinners toward Jesus, because we are in desperate need of a Savior. God warns us, warns us, warn us, then "payday" comes.
To me, evolution is one of the biggest hoaxes ever. It's a theory, with a supposed "scientific" stamp of approval, for rebellious man to hide behind, so he can be sinful, shake his fist at God, and do whatever he pleases. Most of us at age 3 knew that God created man and the universe--some are just slower learners and take longer to arrive at the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by txgreasemonkey
Im catholic too, been to catholic school and had religion lessons everyday (lucky me)..
And as I've said previously even in catholic schools they now teach the prossiblity of evolution.
I can't comprehend and believe the story of Adam and Eve, besides it goes against what we believe in... incent!
I mean how did Adam & Eve carry on the family after their 2 boys?
The bible doesn't mention any more kids from their behalf... so anyway the story goes.. its all incent...
It don't make sense!
Prophecies? I think I could have made a few prophecies about things and they would have happened too. I prophecies me getting a job, and my sister going to school tomorrow. Indeed people make prophecies everyday.
Im really sorry, but I have to disagree with allot of what you said txgreasemonkey, but then you will disagree with what I'm about to say. And that is that evolution has been PROVEN. The actual act of adam and eve being the only two people on the planet, walking about a garden, is a ridiculous thought because we evolved. We weren't suddenly just "here". And also, there is the problem of how two people, and only two people procreate without side effects.
I also don't think I need to read the whole bible, every single word, to offer an opinion on adam and eve, which, I have actually read about.
I also find the thought of blindly following a book completely shallow, and the only reason people do so is out of fear that they won't pass your talked about final exam, and get an eternal afterlife of pleasure.
Im not really into a god who wants me to be a follower, and to disregard everything around me. And if they are there to be tests, these PROVEN facts, then I don't really want a god who thinks its fun to P*ss me about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krs
Perhaps it doesn't make sense because you haven't read Genesis.
Genesis 5:4 (King James Version)
4And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
Please consider other possibilities before jumping to such drastic conclusions.
The Genesis genealogies are given through the male but that doesn't mean that there was an absence of females. The writer's of Genesis assumed that you would assume that femails were born to Adamand Eve. In fact, one of them is mentioned in reference to Cain.
Genesis 4:17 (King James Version)
17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.
BTW
A taboo is established in order to prevent harm.
Incest taboo prevents birth defects and also prevents role confusion within the family group.
Initially, however, the incest taboo between brother and sister wasn't operational due to the special circumstances which required that mankind procreate and fill the earth. Neither were children marred by being born from such close relationships at that time for two reasons.
1. Man was closer to physical perfection
2. God's blessings.
It was only after mankind distanced itself from physical perfection that such relationships began to be harmful. Furthermore, as non-imdediate family members became availbale fort marriage choosing those more distantly- related helped preserve nuclear family role
Clarity.
If everyone made their own assumptions then the book becomes anything to anyone, I can assume that Jesus slept with prostitutes because he kept company with them. See how it serves no end to imply a multitude of events that are not written?Quote:
Originally Posted by Starman
BTW
This thread could easily boil down to a question of faith since faith is a belief that cannot be proven.
True! In the DaVinco Code, didn't it say that Jesus had a relationship with Mary Magdelene?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starman
Starman, u don't know a lot, you are well educated with all of this.
But remember religion is all down to faith. Its not faced with facts and the obvious as u state
I believe that we have already had a discussion concerning Evolution and Inteligent Design.
It would be best to take this to that thread.
I'll even open it so you can all post.
See I can be nice ;)
OK I have moved all the evelution comments to the thread mentioned above.
Please feel free to continue that discussion there.
Why should I believe the DaVinco Code in preference toi the Word of God?Quote:
Originally Posted by Krs
I don't know a lot yet I am well educated in all of this?Quote:
Starman, u don't know a lot, you are well educated with all of this.
But remember religion is all down to faith. Its not faced with facts and the obvious as u state
Isn't that self contradictory?
You are 100% wrong about religion. My belief in God is based on the evidence of a universe which shows clear indications of planning, design, forethought and, contrary to what you have been taught and have chosen to believe, which blind chance could nerver produce. So unlike evolutionists who must dig holes our evidence and support for our belierf in a creator is always at hand and ever present.
Evidence For Intelligent Design -
Phenomenal discoveries in the last few decades have unequivocally demonstrated that living systems are machines at the deepest, molecular level.
http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/ev...ent-design.htm
Believing in Adam & Eve does not mean believing in incest. Just because Adam & Eve were the first to be created by God, doesn't mean they were the ONLY to be created by God.
Also, Adam & Eve does not disprove evolution and evolution does not disprove Adam & Eve.
Those are just general facts.
As for my personal beliefs, I believe in Adam & Eve. I don't know if they actually existed or if they were used to illustrate that which could not be easily explained. Either way, I still believe in them... I believe in what they are meant to convey. And yes, I believe that either way, they were the start of mankind.
Starman my typing error ooppss
I meant you DO know a lot... you are well educated in all of this..
But don't tell me what I chose to believe in is 100% wrong!
Religion is faith.
There are no facts, you believe there are facts because you want to believe.
http://starwars.mytopix.com/img/d/darth_vader-0.jpg "KRS there is no point - the force is strong in this one."
31pumpkin I opened this thread for opinions like I gave mine and I didn't even know there was another thread for intellegance design vs evolution, and I earlier wrote that I made a typing error where I wrote that to starman. He does know a lot!
Im not challenging the bible, not at all, I'm catholic and have nothing at all against the bible. I own a bible and I do read it.
Point taken anyway - case closed.
I don't think 31pumpkin has posted in this thread (yet). :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Krs
DrJizzle I know she didn't but she commented on a 1 of my posts earlier and I just wanted to have my say that's all :)
I agree with most of you. Adam & Eve is a creation story IMO. Told so that the creation of the world would make sense to people in an ancient culture who had little science or technology. Creation stories exist in every culture.
Krs - Sorry if I interrupted the flow of the thread at all. I meant there are many forums (true- not one I could find here) that debate Creation. You wouldn't believe (I could hardly) what one satanist said to me about the Bible! Gosh- are they just looking for attention.. or what?
Yes, I believe the story about Adam and Eve. Thank you Starman for clarifying the part in Genesis about the "incest". I never thought about it, I was looking for the actual count of women or sisters there. I saw ENOCH but I couldn't figure out where his wife came from. Like you said, mostly the men were mentioned. Anyway, people lived to be 1000 yrs. Old then too. And the commandments came later.
Yup. I believe it. And they've been blaming the woman ever since! :(
I think the Adam & Eve story is a metaphorical one illustrating how human civilization so easilly succumbs to temptation.
I somehow think it is connected to the flood (with Noah and the Ark) in explaining why the "cleansing" of the Earth was necessary.
It's the same issue raised in the Scope's Trial, where the question was asked, "who did Lot marry?" It had to be one of his sisters, even though it is not explicitly stated in the Bible. This is because, as Starman correctly points out, the genealogy in the Bible is usually along the male line. Yes, Adam and Eve had daughters as well as sons--we just don't know their names. In the final analysis, we don't judge the Bible but it judges us.
I once heard a theory (not sure from where) that the descendents of Cain are the African people. But if one believes in the flood, then that can't be true, because all of his descendents would have been wiped out in that case. Or am I missing something?
Everything you believe isn't 100% wrong. Sorry I gave you the impression that I was saying that. What I meant is that saying that a religious belief is 100% faith is 100% wrong because part of our religious belief is based on observable facts and logical reasoning. It isn't something totally lacking in evidence. Did you go to the links I provided. They explain what I mean much better. Also, please consider Thomas Aquinas's logical reasons on why the existence of God is inevitable and you will understand what I am trying to say .Quote:
Originally Posted by Krs
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica q.3, art. 3
The third way is taken from possibility and necessity and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not possible to be, since they are found to be generated and corrupted. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which can not-be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything can not-be, then at one time there was nothing in existence. Now if this were true then even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist begins to exist only through something already existing. Therefore if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus now nothing would be in existence -- which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has already been proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore, we cannot but admit the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God. (4)
BTW
Thanks for the compliment.
That Thomas Aquinas quote simply points back to the "who created god then?" question. Since that cannot be proven or explained then both sides are at standstill it would seem.
He seems to say in 50 words what one could say in 10, overly verbose for me.
I can't even begin to understand this. As you understand it, can you clarify?Quote:
Originally Posted by Starman
If we remove all causes then, as Thomas said, there would never have arisen anything at all. Thomas Aquinas was pointing out that our experience teaches us that all things come into existence via another. For example, life comes from life, movement is caused by movement such as an object in motion or a chemical reaction which is itself involves motion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northwind_Dagas
There is always a previous mover a causer. Now, since all things are caused by another, then there had to be something which caused everything but which itself wasn't caused. That something, that prime mover who himself needs no other cause we call God.
In short, Thomas tells us that our logic of cause and effect should be applied only to the caused. But that by necessity, there has to be causer of all things, a necessary being, and a prime mover who himself I remains uncaused and unmoved by anything prior to it. Otherwise nothing would exist since infinite regression, or an infinite number of causers stretching back into infinity is impossible.
If one believes in a Creator then he must admit that the Creator could have created any way He pleases.
... I am a Christian and believe the Bible to be without error, however this does not mean that every word should be taken as literal fact. Surely all would agree that the parables and "sayings" in Proverbs are not to be all taken literally.
... I am also convinced that much of Genesis may very well be stories that are meant to teach something rather than explain a historic fact.
... so as for Adam and Eve. I'm 50/50 on whether they were the first two humans on the planet.
As for the "who created God" question, Life as we know it is a time line... linear. Without this linearness, causality would not exist either. Therefore, God, which transcends time and is eternal, is not bound by causality. God is and was and will always be... all at the same time. There was not before God because there is not "before" and "after" when in the realm in which God resides.
Gosh, the responses to the original question are becoming few and far between :rolleyes:
Oops.. ummm...
I do and...
I do!
:cool: :D
Yup I know that, Tom. I don't believe in the world wide flood or in the descendents of Cain. But I've heard several people talk about both as being true, so I was kind of playing devil's advocate here, and hoping someone would answer / explain their beliefs.Quote:
speedball1 disagrees: The world wide flood has been disproved. While there was a flood in the area it was not worl wide.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:39 PM. |