It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did God Create Adam With A Penis, But Have No Intention of Creating Eve???

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   
haha it is a good point. You could also argue why adam and eve had bellybuttons :-P




posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Ok I will try my best to answer these questions. The bible states that God is the alpha and omega, the begining and end, knowing the end before the begining. As this He would have known He would create a female before ever starting to create the male. Therefore He would have created man with the ability to procreate before creating the female counterpart.

As for homosexual people, I believe they correct to assert they are born this way. Here is why, sin is not an action but a defect we are born with that seperates us from God. The actions many refer to as sin are a by product of this defect, as are greed, hate, and the desire many tout to deny His existence. Our deaths are a direct result of this defect as well. It is for this reason we now must make a effort to seek Him out, as the defect keeps Him from directly showing Himself to us. As an imperfect being we could not survive in the direct presence of God. Perfection and imperfection can not exist together. The imperfect either would taint the perfect or in this case since the perfect is a superior being, the perfect would ultimately destroy the imperfect.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdl79
Ok I will try my best to answer these questions. The bible states that God is the alpha and omega, the begining and end, knowing the end before the begining. As this He would have known He would create a female before ever starting to create the male. Therefore He would have created man with the ability to procreate before creating the female counterpart.

As for homosexual people, I believe they correct to assert they are born this way. Here is why, sin is not an action but a defect we are born with that seperates us from God. The actions many refer to as sin are a by product of this defect, as are greed, hate, and the desire many tout to deny His existence. Our deaths are a direct result of this defect as well. It is for this reason we now must make a effort to seek Him out, as the defect keeps Him from directly showing Himself to us. As an imperfect being we could not survive in the direct presence of God. Perfection and imperfection can not exist together. The imperfect either would taint the perfect or in this case since the perfect is a superior being, the perfect would ultimately destroy the imperfect.


Ok yeah that says it all in a nutshell ..I would agree with that ..
Well said ..



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Also, according to the bible, Adam and Eve would have been the only people ever who didn't have belly buttons.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Briles
 

I should have read this post before posting the above post.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by cancerian42
 


haha thats ok i do it all the time, thanks for the info though, wasnt aware of that



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by JSR
ha ha....what a funny question.

could you imagin adam waking up one morning and looking down....
....."what is that?"



I'm sorry, I don't mean to derail but I must say that is the funniest thing I've seen in a long time.

Thanks for the laugh.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by calihan123
 


Yeah but who was gonna marry them....the serpent???



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Well,in Genesis it says-1:27

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


Which implies he created them at the same time,as the word man,which comes from the proto-Germanic word mannaz which was a gender neutral word used across Europe for centuries.(except in Germany.Man is still a gender neutral word there,while mann means man)

Whereas in Genesis chapter 2 Eve is created long after Adam.2:20

And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
Adam had no companion yet God,who created all male and female animals,didn't know that his male human would also need a female human companion.
And if he didn't,then originally Adam would've had no penis because he wouldn't have needed one.

[edit on 6-11-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by jakyll
And if he didn't,then originally Adam would've had no penis because he wouldn't have needed one.

[edit on 6-11-2008 by jakyll]


If he didn't need a penis then how would he pee? Are you implying that Adam would have had to sit down to pee. If so then maybe Adam, the first male, was a San Franciscan...



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by LiquidMirage
 


Would he have had 'normal' genitalia?

No female,so no ball sack needed.Nothing to penetrate so no significant length whatsoever needed.




[edit on 6-11-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2
Creation was supposed to be made in God's image. God is supposed to be perfect, so I'm assumign that whatever he makes in his own image would be as perfect as possible.

Whether or not that's refering to the spirit or the body, the Genesis story tells of some inherant flaws.

The least of which were their gullibility and ignorance to be tricked into eating the apple.

So the question is, did God intentionally put those flaws in them, thus making Adam and Eve less than his own image. Or, God is inherantly flawed, and hemade Adam and Eve as close to himself as possible, and passed on his own flaws.


God knows the difference between right and wrong. If God made us in his image, then one could assume that God came to the state of being good through trial and error.

This is the metaphor of the story of Adam and Eve. You start out simple and naive and do not know right from wrong, and therefor cannot be held accountable for your actions. Once you know something is wrong, and do it anyway, you must pay the consequences of guilt and remorse.

People put way more into the story than what it is. It's fairly simple and just a cute, simple way of passing on to children (originally through spoken word, then eventually through written word) a metaphorical story about growing from complete innocence to sentience and consciousness. This can only happen through temptation and consequence. I'm not sure why people have torn apart the story to death. It's simple, and it is for a reason, so children can understand it and so that it could be passed on from generation to generation, as it was long before it was ever written on paper.

What I want to know is, if God created us in his image, and humans do evolve, then does that mean that God evolved, and if so wouldn't that mean humans are some day destined to be Gods?

[edit on 6-11-2008 by maus80]



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by maus80
 


But read the rest of the Bible.

If you take it at its word, humanity is certainly held responsible for their mistakes!

There is no room to improve by trial and error. It's either, follow this law to the letter and go to hell, or have this person save you or go to hell.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by asmeone2
 


But I believe in evolution! So somewhere along the line humans developed sentience and free will! I'm just saying that is what the story is about in my opinion, the transition from a species that does not have conscience, to one that does and therefor must be held responsible for it's actions. Adam and Eve are the story of that turning point.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
the book of genesis is not a scientific text. it is a well crafted communication from god to his human creation, and that is all.

a detailed documentation of the creation of this universe, it's physics and human biology would be a message lost on the contemporary humans it was designed to impress.

it was a deliberate communication, and a very successful one.

but science? certainly not. many of our atheist friends and a few christians who dont understand the book, take it as an offering of facts. it is not that at all.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by maus80
 


Apologies for going off topic but...



What I want to know is, if God created us in his image, and humans do evolve, then does that mean that God evolved, and if so wouldn't that mean humans are some day destined to be Gods?


If you haven't already you should definatly start a thread on this.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by maus80
 


I could definitely see that being the case if the bible is taken more metaphorically.

But I beleive the OP intended it to be taken literally for the purposes of this thread. Thus my nit-picking.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


I second that.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Alexander_Supertramp
 


It only appears they believe in that story exactly as it is read. Your certainty in that claim is, however, far from accurate. It's actually your own fault for misinterpreting that reality. Maybe you want them to believe in a literal Bible for selfish intellectual purposes? Of course, someone with that affliction wouldn't be capable of realizing or even accepting their motives even when it is made apparent. Although there might be psychological implications to your claim, the more likely scenario is that this misunderstanding is largely a result of the insufficiency of language in transmitting such religious concepts, so heavily ingrained in esoteric belief, so contingent of experiential learning. There are reasons they "believe" in Genesis to the very word.

So those people you mentioned won't be moved by this evidence. They obviously didn't use logic to come to their conclusion that that story happened as exactly as is accounted for in the Bible. They pursued a slightly more intangible approach. You have to admit it was inconsiderate how you portrayed them as irrational, and incapable of coming to logical conclusions. They aren't as logically incapable as they are not capable of being convinced at all. And that's not to say that is anything wrong with them either. An "enlightened" individual would at least recognize the foundation of their "flaw"; the motivation for it. It is senseless to denounce people because they believe in things fundamental to their moral integrity, and that you, by comparison, in your the "pursuit of knowledge", are a vastly superior intellectual being.

[edit on 6-11-2008 by cognoscente]



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by dave420
And how can we be in his image after these modifications? Does that imply that God has no balls?


Wow. I commend you sir. I wish I had thought of that
.

But in all seriousness, this is what's known as a plot hole.
Yes, the Bible contradicts itself just like any other story does.
And this is only one out of hundreds of inconsistencies, some more obvious then others.

Here's a list of some others:
www.infidels.org...



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join