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.

 

This is why religious believers should pay very close attention to evolution.

page: 1
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2010 @ 05:01 AM
link   
The creation of Life.


Verse 11.

And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.



Pay attention to what verse 11 is saying.

And God said: Let the earth bring forth grass, the seed and so on. Here God is observing how the complete process taking place on earth is creating organic life. God is creating heaven and earth. So God is giving earth very special attention at this stage. God is not doing anything, but observing the process taking place on earth. This is where the study of evolution plays a very important role.

The way i see it, we have a lot to learn about the whole creation part by studying the scientific knowledge about evolution. Verse 11 in Genesis chapter 1 confirms that. So now religious believers and evolutionists have less to argue about. In my opinion evolutionists have been on the right track all along. And the religious believers have been ignorant and in denial of proper knowledge.




posted on May, 12 2010 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Interesting concept you have.

I agree that science and faith could be aligned to some degree but at the same time I feel your interpretation of the verse is off IMO.

The wording is specific..."Let there be".... this is undoubtedly a command and not just a mere observation from God.

These commands shows his power over the earth and the development thereof. He instructs and it is done.......



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 05:29 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Hi, I would like to ask firstly if you're advocating Intelligent Design? I'd like to state I'm an Atheist and that I don't believe in the idea of God, especially not the christian one, but you know - maybe there is some kind of creator out there, if there was I think they're long gone...

If you are an advocate of Intelligent Design then I have one more question for you...

Why is the male g-spot so "awkward" to reach?



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 

I'm sure I'm not the only religious believer on this site who feels perfectly comfortable with that line of thought.
I hope others can be willing to think it through seriously.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gabriel_
Interesting concept you have.

I agree that science and faith could be aligned to some degree but at the same time I feel your interpretation of the verse is off IMO.

The wording is specific..."Let there be".... this is undoubtedly a command and not just a mere observation from God.

These commands shows his power over the earth and the development thereof. He instructs and it is done.......


NO, verse 11 specifically say:

Let the earth bring forth grass and so on. The verse mentions nothing about let there be grass. Like when God said: let there be light. That is something different. Here God is observing earth bringing forth organic life, do to a process taking place.

Of course this concept goes against traditional teachings. But knowledge is one thing and facts are an other. We have a lot of knowledge but we have a lot less facts.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jokei
reply to post by spy66
 


Why is the male g-spot so "awkward" to reach?


Well everything has its place for a reason lol. I don't have any facts about why it is awkward for some to reach. I guess the awkward part is a restriction you have put on your self?



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Just to add to this thread:

Genesis begins with a very "evolution-like" theme.
Starts from darkness to light, all the sudden, kinda like a "big bang".

* First day: God creates light ("Let there be light!")[Gen 1:3]—the first divine command. The light is divided from the darkness, and "day" and "night" are named.


Next, he creates land? Almost like planets.
Now, we don't know if it was literally 1 human day or a galactic day.
Personally I think it was millenia. 1 "day" = 1 billion years

* Second day: God creates a firmament ("Let a firmament be...!")[Gen 1:6–7]—the second command—to divide the waters above from the waters below. The firmament is named "skies".




* Third day: God commands the waters below to be gathered together in one place, and dry land to appear (the third command).[Gen 1:9–10] "earth" and "sea" are named. God commands the earth to bring forth grass, plants, and fruit-bearing trees (the fourth command).




* Fourth day: God creates lights in the firmament (the fifth command)[Gen 1:14–15] to separate light from darkness and to mark days, seasons and years. Two great lights are made (most likely the Sun and Moon, but not named), and the stars.



* Fifth day: God commands the sea to "teem with living creatures", and birds to fly across the heavens (sixth command)[Gen 1:20–21] He creates birds and sea creatures, and commands them to be fruitful and multiply.

Here we go. The good stuff.
Now if you look at where the creatures start, you can imagine evolution taking place on water first, as small microbes, then "being fruitful" and evolving into more complex organisms over millenia, and eventually then moving to land.


* Sixth day: God commands the land to bring forth living creatures (seventh command);[Gen 1:24–25] He makes wild beasts, livestock and reptiles. He then creates humanity in His "image" and "likeness" (eighth command).[Gen 1:26–28] They are told to "be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it." Humans and animals are given plants to eat. The totality of creation is described by God as "very good."

This picture to me represents exactly what is told in the Bible, just not in the correct timeline according to mans created "time".
We actually have NO clue what time is.
Just what we think it is.


* Seventh day: God, having completed the heavens and the earth, rests from His work, and blesses and sanctifies the seventh day.

Wikipedia Source


So imagine, a big bang...then galaxies and planets forming, then water on the planets, with microbes forming into creatures over time and eventually moving to land evolving into the range of animals over millions of years.

Then Man came about.


This is why there is a "missing link".

For some reason, man can't find a link directly to anything in the mammal world that relates man directly evolving from apes. All we find is a similarity in DNA, and chromosomes. Still no direct link.


These are all opinions, people.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Religious believers should pay absolutely no religious attention to evolution, it's not particularly useful in a religious context. Interpreting religious texts to include the concept of evolution is mis-guided at best, it says nothing about religious belief or science.

The sooner the better religion starts worrying about the spiritual health of mankind and science starts to worry about the whys, hows and what for's.

Science is a hindrance to the spiritual mind and religion is a hindrance to the study of the physical universe, they should both stick to the day job.


[edit on 12/5/10 by pieman]



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by jokei
reply to post by spy66
 


Hi, I would like to ask firstly if you're advocating Intelligent Design? I'd like to state I'm an Atheist and that I don't believe in the idea of God, especially not the christian one, but you know - maybe there is some kind of creator out there, if there was I think they're long gone...

If you are an advocate of Intelligent Design then I have one more question for you...

Why is the male g-spot so "awkward" to reach?


Your first question demands some thinking


My answer would have to be yes. I do think life is a very intelligent design.
That's why its so hard to figure out how life evolved. Of course in some personal opinions, some people would like to disagree.

But i also think i know why.

If you study life to try and figure out how it was made you will never reach your goal. Because life is a product of a equation a processes.

So, if you study life, you would want to know what the equation looked like that made life possible.

Your equation would look like X = life. Or process = life. You would want to figure out X or the process. But you will never be able to figure out the process or X by studying life it self.

Life is a product of a process that has taken place. But life is not a isolated equation, life is a result of the whole process from the beginning. From when God said: Let there be light.

Life cant be a result of a random coincidence. It only seams that way.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Hi, thanks for answering that, I might be a bit finicky - but I like to know an OPs viewpoint.

I'm not altogether sure on my view on this - I don't think I could ever be certain, it's too unknowable (as you said)... so I'm gonna go for a massive cop-out here (lazy I know) and say I thank that nature in and of itself is an intelligent design, just that it doesn't necessarily have a creator.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


To answer your reply i must again point out that even considering the word "Let" As a start of any sentance would show authority/ Control/management. and can still not IMO be interpreted as observation.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jokei
reply to post by spy66
 


Hi, thanks for answering that, I might be a bit finicky - but I like to know an OPs viewpoint.

I'm not altogether sure on my view on this - I don't think I could ever be certain, it's too unknowable (as you said)... so I'm gonna go for a massive cop-out here (lazy I know) and say I thank that nature in and of itself is an intelligent design, just that it doesn't necessarily have a creator.


But what if i say that we cant have something that the infinite doesn't have. Intelligence!

That would imply that creation is created by a intelligence the infinite.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Gerald Schroeder FTW



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gabriel_
reply to post by spy66
 


To answer your reply i must again point out that even considering the word "Let" As a start of any sentance would show authority/ Control/management. and can still not IMO be interpreted as observation.



I would say that the word "let" in this case has a totally different meaning.

It is also supported by how the system God created is actually functioning.

God never had any direct contact with earth. Since God said let there be light. God has only been a observer from that time on.

A way to imagine what i have just said. You could imagine the infinite space, The space of emitted energy and earth.

Earth would be in the middle surrounded by emitted energies and out side of emitted energies you have God the infinite. Emitted energies is the space between matter, planets and stars. Than you have God.

God is different than finite. God is infinite. So there is a differential here.
God is separated from his creation. That is mentioned in verse 6.


And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Let (oops) me respond to that by saying that I simply disagree. I'm not sure how clear this will be...

Basically, I am open to the idea that there is some kind of intelligence behind everything. However, as previously stated - not a god.

(This is where my examples might fail).

Humans have intelligence, (more or less) and we live on a planet with many other living organisms, that may or may not be "intelligent" or have "intelligence" - but, I would argue that there are some that certainly don't; flowers, trees, water, atoms etc.

I would liken these things to toys created by man, they may have aspects of the creator, but are not necessarily intelligent by themselves.

F*** Ok, I've just agreed with you, I think - you're argument bears merit Sir.

Hmm, let's take another viewpoint - there may be an initial event that we could call the Big Bang, this doesn't have to be the same as the generally accepted "Big Bang" - but it's a good name, alternately we could call it Gary? Anyway, the Gary event occurred and everything following on is symptomatic and/or reactionary to that initial event.

I'm not going to win, you're not - but this is a topic that interests me, so I'm open to ideas.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   
Hello there. My very first thread on ATS was about this topic. Here are the verses I thought to be curious:



Genesis 1:11-12. The Bible shows God saying 'Let there be…' in other verses but then switches the phrase to 'Let the earth bring forth plants' and 'Then the earth brought forth plants.' Were plants developed from the earth through adaptation with the gentle care and intervention of God?

Genesis 1:24-25. Again, instead of a 'Let there be…' God tells the land (from the vegetation he created?) to bring forth animals but then also shows us Him creating them. Theistic evolution? Did God design new creations from His other creations through genetic evolution while being fully involved in the process?

Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:7. Wait a minute. God said He created man in His own image and that He also created him from the dust out of the ground. Again, was He using His own creation to make other creations?

Genesis 2:21-23. God made Eve out of Adam. Why not form her out of the ground as well? Did God use cellular mitosis and more 'new creation from previous creation?' Why cause a deep sleep to come over Adam and take part of him to make another? We know living cells divide as a fact of science. Did God use His creation of cellular mitosis to create Eve?

Genesis 2:18. Wait a minute. How could thorns and thistles (or any new species) come into being if creation was absolutely complete? Did God again use nature to create nature? Did he encode it to be a perpetuating system with His direct guidance? Does He still actively participate in the birth of new species? He again used the terminology for the land to bring forth thorns and thistles and not 'Let there be thorns and thistles' which would have implied an immediate creation. Gradual vs. Immediate and 'Let there be' vs. "Land bring forth.'


www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oddly enough, I started the thread as a tongue-in-cheek joke but later began to more deeply contemplate it and am not so sure anymore.

Something to think about. There seems to be a pattern of God speaking inorganic objects into creation but creating organic objects from other organic matter.

?



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:47 AM
link   
My position has always been very clear on this debate.

Evolution isn't 100% correct.

Creation isn't 100% correct.


I think the only thing we (humans) have done is define the two extremes...and as usual, the truth probably lies somewhere inbetween.

I'm fine with not knowing...I am not arrogant enough to believe that I know everything. On subjects like these, my personal belief is just fine with me.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
If there was a big bang the universe is finite, if it ever was, it always is. If there is also an infinite god then this god can not be part of the universe, it can't even really interact with it, all it can do is observe it from the moment of the big bang.

This makes god infinitely powerful outside the universe and powerless inside it.

On the other hand, outside the fabric of space/time, the linear nature of time is totally irrelevant so it is entirely possible to determine the entire coarse of history at the time of the big bang by tweaking this or that.

In the end, god must be both omnipotent and totally impotent.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


What you have just mentioned is what i am trying to resolve at the moment. But this is going to take some time. I know that Moses is stumbling on some verses.
In verse 8 Moses called the firmament for heaven. But verse 6 implies that the firmament is earth and all the planets.

This is verse 8.


And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.


This is verse 6.


And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.


To be able to understand this you have to understand that God is creating heaven and earth. That is verified in Genesis chapter two. So you also have to read Verse 1 as a title. God hadn't already created heaven and earth in verse 1. Because verse 1 says: In the beginning God created heaven and earth. The beginning started when God said: Let there be light.

Verse 2 describes what infinity looked like before God said let there be light. There was no earth or heaven in verse 2.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Good points being made here, anyone ever wonder what creatures existed when it was just darkness just some food for your minds lol. Op I agree science and religion have many cross points and as humans evolve we will better understand it.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join