Right, you and Anthony are in danger of dominating the top 10 list. lemme assure you it won't happen any time soon. With threads like these and this one , you guys will be on top for a long time to come.
ok, how can i put it, i believe that evolution is basically a false, basically, evil theory. i believe that satan made people question god, just as he did with adam and eve. if you have a question about this please ask, ill be happy to answer
BuddMan Calm down. One misconception is Evolution = Creation of Life. Darwin never addressed the actual creation of live, just specization. The books title was created for sales. Even Darwin admitted (probably against his publishers wishes) there is a God, and Darwin only addressed the vast multitudes of different life on the planet. As for evolution, here is an argument for it: How many skin colors could Adam and Eve have? Two at most, but do to climate differences, the world is full of many different skin colors to both protect from the sun, and utilize it's energy for Vit-D production. Therefore human evolution occurred under God's control. So maybe we can all reach a happy medium (put an AND in the title in place of VS), God would want it that way. So, relax, Tom
no one can really say that what one said is true or not. we've got our own upbringing and beliefs. wether i belive in creation or evolution, it's definitely my call. and others have nothing to do with it but to respect it.
I am always amazed at people's insistence that the creation stories (yes stories there are two in Genesis) should be taken literally. That is not the point of the stories in Genesis. The Bible is not a science book, it is a faith book. The Bible makes a really bad science and history book, but it makes a really good faith book telling the story of God's love for all people. There are times when the history that is told in the Bible agrees with other sources of history, but that is not the purpose of the Bible. As far as creation vs. evolution goes you are asking the wrong question(s). The two are not necessarily opposing each other. The creation stories in Genesis tell us WHO created, evolution tells us a possible HOW it might have been done. Whether it happened 10 billion years ago, or last week it does not matter. They are different questions with different answers. Another thought about this whole thing. The Hebrew word for Adam does not refer to a single person. The word Adam in Hebrew is used to refer to "humans" as in all humans. It is plural. Wikipedia says something like this in its description of Adam and Eve. There is my 2 cents worth.
well ,i accept your beliefs in the bible, but i used to believe in evolution myself, until i started research on it, and lets just say i now believe every story in the bible should be taken literally, no where in the bible does it say for it not to be taken literally
You poor poor man. You are the kind of guy who doesn't "believe in" stem cells because somebody told you it was evil. People quote the Bible every day in order to steer the mindless sheep that will follow. You say that you don't "believe in" evolution. What is it about evolution that you don't believe in? Evolution isn't a faith. Evolution isn't anti-god anti-the bible anti-religion or anti-anything. Do you believe in evolution of animals, but not the evolution of man? Do you simply not believe that man has evolved over the years from being a slightly different creature? Certainly, it's viable to say that man has not evolved from a simple single celled organism through a series of physical metamorphises (microbe-fish-walking fish-four legged creature-chimpanzee-missing link-human) into a two legged intelligent creature. There never has been any evidence to support that kind of a chain, although there certainly hasn't been anything out there that blatently disproves this series of events either. To say that evolution does not occur is simply ignorant. It is observable in countless capacities all around the world, throughout our environment. To rely on "faith in God" to disspell evolution quite simply is an ignorant mans way of shunning something that is too complex for him to think about. To take everything in the Bible literally is to rely on every translation of every text made in the last several thousand years to be accurate and literal. That's a problematic proposition in and of itself. God did not write the Bible. Man wrote the Bible. The men who wrote it were no more a reliable source of information than you or I. They were fallable, they were corruptable, they were driven by more than just the writing of the text. I'm not trying to "disspell the bible" or anything like that, believe me. I'm just pointing out that taking everything in the bible literally is just plain silly. If it were meant that way, or even if the popular opinion was to take it that way, I couldn't go into any of a thousand Christian bookstores to buy an interpretation of any number of bible passages. Sunday sermons would simply be readings without any commentary. There would be no Evangelism TV.
I'm half monkey/half human. My brain is 100% monkey! My intelligence is 100% frog. I come from the planet Zeekois.
Actually I was told the word Adam is the punciation of a Hebrew word that means "red dirt". As in what he was made of, as per the bible. later, tom
Before you start swinging broadly painting all of us, the issue isn't stem cells in the news, it's embryonic stem cells. Truth being, from this lay person, the best source of genetic material that matches the recipient is the recipient. (get it ) . So the best source of stem cells for the recipient is still the recipient. Stem Cell research needs to focus on using the recipients biological material for research. It's a money issue, for a 100 bucks they can get tons of eggs off poor college girls that doesn't know they don't get replaced ever. It's more expensive to do stem cell research by getting them from real life people, and model testing to real world requirements. It's a money issue, the medical community still makes money even with failed organ transplants, they do it again, again, and again charging you each time. So, for some of us, we want real answers with stem cell research not companies lining their pockets with profits from 'cheaper' research, and inaccurate testing. So, please don't beat us all up. tom
You are a sham, if you were even on ounce a faith believer you won't be promoting your theories and bothering people, you would be a speaker of the truth and fellowshipping with us. I call you out, false prophet! I'm even tempted to red rep you too. tom
Adam + Eve Cain and Able So who would the people who came across Cain and wanted to kill him be if Adam and Eve were the only humans on Earth apart from their sons, Cain and Able (deceased, killed by Cain)??
If I remember right, it was Cain that put forth he was a dead man(others would kill him) and God placed mark of protection on him. tom
Yeah, I know. The point is ... if Adam and Eve had two sons called Cain and Able, and Adam and Eve were the first / only humans on Earth, who were the others Cain was referring to? Ergo, Adam and Eve were not the first / only humans on Earth.