Evolution

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

The story of Noah? According to Wikipedia, it reached its current state in the 4000's BC, which of course means it was recorded before that time, as it came from two 'quasi-independent' sources.

Got a link on that??? 'cause if I remember correctly most biblical "scholars" claim the earth is only 4000ish years old... which puts 4000BC 2000 years before creation.

MacLeod

The Bible was written about 1500 BC. The story of Gilgamesh was written in 2700 BC. Hence the Gilgamesh story predates Noah by over a thousand years!

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

And how in the world do you figure that? The moral atheist is only obeying, at best, half of God's commands, and none in spirit and in truth. That ain't looking too good for him.

no gods before me, no idols, no misuse of the name, sabbath day, honor father & mother, no murder, no adultry, no stealing, no coveting, no lying.... So if you're lazy on sundays and don't swear, you're good on everything.

Or forget the old testament and roll with love thy neighbor as thyself. Check.

MacLeod

unc2701 wrote:

As an aside, my respect for Macleod is skyrocketing.

Hmmm. Maybe Im on the wrong side after all!

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

A very quick search on google brought up some dates for the two stories. First I googled Gilgamesh. Supposedly written down about 2700BC. The story of Noah? According to Wikipedia, it reached its current state in the 4000's BC, which of course means it was recorded before that time, as it came from two 'quasi-independent' sources.

and here we go... I was wrong about the "scholars".... they say 6000 years, but according to this:
http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm

there's 1600ish years between creation & the flood. Not that I really buy into that, but you can't have it both ways.... yeah, so I'm officially calling **** on your 4000BC.

And with that I'm out. Good night all.

unc2701

MacLeod wrote:

Hmmm. Maybe Im on the wrong side after all!

yeah, its starting to freak me out, too. :rolleyes:

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

Got a link on that??? 'cause if I remember correctly most biblical "scholars" claim the earth is only 4000ish years old... which puts 4000BC 2000 years before creation.

Here's the link. And the excerpt:

According to the predominant view in postmodern textual criticism—the documentary hypothesis—the Ark story told in Genesis is based on two originally quasi-independent sources, and did not reach its present form until the 5th century BC.

I personally don't know what Christians believe the earth to be only 4000 years old. I would go with around maybe as far back as around 5000BC, then 2000, so you've got about 7000 years old. But, admittedly, that's about as old as any Christian will allow for. There are several different thoughts on the earth's age.

MacLeod wrote:

The Bible was written about 1500 BC. The story of Gilgamesh was written in 2700 BC. Hence the Gilgamesh story predates Noah by over a thousand years!

Says who?

unc2701 wrote:

no gods before me, no idols, no misuse of the name, sabbath day, honor father & mother, no murder, no adultry, no stealing, no coveting, no lying.... So if you're lazy on sundays and don't swear, you're good on everything.

Or forget the old testament and roll with love thy neighbor as thyself. Check.

You missed almost the whole of my point. I said you're barely covering half the commands. If you're not a believe, then do you have a fervent prayer life? Do you daily seek to walk by His side? Do you actively spread His word? Probably not. And in what spirit do you obey the commands you do obey? Do you do them in humble submission to an all-powerful god? Probably not.

Really doesn't sound like such a personn would be too pleasing in the Lord's sight.

schwarcw

I just cranked up some Black Sabbath

schwarcw

Masters of Reality!:D

MacLeod

audiobliss wrote:

Says who?

http://www.carm.org/bible/biblewhen.htm

http://www.gotquestions.org/Book-of-Genesis.html

http://net.bible.org/dictionary.php?word=Genesis

There are 3 links for ya from Christian websites that state when the Bible, namely Genesis, was written. Around 1500 BC.

George Grand

Man, we have to stop at quoting scripture and stuff. We're REALLY not supposed to be discussing this.

audiobliss

I'm pretty sure we haven't quoted Scripture yet.

MacLeod

...for thou shalt not stay up later than 10:30 when ye has to rise early and deliver thy kegs to thy bars.

-Austin 3:16

Nighty night!

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

According to the predominant view in postmodern textual criticism—the documentary hypothesis—the Ark story told in Genesis is based on two originally quasi-independent sources, and did not reach its present form until the 5th century BC.

Uh, i though i was done for the night. 5th century doesn't equal 4000BC, dude.

As for the commandments, maybe you should read the bible. There's the ten old testament ones and the one and only one given by christ... which is what I listed off.

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

Uh, i though i was done for the night. 5th century doesn't equal 4000BC, dude.

Drrrr. Major brain ****. I need to stop for the night.

unc2701 wrote:

As for the commandments, maybe you should read the bible. There's the ten old testament ones and the one and only one given by christ... which is what I listed off.

You shouldn't quote the Bible so authoritatively when you haven't read/don't understand any of the New Testament. You keep ignoring this whole 'in spirit and in truth' thing. And the whole rest of the idea of serving God. It's not just living a 'good' life, as defined as man. If so, there wouldn't be any need for Christianity. There's more to it.

heiney9

This is certainly the most entertaining thread I've read in a long time. It's all blah..blah...blah..blah...blah....blah...blah...blah...blah, because there are so many quoteable POV's from so many esteemed scholars from all different camps, there is no right answer.

Point-Counter Point.......Jane you ignorant ****.........

H9

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

You shouldn't quote the Bible so authoritatively when you haven't read/don't understand any of the New Testament. You keep ignoring this whole 'in spirit and in truth' thing. And the whole rest of the idea of serving God. It's not just living a 'good' life, as defined as man. If so, there wouldn't be any need for Christianity. There's more to it.

Ahh, see I spent my formative years as a catholic. I know the New testament quite well... we just don't buy into this faith & faith alone ****.

and you'll note that 1)I don't really seem to think that there is a need for christianity and 2)Christ didn't seem too hot on the idea either.

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

Ahh, see I spent my formative years as a catholic. I know the New testament quite well... we just don't buy into this faith & faith alone ****.

Ok, no one's mentioned anything about 'salvation by faith alone'. I don't see any evidence of that in the Bible. And I can't believe I just heard a Catholic say they don't believe it, either.

unc2701 wrote:

and you'll note that 1)I don't really seem to think that there is a need for christianity and 2)Christ didn't seem too hot on the idea either.

Now that's very intersting. Perhaps intersting isn't the word I'm really looking for...but I'll stick with it...

unc2701

audiobliss wrote:

Ok, no one's mentioned anything about 'salvation by faith alone'. I don't see any evidence of that in the Bible. And I can't believe I just heard a Catholic say they don't believe it, either.

Protestants! Martin Luther! *sigh*

Edited: lost cause.

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

Edited: lost cause.

Whao, you had a cause?

unc2701

To inspire you to seek education in the faith you profess to follow.

Then I realized that I don't care and you're not interested.


And to all a good night. Seriously, this time.

audiobliss

unc2701 wrote:

To inspire you to seek education in the faith you profess to follow.

Then I realized that I don't care and you're not interested.


And to all a good night. Seriously, this time.

Well, thanks for telling me I have no interest in the faith I've just spent my evening arguing for.

Airplay355

Guys chill out before we kill this convo...

I have a question.

I don't really know the story of genesis, but isn't that when God created the world? Then populated it with adam and then eve? 6 days and he rested on the 7th right?

Well that's all good and dandy but where'd dinosaurs come from? Where'd neanderthals come from? Trilobytes? Virus's?

All part of God's creation?

Maybe I have my genesis story wrong though...set me straight.

**** guys stop trying to convince eachother of stuff lol, no1 is gonna change their mind here, no use getting mad abot it.

brettw22

Few things I've come to realize:

1. I'm ECSTATIC that I wasn't ever alive when some 4000 pound whale was upright walkin around on land.........that would freak me the **** out.

2. It's humorous to see someone argue against something with basically a fingers in the ear approach............

cmy330go

Airplay355 wrote:

......Well that's all good and dandy but where'd dinosaurs come from? Where'd neanderthals come from? Trilobytes? Virus's?

All part of God's creation?.....

Most likely during the 5th or 6th day (creative period). This is when God it said to have created all living creatures. Of course dinosaurs are never mentioned by name in the Bible. However the Bible does mention "great sea creatures" which could have included dinosaurs since they are reptile like. Also in some translations there is an old Greek word used that translates "dragon". As we know dragons to be mythical, it is thought that writers of that time may have used this word in reference to dinosaurs in an atempt to give these already extinct mammoth creatures a mythical tone.

cmy330go

unc2701 wrote:

......1)I don't really seem to think that there is a need for christianity and 2)Christ didn't seem too hot on the idea either.....

That depends on your definition of Christianity. If by Christianity you mean the worshiping of Christ, then you're right. Jesus never wanted his followers to worship him, but rather worship his father (God). Granted he was the perfect model to follow in worshiping God, however he always gave credit for what he was able to do to God.

PolkThug

audiobliss wrote:

If macro-evolution were true, and there really have been all these changes, or 'evolutions' in different animals, then where are the fossils of animals during the change? There aren't any. Boom. Your theory just took a big hit.

Its happening right now, and sometimes the changes aren't gradual. For instance, my parents and my grandparents all had 4 wisdom teeth. I only had 2. There were no "mini" wisdom teeth or "half teeth", the change was sudden from 4 in the previous generation to me with 2. So, it is indeed possible that maybe future generation from my line won't have any some day. You can call it evolution/adaptation/mutation or whatever you want, but the bottom line is that my blueprint is different. Living things make changes over time and either the change works and they survive and pass it on, or they don't.

Also, if evolution doesn't exist, then I guess we only need one antibiotic.

audiobliss

Well, there are several different types of evolution, and I'm talking about the grander, macro-evolution needed to explain the change from ape to man, for instance.

I would think that your example of wisdom teeth comes down to genes and chromosomes passed down from you parents, just like that which determines your eye color, etc.

cmy330go

PolkThug wrote:

Its happening right now, and sometimes the changes aren't gradual. For instance, my parents and my grandparents all had 4 wisdom teeth. I only had 2. There were no "mini" wisdom teeth or "half teeth", the change was sudden from 4 in the previous generation to me with 2. So, it is indeed possible that maybe future generation from my line won't have any some day. You can call it evolution/adaptation/mutation or whatever you want, but the bottom line is that my blueprint is different. Living things make changes over time and either the change works and they survive and pass it on, or they don't.

Also, if evolution doesn't exist, then I guess we only need one antibiotic.

I wouldn't necessarily call situations like that "evolution". As I mentioned before, mankind is currently in an imperfect state, and as we continue to reproduce we gradually become more and more imperfect. Once again....copy of a copy etc.

I guess to some extent it does depend on your personal definition of evolution. If by evolution you mean change in general, then I don't disagree. But to say that humans or animals evolve by growing extra limbs or the like in order to adapt to environment, or even grow into other species I would have to disagree. Even many "scientists" have acknowledge that changes that happened within a species over time rarely ever helped them.

In regards to the antibiotics comment....I really think that is simply due to the immune system doing it's job of ridding the body of foreign substances.

EDIT: As a side note. I think it is pretty cool that this conversation has remained relatively civil. Hopefully we can keep it up.:)

PolkThug

If anybody wants to learn more about origins of Christian parables/stories/mythology, just lookup the mythology that precedes it, ie Dionysus and Mithra. By the time JC turned water into wine, it was old hat.