My position explained

Rrhain,

quote:

---

Oh, lord...are you seriously claiming...If you argue this, you are...And of course, the problem with that is...And, of course, nobody...Your problem is that...Actually, all those things point to...The Bible says the exact opposite...Physically impossible. The world cannot be...Everything about the earth points to...

---

If you have all the answers, is it worth it for me to really respond?

quote:

---

Where in the creation story do you find humans and animals being created in different ways? I want chapter and verse.

---

This seems worthwhile for the edification of all. Notice first the creation of birds and see creatures:Gen 1:20 And God said, "Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens."
Gen 1:21 So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.""GOD CREATED..."Notice God then makes ground animals. He does not say, "Let some of the sea creatures evolve into land creatures. Rather, He makes them distinctly.Gen 1:24 And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds--livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good."Let the earth bring forth..." not "Let other creatures bring forth..."Then we see man is of different stuff.Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.Man and only man is created "in our image," that is, the image of God.Then we see in Chapter 2 of Genesis that Man gets their own chapter.Gen 2:5 When no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up--for the LORD God had not caused it to rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground,
Gen 2:6 and a mist was going up from the land and was watering the whole face of the ground--
Gen 2:7 then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.Notice carefully please that biological plant life has not yet even grown when God makes man. Rather, the seeds have been planted but have not grown. So, Perhaps there were billions of years of animals evolving without any plants around, but I doubt it. Notice also that God Makes man by breathing into his nostrils. He does not do this to animals.And, I think the Apostle Paul really states the obvious when he says:1Co 15:39 For not all flesh is the same, but there is one kind for humans, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish.

If this was all you had to offer, probably not.

How is this obvious? We transplant pig hearts into humans. We eat birds, animals, and fish. Clearly we're all of the same "kind" of flesh, or else these compatibilities would not exist.Yeah, I mean, poultry, beef, and grouper all taste different when you cook them. Duh. But you ignore the fact that these things are fundamentally more alike than they are different.That's really why evolution is so compelling as a theory; the deeper you study organisms, the more you realize that they're so fundamentally the same.

Maestro232 responds to me:

quote:

---

If you have all the answers, is it worth it for me to really respond?

---

Do you have something to contribute other than baseless assertion? I can back up everything I said. What do you have?I can easily be wrong, but you're going to have to show me. Show me how Noah managed to get animals that are unique to Australia and that cannot swim all the way across the Indian Ocean to the Middle East in order to acquire passage on a boat which could not provide the food they would require to eat (that food also being unique to Australia) and then returned back to Australia, not leaving a single trace of their existence in their travels.Show me how such a reduced population as having only two of every "unclean" animal (Gen 7:2) managed to provide enough genetic diversity to repopulate the entire planet.Find me the ancient writings where keepers of animals notice that they keep on getting new breeds of animal with every single generation.I even asked you a trivially simple question which you failed to even bother to respond to:Where in the creation story do you find humans and animals being created in different ways?I want chapter and verse.Forget the poring through biology journals, science abstracts, and archaeological publications. Just go through the Bible and tell me where in Genesis it describes how god did it and that the way god did it for animals was different than the way god did it for humans.Chapter and verse, please.Strange how in this discussion between us regarding what the Bible says, I've been the only one actually quoting it.Now, if you want to simply invoke magic and say, "It was a miracle," then just get off your duff and say it. Don't pretend that there is any actual scientific evidence for your claims because that is the point behind magic: It defies science. God, being god, can do anything. There is no reason not to think that god created the entire universe exactly as it is precisely two seconds ago with all of our memories of our lives preloaded into our consciousness. And there's absolutely no way to contradict it. God can do anything, remember?So come out with it. Where is your evidence? "The Bible says so" is not evidence about anything other than what the Bible says.It's time for you to be specific.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Maestro232 responds to me:

quote:

---

Notice God then makes ground animals. He does not say, "Let some of the sea creatures evolve into land creatures. Rather, He makes them distinctly.

---

Irrelevant.The question put to you is where you can find in the Bible a passage that shows how the method god uses to create humans is different from the method used to create animals. The claim is that humans are somehow "different" from animals. That the way humans came into being was unique compared to the way animals were.

quote:

---

Then we see man is of different stuff.

---

No, we don't. I still see humans being made from the ground (Gen 2:7, Gen 3:19) and animals being made from the ground (Gen 1:24, Gen 2:19).So where can we conclude that humans and animals were made in any different manner? You might be able to make a case that water-living animals/birds were made differently from land animals/humans since the former were made from the water (Gen 1:20) while the others were made from the ground (Gen 1:24, Gen 2:7), but you haven't explained how humans are any different than cattle in being made from the ground.

quote:

---

Then we see in Chapter 2 of Genesis that Man gets their own chapter.

---

No, the animals are there with humans, too.Genesis 2:19: And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.So how is this any different from the creation of Adam?Genesis 2:7: And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.What do you think "out of the ground" means and why is it different when god does it to Adam compared to when god does it to the other animals?

quote:

---

Notice carefully please that biological plant life has not yet even grown when God makes man.

---

In direct contradiction to Genesis 1 where the plants were made days before humans. But, this isn't a discusson about the blatant contradictions between Gen 1 and Gen 2. This is a discussion about humans being created differently from other animals.Genesis 1 is amazingly vague about the creation of humans. It doesn't say anything about it other than god did it. But Genesis 2 is quite specific: Humans are made from the ground. Genesis 3 has god reminding Adam of this fact. Out of dust he was made and to dust he shall return.So if animals were made from the ground and humans were made from the ground, in what way are humans different from other animals due to the way they were created?

quote:

---

Rather, the seeds have been planted but have not grown.

---

Incorrect. The Bible explicitly states that not even this has happened:Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.What do you think "before it was in the earth" means? What do you think "not a man to till the ground" means?Too, the Bible directly states that it was god who planted the garden:Genesis 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.This is after the creation of Adam. Those seeds had not been planted because god hadn't planted them yet.

quote:

---

So, Perhaps there were billions of years of animals evolving without any plants around, but I doubt it.

---

Since most animals are herbivores, I would certainly hope you would doubt it. But seeing as how the Bible directly says that plants were created before animals (both Gen 1 and Gen 2), then we cannot accept the reverse as a possibility.

quote:

---

Notice also that God Makes man by breathing into his nostrils. He does not do this to animals.

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you? Did you even bother to read my post before responding?Genesis 7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.Are you saying that animals are not included in the "all"?

quote:

---

And, I think the Apostle Paul really states the obvious when he says:

---

Paul is irrelevant. We are talking about Genesis.That said, you are misinterpreting 1 Corinthians. Let's take a look at the context in which it was said, shall we?1 Corinthians: 15:38: But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.15:39: All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.It would seem that Paul is talking about the physical shape of the body, not the spiritual foundations by which they were created.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

You know something? You actually lay down an argument quite well.
I as a beliver must admit that I believe in magic.
There. I've said it. I've seen it. And I believe it.
I need to quote no Bible to explain myself. If I can pass the local mental health test, my character is my only evidence!
Any words from the Maestro?

Okay, I am not going to debate whether what you saw was magick or not, but I am curious what it was and how it ties into knowing (from this) that the Bible is accurate with regard to biogenesis and speciation, as well as that humans were certainly created separately/differently than other animals?This message has been edited by holmes, 12-26-2004 04:29 AM

What I mean is that I believe in the supernatural as described in the Bible.The Bible shows God communicating with men, but shows no connection with the animals. Since men wrote the book, this much is obvious. Perhaps dolphins have an agreement among themselves of who God is...they most certainly know that man is not their supreme source!Genesis most certainly was written by ancient humans who did not write the book merely to pass time or create a story. It seems that these people did have a basis for this writing. A story passed down that was so reverant and special that it was retold and retold again.
I think that the book leaves room for human speculation, based on the understanding of that time. These authors may have had a divine experience, but they were no superbeings. They had limited experience and called it as they saw it.I don't believe that the fact that they wrote it as they saw it means that they were without a divine imparted motive. Call it a belief and not a fact, but I believe that God and man interacted. If we take the story of Noah as an allegory with a truth behind it, God must have interacted with all of the animals that came to this boat as well.Eight people could not have ran to and fro and coaxed that many animals anywhere. Were not Tigers and Lions ferocious by that time?
The story was perhaps NOT literally true as a scientific fact yet WAS literally true as a human/divine interactive lesson. What do we learn? Listen to God and don't be wise in your own eyes.This message has been edited by Phatboy, 12-28-2004 23:32 AM

---

How is this different from any other faith/religion? But the only way people "listen to God" is to either listen to a voice they hear within their own head, or to what other people say God is telling them.How can one differentiate when one is actually receiving a message from God, from just being wise in one's own eyes, since he has yet to show up in person to deliver a concrete and objectively understood message?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Phatboy responds to me:

quote:

---

There. I've said it. I've seen it. And I believe it.

---

You saw the flood?You're more than four thousand years old? You saw the creation of humans? You're at least six thousand years old? You're not human since if you saw the creation of humans, you couldn't actually be human, yourself.Do not confuse your spiritual moment that happened after those events with the actual events, themselves.And in the end, if you are going to invoke magic, then stop trying to call it science. Be honest and say you claim this to be true despite what all the evidence says, not because of it.

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Phatboy responds to me:

quote:

---

The Bible shows God communicating with men, but shows no connection with the animals.

---

And yet, god speaks to a man through an animal.Let's not forget, the serpent was an animal. It, like humans, was cursed.Have you considered the possibility that the reason god doesn't bother too much with the animals is because they haven't done anything wrong?

quote:

---

Genesis most certainly was written by ancient humans who did not write the book merely to pass time or create a story.

---

Neither was the Iliad nor the Odyssey. Therefore, they must be true. Zeus lives.

quote:

---

If we take the story of Noah as an allegory with a truth behind it, God must have interacted with all of the animals that came to this boat as well.

---

Incorrect. The Bible directly contradicts this. Instead, god tells Noah to gather them. God does gather them himself. Even if the story of Noah is supposed to be a parable, you cannot contradict the direct narrative.

quote:

---

The story was perhaps NOT literally true as a scientific fact yet WAS literally true as a human/divine interactive lesson.

---

That makes no sense. Something cannot be literally true and not a fact. Lessons don't have to come from things that are literally true (what would be the point of all of Jesus' parables?) but if something is literally true, then it is a fact.You need to consider the possibility that it isn't true at all. Oh, the lesson behind the story might have worth, but that doesn't make the events true.Jesus understood this. Why don't you?

---

Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!