Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-25-2019 3:32 PM
28 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,729 Year: 9,765/19,786 Month: 2,187/2,119 Week: 223/724 Day: 62/93 Hour: 2/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1112131415
16
Author Topic:   Adam was created on the 3rd day
graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3127 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 226 of 233 (548079)
02-25-2010 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by doctrbill
02-24-2010 8:55 PM


Re: FACT versus FANTASY
That and the fact that your Bible asserts it had not rained, leads me to believe that you need further study.

It only says that because the ground is where all the water started. It's not going to stay in the soil but will evaporate or go deeper in the soil. The mist went up from the ground and that is what started the hydrology cycle. You need just extrapolate from the scripture based on basic principles if hydrology and irrigation - evaporation, rain, runoff, rivers, irrigation. I am comfortable with the way it reads.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by doctrbill, posted 02-24-2010 8:55 PM doctrbill has acknowledged this reply

    
graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3127 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 227 of 233 (548080)
02-25-2010 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by greyseal
02-25-2010 10:15 AM


Re: evolution is a fact - abiogenesis is a fact.
there's plenty of proof for evolution, and we know abiogenesis occured.

Maybe evolution is not the word I am looking for sense it is such a general term. The idea that humans evolved from other animals? Abiogenesis is certain in that Adam was created from the ground.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by greyseal, posted 02-25-2010 10:15 AM greyseal has not yet responded

    
adelpit346
Junior Member (Idle past 3271 days)
Posts: 11
Joined: 04-05-2010


Message 228 of 233 (553795)
04-05-2010 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by graft2vine
07-28-2006 7:28 PM


Spam

Edited by AdminSlev, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by graft2vine, posted 07-28-2006 7:28 PM graft2vine has not yet responded

    
anthonylau 
Suspended Junior Member (Idle past 3259 days)
Posts: 20
Joined: 04-24-2010


Message 229 of 233 (557236)
04-24-2010 12:48 AM


spam deletion

Edited by AdminAsgara, : spam deletion


    
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 230 of 233 (581689)
09-16-2010 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by doctrbill
02-24-2010 8:55 PM


Re: FACT versus FANTASY
doctrbill writes:

And if that mist supplied moisture enough then why was a river needed for irrigation?

Hi Doctrbill. Nice to see you're still around; since Jan/2001.

Perhaps the river irrigation was to come down the line after the sin/curse when Adam would have to till the land etc. Perhaps for certain crops more water than the mist afforded would be beneficial for a good yield.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by doctrbill, posted 02-24-2010 8:55 PM doctrbill has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by doctrbill, posted 09-17-2010 10:18 AM Buzsaw has responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 936 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 231 of 233 (581744)
09-17-2010 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by Buzsaw
09-16-2010 11:15 PM


Re: FACT versus FANTASY
Hi Buzz,

I see you are hanging in there as well.

Buzz writes:

Perhaps the river irrigation was to come down the line after the sin/curse when Adam would have to till the land etc. Perhaps for certain crops more water than the mist afforded would be beneficial for a good yield.

Two problems I see with this answer, Buzz. They are the same two problems stated in verse five (vs. 5):

1) - Nothing is growing "because" it hasn't rained. - If the mist had provided adequate soil moisture then surely something would have been growing. And,

2) - There is no one to "till" (work, cultivate) the soil. - The man was created in the first place because "there was not a man to till the ground." In fact, these people were brought in "to dress the garden and keep it." (vs. 15).

One cannot keep a garden without working the soil. It is interesting to note (and I had not seen this before now) that the Hebrew term 'abad - translated "till" in verse 5 is translated "dress" in verse 15. Indeed, some modern versions read:

"to till it" (NRSV);
"to work it" (NIV);
"to cultivate it" (NASB).

You will note that both the "mist" and the "irrigation" are in place before the fall (vs. 10).

Hope this answers your question.


Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Buzsaw, posted 09-16-2010 11:15 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by Buzsaw, posted 09-17-2010 10:27 PM doctrbill has responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 232 of 233 (581881)
09-17-2010 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 231 by doctrbill
09-17-2010 10:18 AM


Re: FACT versus FANTASY
One must read what led up to this ambiguous statement in order to explain it.

ASV verse 4:

These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.

In context, the statement in question aluded to the timeframe of just before day three when there was no sun and moon, etc and before the plants were made. Chapter one is the only consistently sequential record of creation.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by doctrbill, posted 09-17-2010 10:18 AM doctrbill has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by doctrbill, posted 09-17-2010 11:22 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 936 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 233 of 233 (581889)
09-17-2010 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by Buzsaw
09-17-2010 10:27 PM


Re: FACT versus FANTASY
Buzsaw writes:

In context, the statement in question aluded to the timeframe of just before day three when there was no sun and moon, etc and before the plants were made. Chapter one is the only consistently sequential record of creation.

And yet, you wish the second narrative to agree with the first. If the second narrative is sequentially inconsistent (inconsistent with narrative one) then what makes you think that narrative one is the "consistently sequential...record." What makes you think the man was made before the woman? Because the story has a flow to it, that's why. God made the man and then the animals and brought the animals to the man to see what he would call them. After surveying and naming all the animals, the man found no mate among them. Then the woman was made; after the man; after the animals. So, actually, the sequence of narrative two IS consistent with the story of narrative two. It is NOT consistent with the story of narrative one.

Narrative one; the narrative you say is "the only consistently sequential record of creation" has plants appearing on day three, birds appearing on day five, and animals including humans (male and female) on day six.

Telling the story as if the man appears before the plants, before the birds, before the other animals and well ahead of woman is no accident but is important to the story in narrative two. You cannot reorder the events of narrative two without ruining the story told there; and the order of those events is entirely different from what you have called "the only consistently sequential record of creation," i.e. narrative one.

BTW, The woman of narrative 2 is made NOT by speaking her into existence simultaneously with the man, as depicted in narrative 1, but rather by cloning her, sometime after, from a surgically removed piece of the man. This is not a random and irrelevant reordering of events but a purposeful and independent description of a very different idea of origins. The fact that it does not mention fish or seas is on a par with the fact that it does not mention sun, moon, or stars. It's all about the land, the garden, the naked people, and the talking snake.

Narrative one sounds a bit like an evolution.

Narrative two sounds exactly like a fairy tale.


Theology is the science of Dominion.
- - - My God is your god's Boss - - -
This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Buzsaw, posted 09-17-2010 10:27 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1112131415
16
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019