# Snakes and creation.



## SemperFiDawg (Sep 8, 2021)

Don't know why I was thinking about this, but you take the Diamondback.  Those designs are a perfectly symmetrical geometric 'diamond'.   







and then 





repeating bands..........in the same sequence.  

I look at these two little examples and think, "How can anyone believe this just.......happened.


----------



## Mars (Sep 8, 2021)

Or the bombardier beetle.

There are millions of great examples God's creation. The human brain being one of the most amazing


----------



## furtaker (Sep 8, 2021)

Mars said:


> Or the bombardier beetle.View attachment 1103266
> 
> There are millions of great examples God's creation. The human brain being one of the most amazing


And the human eye.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 8, 2021)

"Snakes and Creation" sounds like the name of a folk singing duo! 
Speaking of snakes & creation, let's take something from Genesis that confuses me:
when the serpent tricked Adam & Eve he was forever cursed to crawl on his belly eating dust. Fair enough, but how did the serpent get around_ before _he was forced to crawl?  Haven't serpents _always_ crawled?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 8, 2021)

Mars said:


> Or the bombardier beetle.View attachment 1103266
> 
> There are millions of great examples God's creation. The human brain being one of the most amazing


 
 the next time you start getting too gassy, you can just blame it on a bombardier beetle infestation!


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 8, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I look at these two little examples and think, "How can anyone believe this just.......happened.


Would belief in it 'just happening' require any faith?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 8, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> Would belief in it 'just happening' require any faith?


 
good question! IMHO just because the universe is incredibly complex and amazing that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be planned out ahead of time. We as humans just don't understand all the processes & mechanisms that make the universe tick. 

Fire seemed like something supernatural to early hominids. Then they figured out how to make & harness fire and the "supernatural" moved to something else beyond their comprehension. When they figured that new thing out, the supernatural moved further away. No human can ever know the reasons for everything, but that doesn't mean all humans have the need to assume that a higher consciousness is behind whatever they don't understand.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Sep 8, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> "Snakes and Creation" sounds like the name of a folk singing duo!
> Speaking of snakes & creation, let's take something from Genesis that confuses me:
> when the serpent tricked Adam & Eve he was forever cursed to crawl on his belly eating dust. Fair enough, but how did the serpent get around_ before _he was forced to crawl?  Haven't serpents _always_ crawled?



Uber


----------



## bullethead (Sep 8, 2021)

Has anyone ever heard of evolution where species adapt to their needs in order to survive? It takes a very long time for it to happen. Evolution is a process. It doesn't just happen or happen quickly.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Sep 8, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Has anyone ever heard of evolution where species adapt to their needs in order to survive? It takes a very long time for it to happen. Evolution is a process. It doesn't just happen or happen quickly.



Comorants of Galapagos have gone flightless. They swim and catch food in the shallows so have no need of wings living on these remote islands. They have been flightless for the time of their discovery. They do have stubby wings matching any other bird’s construct.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 9, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Don't know why I was thinking about this, but you take the Diamondback.  Those designs are a perfectly symmetrical geometric 'diamond'.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What about animals etc. with non symmetrical shapes or non repeating color bands or of only one color..... did they just..... happen? Or? 
Wouldnt they be a counter point to your observation? Different god made those? The Christian god wasnt feeling very artistic with them? Ran out of crayons?


> Experts now recognize that coloration patterns and common mnemonics which people use to identify the deadly coral snake are occasionally inconsistent. While any North American snake exhibiting the coral snake's color banding pattern will almost certainly in fact be a coral snake (with one exception), there are coral snakes in other parts of the world which are colored differently.


Inconsistent? Colored differently? How could that be? Are they the Atheists of the coral snake world?


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 9, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> ...._We as humans just don't understand all the processes & mechanisms that make the universe tick...._


: ) 4 sure.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 9, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> Would belief in it 'just happening' require any faith?



Not if it's a hypothesis.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 9, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> What about animals etc. with non symmetrical shapes or non repeating color bands or of only one color..... did they just..... happen? Or?
> Wouldnt they be a counter point to your observation? Different god made those? The Christian god wasnt feeling very artistic with them? Ran out of crayons?
> 
> Inconsistent? Colored differently? How could that be? Are they the Atheists of the coral snake world?



The odds of the lottery coming out 1,2,3,4,5,6 are the same as any other combination of numbers.  It's only interesting because we have imposed meaning on the order of those numbers.  They're just random shapes on ping pong balls.

If they used letters, imagine what they might spell.  Imagine what people would make of it.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 9, 2021)

Ruger#3 said:


> Comorants of Galapagos have gone flightless. They swim and catch food in the shallows so have no need of wings living on these remote islands. They have been flightless for the time of their discovery. They do have stubby wings matching any other bird’s construct.



basically "use it or lose it". They still might have the genes that would allow them to grow normal wings, but those genes aren't "expressed" because there's no more need for them to be. Nature doesn't waste energy.

That said research is showing that many species of living things - to include humans - have a lot of genes available that could be expressed & engaged (or repressed and go unused) but the environmental demand hasn't yet been put upon these genes, or a demand has lessened.

So in a nutshell nearly every living species has within it the potential to adapt & evolve a very wide variety of adaptations to environmental changes over a long enough time span. IMHO this explains why we have such an incredible (seemingly redundant) variety of different species that are almost exactly the same but with very slight variations.

Dozens of species of willow trees for example, all coming from a few or even a single species long ago. Species that evolved relatively recently are genetically very "close but no cigar" so they can naturally (occasionally) hybridize, normally producing a sterile tree.

But a willow tree will never hybridize with pine tree because genetically they are not even in the same ballpark genetically. And a pike and a musky can hybridize and produce a sterile "tiger musky" because they are genetically close. A pike and a catfish will never hybridize because they are just too different.

My point is evolution is real no matter whether we accept it or not and we can provide examples right here and now. That said perhaps evolution is "gods way" of ensuring that life in general can exist under a constantly changing environment. But the bible and other religious documents & guides certainly don't even so much as hint at such a mechanism because they were written by humans thousands of years ago when the scientific database/mindset was almost non-existent.

Some might say that the bible seems to be scientifically nonsensical because humans wouldn't have been able to understand anything complex anyway.
I disagree with that idea. Humans would indeed be able to grasp (if god had told them) the concept of the world being round and not flat, that the world is huge and contains millions of different species beyond camels, donkeys and rabbits and they had enough math skills to grasp that all these species would not fit on a wooden boat that - by the way - would be too big to even be seaworthy for more than ten minutes let alone weeks/months.

IMHO the bible is nonsensical to modern societies because the stories were told & written down by humans, for humans, at the level of understanding of the times in that region of the world.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Sep 9, 2021)

Anyone that has witnessed a mammal birth seeing a life move from nurtured by the female, clear it’s lungs of fluid and in an instant is air breathing and doesn’t see God’s hand is blind.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Clouds that look like an animal, state, country or literally "something " or patterns in toast that look like a Westernized Jesus must all be by design and the artistic capabilities of a higher artist that wants to reveal itself to humans through visual recognition. 
Or
The human mind has evolved to recognize patterns and shapes as a means of survival and the mind will assimilate a shape with a familiar shape to us that is already "recorded" in our memory.
Snakes had patterns which looked like geometric shapes long before humans coined the phrase.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 9, 2021)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Uber


 You win the internets today.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 9, 2021)

Ruger#3 said:


> Anyone that has witnessed a mammal birth seeing a life move from nurtured by the female, clear it’s lungs of fluid and in an instant is air breathing and doesn’t see God’s hand is blind.


So far in just this short thread we have geometric shapes = God, repeating colors = God, Beetles with gas = God, mammal birth = God.....
What do they all have in common?
If you believe in the Christian God and the Bible story... you see the Christian God.
Of course, if you believe in a different god, or no god... you dont.
Funny how that works.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Ruger#3 said:


> Anyone that has witnessed a mammal birth seeing a life move from nurtured by the female, clear it’s lungs of fluid and in an instant is air breathing and doesn’t see God’s hand is blind.


So if someone sees a different God's hand they are also correct?
Seeing something magnificent and something that is not easily understood gets a "god did it assumption"......why?


----------



## Ruger#3 (Sep 9, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> So far in just this short thread we have geometric shapes = God, repeating colors = God, Beetles with gas = God, mammal birth = God.....
> What do they all have in common?
> If you believe in the Christian God and the Bible story... you see the Christian God.
> Of course, if you believe in a different god, or no god... you dont.
> Funny how that works.



No disrespect intended, but no man created that process. A force beyond our comprehension is at work. For me that force is God, some folks label it nature.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Ruger#3 said:


> No disrespect intended, but no man created that process. A force beyond our comprehension is at work. For me that force is God, some folks label it nature.


Nobody is claiming a man created anything. But the claims that a god did it are made without a shred of evidence to show anything that backs that up, let alone a which specific  "god" is responsible.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 9, 2021)

Ruger#3 said:


> Anyone that has witnessed a mammal birth seeing a life move from nurtured by the female, clear it’s lungs of fluid and in an instant is air breathing and doesn’t see God’s hand is blind.



Call me Stevie Wonder then! There very well could be god's guiding hand in the millions of years old obviously successful birthing process, but that god and and the god of the bible/koran/vedas/torah/etc might be two different entities entirely. 

My point being the gods of organized religions seem to be "made up" by humans.
Lots of different versions of god because there are lots of different cultures and societies. Ultimately there is only one absolute truth in the universe, not different versions of it.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 9, 2021)

Ruger#3 said:


> No disrespect intended, but no man created that process. A force beyond our comprehension is at work. For me that force is God, some folks label it nature.





> For me that force is God


For you, thats fine. You see what you see.
But you went alot further than that.


> Anyone that has witnessed a mammal birth seeing a life move from nurtured by the female, clear it’s lungs of fluid and in an instant is air breathing and doesn’t see God’s hand is blind.


Im just pointing out that lots of visually capable people dont see the same thing.


----------



## Ruger#3 (Sep 9, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> For you, thats fine. You see what you see.
> But you went alot further than that.
> 
> Im just pointing out that lots of visually capable people dont see the same thing.



I appreciate you position but stand that those forces are supernatural and it’s difficult to grasp not seeing them.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Can anyone make the move from claims and assertions and show us why a deity is responsible and then show which specific deity is responsible?
I mean I can say the Flying Spaghetti Monster is responsible and I can assert how his powers are capable and his will is absolute and his actions are sovereign but it is all just claims and assertions without any substance to back it up. I can say look at an onion, if you cannot see that the FSM hand made that onion you are blind. But a statement like that has zero clout.
Who can back up their own FSM and then show us the details of how such a god is responsible?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 9, 2021)

Once upon a time, even trying this would be heresy, possibly under penalty of death.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 9, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> Call me Stevie Wonder then! There very well could be god's guiding hand in the millions of years old obviously successful birthing process, but that god and and the god of the bible/koran/vedas/torah/etc might be two different entities entirely.
> 
> My point being the gods of organized religions seem to be "made up" by humans.
> Lots of different versions of god because there are lots of different cultures and societies. Ultimately there is only one absolute truth in the universe, not different versions of it.


We think a lot alike. I believe in a higher power. I don't believe that it necessarily corresponds even remotely to any of the man-made organized religions which seem mainly to have the goal of controlling masses of people.  Or that it can even be understood by us. Or wants to be.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

I believe in creation by God of the Bible. I also believe that evolution is part of His creation and used for species to adapt.

We see evolution all around us daily.

That in mind, I don’t believe our earth is as old as science says, I do believe we’re older than most Christians think. If evolution is a process where something living adapts……..then ok, but, something created the first living - it didn’t adopt from nothing.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I believe in creation by God of the Bible. I also believe that evolution is part of His creation and used for species to adapt.
> 
> We see evolution all around us daily.
> 
> That in mind, I don’t believe our earth is as old as science says, I do believe we’re older than most Christians think. If evolution is a process where something living adapts……..then ok, but, something created the first living - it didn’t adopt from nothing.


So some animals, plants, humans etc were poofed into existence?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So some animals, plants, humans etc were poofed into existence?


However creation works. I assume that sounds as convincing as poof, here’s the first living thing - now adapt?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I believe in creation by God of the Bible. I also believe that evolution is part of His creation and used for species to adapt.
> 
> We see evolution all around us daily.
> 
> That in mind, I don’t believe our earth is as old as science says, I do believe we’re older than most Christians think. If evolution is a process where something living adapts……..then ok, but, something created the first living - it didn’t adopt from nothing.




They say the universe is 13 billion years old.  Do you know how they came to that conclusion?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So some animals, plants, humans etc were poofed into existence?



Might be some 'poofing' involved at some point, unless we redefine 'nothing'.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

ambush80 said:


> They say the universe is 13 billion years old.  Do you know how they came to that conclusion?



Initially, assumptions.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

ambush80 said:


> Might be some 'poofing' involved at some point, unless we redefine 'nothing'.


Is there anyone credible that makes the claim that something came from nothing?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Is there anyone credible that makes the claim that something came from nothing?


Evolution = something living adopts into something living. 

What’s the first living? Did it poof?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Evolution = something living adopts into something living.
> 
> What’s the first living? Did it poof?


Spotlight YOU are the next contestant on "It's Your Lucky Day"
I will start you in the right direction.
https://science.nasa.gov/solar-syst...rth-and-has-it-evolved-elsewhere-solar-system


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

But wait! There's More..
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/origsoflife_04


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Spotlight YOU are the next contestant on "It's Your Lucky Day"
> I will start you in the right direction.
> https://science.nasa.gov/solar-syst...rth-and-has-it-evolved-elsewhere-solar-system


I hate reading lol. But ok, I’m traveling home so I will read it when I get back to the office this evening.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I hate reading lol. But ok, I’m traveling home so I will read it when I get back to the office this evening.


And to be clear the links are a very basic outline with examples. The actual process is undoubtedly more in depth and takes amounts of time into account which is hard to comprehend.
The earth's conditions billions of years ago were not like they are today. The earth was being bombarded by objects and particles from the beginnings of the Universe constantly. Still is to lesser degrees.
And The Big Bang didn't happen and was done. It is still happening. The Universe is still expanding and the expansion is increasing in speed.

These subjects can be read, researched and studied for a lifetime. They are not a matter of "one day there was nothing and the next day a giraffe was standing in a field". There are answers that can be provided if a person really wants to research the science.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Spotlight YOU are the next contestant on "It's Your Lucky Day"
> I will start you in the right direction.
> https://science.nasa.gov/solar-syst...rth-and-has-it-evolved-elsewhere-solar-system





> What’s the first living? Did it poof?


This is where I’m at. 

From the link - 
“Understanding the processes that lead to life, however, is complicated by the actions of biology itself”

This question will never be answered, I realize that. I was just saying that in either creation or evolution, something had to “poof” to a living thing in order for evolution to work.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> But wait! There's More..
> https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/origsoflife_04


From the article. 

“All living things reproduce, copying their genetic material and passing it on to their offspring. Thus, the ability to copy the molecules that encode genetic information is a key step in the origin of life — without it, life could not exist. This ability *probably* first evolved in the form of an RNA self-replicator — an RNA molecule that could copy itself”

Only thing I’m pointing out is I’m not knocking evolution, but it’s no more of a concrete answer than creation is. Both require some form of “I believe”.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> This is where I’m at.
> 
> From the link -
> “Understanding the processes that lead to life, however, is complicated by the actions of biology itself”
> ...


Big difference in poofing vs particles mixing to allow life to happen.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> From the article.
> 
> “All living things reproduce, copying their genetic material and passing it on to their offspring. Thus, the ability to copy the molecules that encode genetic information is a key step in the origin of life — without it, life could not exist. This ability *probably* first evolved in the form of an RNA self-replicator — an RNA molecule that could copy itself”
> 
> Only thing I’m pointing out is I’m not knocking evolution, but it’s no more of a concrete answer than creation is. Both require some form of “I believe”.


Creation is the process which occurred to allow evolution to take place.
Where creation differs in science and religion is that Creation took billions of years in order for the proper elements to form to spawn life, then it took billions of more years for that life to adapt to live. In religion people think a great magician waived a wand and things as we see them today immediately existed.
Huge difference


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 9, 2021)

Who created God?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

The top link ties in with the bottom. 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK230211/

The process in this link lacks the earliest conditions of the earth and time as spoken about above.
https://www.livescience.com/3214-life-created-lab.html


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Initially, assumptions.




It's actually quite simple and something that you understand very well.  The Doppler Effect.  

Ever notice how a siren seems to get higher pitched when the fire engine gets closer?  That's the sound waves compressing.  Light does the same thing, it shifts from blue to red.  That shift can be measured and can tell you how far something is.  We know how fast light travels so when we look to the edge of the known universe we can see the red shift and thereby calculate how old that light is that's coming to us.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Is there anyone credible that makes the claim that something came from nothing?



Contemporary cosmologists speculate that even in a vacuum there's a 'potentiality' for a vibration.  That redefines the 'nothingness' of a vacuum and the 'somethingness' of a potentiality.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

ambush80 said:


> Contemporary cosmologists speculate that even in a vacuum there's a 'potentiality' for a vibration.  That redefines the 'nothingness' of a vacuum and the 'somethingness' of a potentiality.


The Quantum Theory stuff is fascinating and String Theory adds to it. Both elude to something still being there even though it seems like nothing.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...ientific-meanings-of-nothing/?sh=2ee289ca1a5f

https://www.livescience.com/28132-what-is-nothing-physicists-debate.html


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> Creation is the process which occurred to allow evolution to take place.
> Where creation differs in science and religion is that Creation took billions of years in order for the proper elements to form to spawn life, then it took billions of more years for that life to adapt to live. In religion people think a great magician waived a wand and things as we see them today immediately existed.
> Huge difference


I can see that point. I don’t know if Christians really believe all things were created the way we see them today. At least after getting in depth with them they acknowledge they can see some form of evolution at work. We have new species and crossed species pop up daily. Hard to deny evolution at work. The source behind that evolution for me is God. But that’s my belief.


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 9, 2021)

Snakes have forked tongues and on it more than enough has been said. And the fact that snakes can be dressed up in fancy patterns of haute-couture makes snakes an easy methaphor for human beings who are conniving (cons) as to their self interests at the expense of others. "You snake you!" said the weasel.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Who created God?


Stop


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 9, 2021)

Are potentialities ( as in potential vibrations in a vacuum) natural? Or just a figure of speech?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I can see that point. I don’t know if Christians really believe all things were created the way we see them today. At least after getting in depth with them they acknowledge they can see some form of evolution at work. We have new species and crossed species pop up daily. Hard to deny evolution at work. The source behind that evolution for me is God. But that’s my belief.


I understand what you are saying but doesn't that line of thought go directly against the bible?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I understand what you are saying but doesn't that line of thought go directly against the bible?


https://www.businessinsider.com/examples-of-evolution-happening-right-now-2015-2


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I understand what you are saying but doesn't that line of thought go directly against the bible?


ok I reread the other post. You said “Creation took billions of years in order for the proper elements to form to spawn life”

Based on that, yea you’re right, it goes against the Bible.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> https://www.businessinsider.com/examples-of-evolution-happening-right-now-2015-2


I wasn't questioning the modern evolution. Evolution constantly continues as needed.
I was questioning the 6 day creation where there is no room for the transitional fossils and the time it took for life to start.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 9, 2021)

bullethead said:


> I wasn't questioning the modern evolution. Evolution constantly continues as needed.
> I was questioning the 6 day creation where there is no room for the transitional fossils and the time it took for life to start.


Yea I gotta little crossed up focusing on seeing evolution at work / hard to deny evolution.


----------



## Baroque Brass (Sep 10, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Who created God?


I asked my very devout wife that question once. I got a blank stare in response.


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 10, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Yea I gotta little crossed up focusing on seeing evolution at work / hard to deny evolution.




How about that days in the creation accounts are thousands of yrs and so likewise one man, said first, is a thousand generations. That is the man Adam who was created by God was as ( similar) to the man created by God said Christian and so a man of many generations also, a man with his own beginning-creation just like Adam had? If this was the case then Genesis is an edited account of creation, adequate for its purpose, to which evolutionary changes ( as we understand them) need not be foreign.


In the beginning was "The Word" because the jigs that were to be man had no consciousness of the Devine. When man was created  was the day he was with the consciousness to know God or when he knew himself as a being to which God breathed life into his nostril.


"... the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being."

Note that man gets to be a living being here not from the natural push-pull of his thoracic muscles and so the air, but rather from "God's breath" which is apart of other creatures creation.  No mention of God's breath into the nostrils of animals for example.

Genesis is a highly edited account of creation. Its main focus is the spiritual nature of man. It is a condensed narrative of the day of creation and the separate creation of man perhaps. The editor's focus is mainly these two items which happen at the same time, possibly because man is at the day of his creation  able to apprehend from his  now unique perspective which is that he is able to know creation in general  and his creation separate. Man is walking with God.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 10, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> We think a lot alike. I believe in a higher power. I don't believe that it necessarily corresponds even remotely to any of the man-made organized religions which seem mainly to have the goal of controlling masses of people.  Or that it can even be understood by us. Or wants to be.


I think thats where alot of organized religions shoot themselves in the foot.
They present their god as this mystical, impossible to understand, incomprehensible entity...... and then proceed to tell you all about it, what it wants, thinks, does, expects from you etc.
Both cant be true at the same time.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 10, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> How about that days in the creation accounts are thousands of yrs and so likewise one man, said first, is a thousand generations. That is the man Adam who was created by God was as ( similar) to the man created by God said Christian and so a man of many generations also, a man with his own beginning-creation just like Adam had? If this was the case then Genesis is an edited account of creation, adequate for its purpose, to which evolutionary changes ( as we understand them) need not be foreign.
> 
> 
> In the beginning was "The Word" because the jigs that were to be man had no consciousness of the Devine. When man was created  was the day he was with the consciousness to know God or when he knew himself as a being to which God breathed life into his nostril.
> ...


So it took God 6,000 years to "create" and we are on our 2nd week according to God's timeline?
Neither is enough time to account for the evolutionary process we have been able to witness nor the scientific ways of measurement. 

Who did the "editing" in Genesis?


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 10, 2021)

Baroque Brass said:


> I asked my very devout wife that question once. I got a blank stare in response.


Typically you get the "He just always existed" response.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 10, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Typically you get the "He just always existed" response.


Yes.
Nothing is eternal, well except MY god. All that other stuff is preposterous.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 10, 2021)

There are 2 distinct types of evolution:
Micro = adaptation within a species.
Macro = change from 1 species to a whole nother species (aka, speciation).


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 10, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> How about that days in the creation accounts are thousands of yrs and so likewise one man, said first, is a thousand generations. That is the man Adam who was created by God was as ( similar) to the man created by God said Christian and so a man of many generations also, a man with his own beginning-creation just like Adam had? If this was the case then Genesis is an edited account of creation, adequate for its purpose, to which evolutionary changes ( as we understand them) need not be foreign.
> 
> 
> In the beginning was "The Word" because the jigs that were to be man had no consciousness of the Devine. When man was created  was the day he was with the consciousness to know God or when he knew himself as a being to which God breathed life into his nostril.
> ...



I have no issues with God forming man from a microbe (dust of the ground) over a small period of time - meaning I’m not hung up on a day being 24 hours, but not convinced on a million years, either. Regardless of the time span that breath of life was from God.


Seeing evolution at work today wasn’t about creation.

I believe in creation by God. From there this thing we call evolution happens. Most of it is man made, you can see it in genetic selection  / embryo screening.

There are cases of the mice in this link,

https://www.businessinsider.com/examples-of-evolution-happening-right-now-2015-2

God created the mice, though.

Can God use evolution? Obviously, he’s allowing it.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 10, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I have no issues with God forming man from a microbe (dust of the ground) over a small period of time - meaning I’m not hung up on a day being 24 hours, but not convinced on a million years, either.


To the extent that 'the sun' has to do, directly &/or indirectly, with the calculation of how long a day or year or whatever is ... 
i try to keep in mind, for _my_ hypothesizing about how 'we' got here, 
that per Genesis, there was not even a 'sun' till the 4th 'day.'
That leaves me with wondering matters such as 'how long' is how long 'days 1 thru 3' actually were.  
Even, also, who am i, or 'science' for that matter, to be able to conclude what the speed of the rotation of the earth was 'back then,' whenever back then was .... 
i know of know one who was around then, nor now, to be able to convincingly prove whatever it was, was.


----------



## Baroque Brass (Sep 10, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Typically you get the "He just always existed" response.


And that’s exactly what she said. I asked her how he knew the time was right to “create the universe” and I got another blank stare. She hates it when I introduce logic into a discussion about creation.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 10, 2021)

Baroque Brass said:


> And that’s exactly what she said. I asked her how he knew the time was right to “create the universe” and I got another blank stare. She hates it when I introduce logic into a discussion about creation.


If such a deity / higher power is out there, (and I believe there is) do you honestly think it’s restricted to something man made such as “logic” as you know it?


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 10, 2021)

Baroque Brass said:


> And that’s exactly what she said. I asked her how he knew the time was right to “create the universe” and I got another blank stare. She hates it when I introduce logic into a discussion about creation.


I kinda feel bad for her 
What other answer could she give that wouldnt go against her beliefs?
Even if she said "I dont know", that would go against what she has been taught.
These stories put believers between a rock and a hard place sometimes.


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 10, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So it took God 6,000 years to "create" and we are on our 2nd week according to God's timeline?
> Neither is enough time to account for the evolutionary process we have been able to witness nor the scientific ways of measurement.
> 
> Who did the "editing" in Genesis?




Ah! Sorry if I made my statements to mean 6,000 yrs. It was not my intent. As far as man in concerned a 6 day creation works or  60 billion yrs. Regardless creation is accounted for in human terms ( narrative) only after man is created.

I don't know who did the editing... probably some smart individuals who could compile more than one first source account of creation into a one account. Or they compiled the accounts of two cultures into one, who's accounts had a solid history.  More than not they were also allied to the spirit of God. I mean, they were not atheist studying creation stories simply for academic value. Simply they compiled their account of a monotheistic God and a type of man in league from a world with many different gods, some indifferent to man.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 10, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I kinda feel bad for her
> What other answer could she give that wouldnt go against her beliefs?
> Even if she said "I dont know", that would go against what she has been taught.
> These stories put believers between a rock and a hard place sometimes.


Not really. Maybe the blank stare doesn’t mean “I don’t know”

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know _them_, because they are spiritually discerned.”

Maybe the organized religions aren’t spiritually connected?? 

Although we can’t possibly know all there us about God, we can and do know some things.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 10, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The Quantum Theory stuff is fascinating and String Theory adds to it. Both elude to something still being there even though it seems like nothing.
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...ientific-meanings-of-nothing/?sh=2ee289ca1a5f
> 
> https://www.livescience.com/28132-what-is-nothing-physicists-debate.html




It's out of my league.  I still don't understand special relativity and no one has been able to explain it to me,.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 10, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Not really. Maybe the blank stare doesn’t mean “I don’t know”
> 
> “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know _them_, because they are spiritually discerned.”
> 
> ...





> Maybe the blank stare doesn’t mean “I don’t know”


I wasnt implying that her blank stare meant "I dont know". Was just saying that "I dont know" isnt even a choice for her.


> we can and do know some things.


We know exactly what man has taught us to know.
I'll throw in individual exceptions to that ^ for those that have personally met God in whatever manner.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 10, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> If such a deity / higher power is out there, (and I believe there is) do you honestly think it’s restricted to something man made such as “logic” as you know it?


Its the stories/claims that doesnt get along with logic. Not the deity itself.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 10, 2021)

Baroque Brass said:


> And that’s exactly what she said. I asked her how he knew the time was right to “create the universe” and I got another blank stare. She hates it when I introduce logic into a discussion about creation.




What does "a moment" look like to an eternal, infinite observer?  Do things happen "in sequence"?


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 10, 2021)

bullethead said:


> The Quantum Theory stuff is fascinating and String Theory adds to it. Both elude to something still being there even though it seems like nothing.
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...ientific-meanings-of-nothing/?sh=2ee289ca1a5f
> 
> https://www.livescience.com/28132-what-is-nothing-physicists-debate.html



https://www.livescience.com/28132-what-is-nothing-physicists-debate.html

_"Is that really nothing?" he asked."There's no space and there's no time. But what about physical laws, what about mathematical entities? What about consciousness? All the things that are non-spatial and non-temporal."_

The notion that consciousness can exist without material is a bridge too far for me.  Might as well call it a soul.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 10, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> We think a lot alike. I believe in a higher power. I don't believe that it necessarily corresponds even remotely to any of the man-made organized religions which seem mainly to have the goal of controlling masses of people.  Or that it can even be understood by us. Or wants to be.



I kind of relate to the concept of a "great spirit" that many indigenous tribes believe in. The great spirit is basically an unknowable force, very abstract for the most part. When you get down to it "religion" can really only get so organized, codified and widespread without a written language.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 10, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> I think thats where alot of organized religions shoot themselves in the foot.
> They present their god as this mystical, impossible to understand, incomprehensible entity...... and then proceed to tell you all about it, what it wants, thinks, does, expects from you etc.
> Both cant be true at the same time.



HA! Good point right there.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 10, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So it took God 6,000 years to "create" and we are on our 2nd week according to God's timeline?
> Neither is enough time to account for the evolutionary process we have been able to witness nor the scientific ways of measurement.
> 
> Who did the "editing" in Genesis?



apparently a multitude of editors because there's no consistency and plot holes and contradictions are everywhere. 

One thing that really brings out the cynic/skeptic in me is that many events in the bible used to be taken literally, because most people were more trusting and uneducated thousands or even hundreds of years ago. As science and education advances now those same events are just "metaphorical" or symbolic. And when people catch on that even metaphor doesn't add up, then the default answer of "well you just don't have enough faith to understand!" or "the lord works in mysterious ways" comes out. 

All I'm saying is the game seems to be rigged so that people will always find a way to convince themselves that their belief is not in vain.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 10, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> I kind of relate to the concept of a "great spirit" that many indigenous tribes believe in. The great spirit is basically an unknowable force, very abstract for the most part. When you get down to it "religion" can really only get so organized, codified and widespread without a written language.


Yep. If I was going to follow a religion, that would be the type. I guess I already do for the most part.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 10, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Ah! Sorry if I made my statements to mean 6,000 yrs. It was not my intent. As far as man in concerned a 6 day creation works or  60 billion yrs. Regardless creation is accounted for in human terms ( narrative) only after man is created.
> 
> I don't know who did the editing... probably some smart individuals who could compile more than one first source account of creation into a one account. Or they compiled the accounts of two cultures into one, who's accounts had a solid history.  More than not they were also allied to the spirit of God. I mean, they were not atheist studying creation stories simply for academic value. Simply they compiled their account of a monotheistic God and a type of man in league from a world with many different gods, some indifferent to man.


So your post was assertive guesses?


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 10, 2021)

bullethead said:


> So your post was assertive guesses?



Guesses? Why the nerve!  Personally I thought I was on the right track although I held back ---as it could have had a bit more cowbell. Not guesses but feelings in rhythm like the rank percussiveness or assertiveness of cowbell within a symphonic whole.

Something like this, but much more. It's like I get this fever:


----------



## bullethead (Sep 11, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Guesses? Why the nerve!  Personally I thought I was on the right track although I held back ---as it could have had a bit more cowbell. Not guesses but feelings in rhythm like the rank percussiveness or assertiveness of cowbell within a symphonic whole.
> 
> Something like this, but much more. It's like I get this fever:



That skit was good. I watched it live back when SNL was still funny.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 11, 2021)

What is thought to exist: 
(1) before the big bang; &
(2) if there was 'something,' 
is it viewed to having been eternally in place
(e.g., a repeatedly expanding out & contracting back on itself & expanding back on out, etc, etc.)?
(3) if the 'something' is thought to be eternally in place,
how did the 'something' come into existence?


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 11, 2021)

bullethead said:


> That skit was good. I watched it live back when SNL was still funny.


Yeah I used to watch SNL religiously back in the days of Belushi, Aykroyd etc.
It just aint funny no mo'.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 11, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> What is thought to exist:
> (1) before the big bang; &
> (2) if there was 'something,'
> is it viewed to having been eternally in place
> ...



indeed, this has always fascinated me: whether you believe in the bible "there was nothing and then god waved the wand" approach or the scientific "there was nothing except a singularity that expanded" neither can explain how did nothing become something.

If god made it happen, where did he come from? Or if a tiny condensed spot of energy made it happen where did that spot of energy come from? The nuts & bolts of the origins of the universe are speculation and may never be solved.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 11, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Yeah I used to watch SNL religiously back in the days of Belushi, Aykroyd etc.
> It just aint funny no mo'.
> View attachment 1103697


 but it's a big leap from the 70's until today! Back in the early 90's SNL was very good IMHO. David Spade, Adam Sandler, Chris Farley, Chris Rock, Mike Meyers, Phil Hartman, and others were consistently funny.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 11, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> but it's a big leap from the 70's until today! Back in the early 90's SNL was very good IMHO. David Spade, Adam Sandler, Chris Farley, Chris Rock, Mike Meyers, Phil Hartman, and others were consistently funny.


Yeah there were certainly some funny skits from that time frame but for me it just wasnt the same as the beginning.
This one is a classic though -


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 11, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Yeah there were certainly some funny skits from that time frame but for me it just wasnt the same as the beginning.
> This one is a classic though -



I used to have a Matt Foley "living in a van down by the river" T-shirt. That same store also sold a "more cowbell" T-shirt.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 11, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Yeah I used to watch SNL religiously back in the days of Belushi, Aykroyd etc.
> It just aint funny no mo'.
> View attachment 1103697




Throw in Chevy and you got about a pound of blow in that picture.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 11, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> indeed, this has always fascinated me: whether you believe in the bible "there was nothing and then god waved the wand" approach or the scientific "there was nothing except a singularity that expanded" neither can explain how did nothing become something.
> 
> If god made it happen, where did he come from? Or if a tiny condensed spot of energy made it happen where did that spot of energy come from? The nuts & bolts of the origins of the universe are speculation and may never be solved.



The only real difference is the addition of a consciousness, a motive.  It's a hypothesis that unnecessarily overcomplicates the search for the truth at this time, in my opinion.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 11, 2021)

WaltL1 said:


> Yeah there were certainly some funny skits from that time frame but for me it just wasnt the same as the beginning.
> This one is a classic though -


Chris Farley didn’t hold back on any of his acting!!


----------



## oldfella1962 (Sep 11, 2021)

ambush80 said:


> The only real difference is the addition of a consciousness, a motive.  It's a hypothesis that unnecessarily overcomplicates the search for the truth at this time, in my opinion.



good point. Take human motivations, egos and agendas off the table and get to the no-doubt-about-it truth. I hope we find out before I leave this world.


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 11, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> good point. Take human motivations, egos and agendas off the table and get to the no-doubt-about-it truth. I hope we find out before I leave this world.



Sometimes I think the most important truth is that I like it when i scratch my dog's head and she likes it too.


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 11, 2021)

ambush80 said:


> Throw in Chevy and you got about a pound of blow in that picture.


And thats a fact!


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 11, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Chris Farley didn’t hold back on any of his acting!!


For a big 'ol boy he could move like a gymnast!


----------



## ambush80 (Sep 11, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Chris Farley didn’t hold back on any of his acting!!





WaltL1 said:


> For a big 'ol boy he could move like a gymnast!


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 11, 2021)

ambush80 said:


>


----------



## bullethead (Sep 12, 2021)

This mornings yahoo headline tells of a new much larger(of that type) fossil found in Canada. Reading the article gives a feeling that scientifically a reader knows enough to understand and agree or disagree with their findings on species,age etc..
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fossils-found-canada-belong-giant-140708586.html

But I clicked on the "study published Wednesday" link in the article and it put into perspective just how much effort goes into details which make up their conclusions. I think it will be an insight to many of just how much detailed effort goes into all of these discoveries until they can finally make a definitive call on what something is, how old it is,how long it has been there etc etc etc....
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.210664


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 2, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> "Snakes and Creation" sounds like the name of a folk singing duo!
> Speaking of snakes & creation, let's take something from Genesis that confuses me:
> when the serpent tricked Adam & Eve he was forever cursed to crawl on his belly eating dust. Fair enough, but how did the serpent get around_ before _he was forced to crawl?  Haven't serpents _always_ crawled?



He took away their legs. You can get the full story here:


----------



## bullethead (Dec 2, 2021)

atlashunter said:


> He took away their legs. You can get the full story here:


He speaks as if it is a George Thorogood song


----------



## atlashunter (Dec 2, 2021)

bullethead said:


> He speaks as if it is a George Thorogood song



“You can read the bible if you want, or you can just take it from me.”


----------



## 660griz (Dec 3, 2021)

Why would God, on most mammals, put a 'playground', next to a 'sewage treatment' plant?


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 5, 2021)

660griz said:


> Why would God, on most mammals, put a 'playground', next to a 'sewage treatment' plant?




‘A woman can be proud and stiff
When on love intent;
But Love has pitched his mansion in
The place of excrement;
For nothing can be sole or whole
That has not been rent.’


--W.B. Yeats


----------



## Israel (Dec 9, 2021)

ambush80 said:


> ‘A woman can be proud and stiff
> When on love intent;
> But Love has pitched his mansion in
> The place of excrement;
> ...


do you think the Bishop wanted ascent apart from descent? Or felt it could be recommended?


----------



## oldfella1962 (Dec 25, 2021)

ambush80 said:


> ‘A woman can be proud and stiff
> When on love intent;
> But Love has pitched his mansion in
> The place of excrement;
> ...



 goodness! I know that's old school "poetry" and whatnot, but that sounds like men's room graffiti!  I'll bet that W.B. Yeats has a few poems beginning with "there was an old man from Nantucket".  You old timers know what I mean.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Dec 25, 2021)

atlashunter said:


> He took away their legs. You can get the full story here:



 with the sound turned off it looks like a sandbox insurgent video. I'm glad Bin Ladin's production team got work after his death.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Dec 25, 2021)

atlashunter said:


> “You can read the bible if you want, or you can just take it from me.”


 
Well actually the whole bible is a collection of "take it from me but the way I heard it is...." stories. My six year old grand-daughter tells similar rambling stories that are embellished when she starts to lose my interest.


----------



## ambush80 (Dec 25, 2021)

oldfella1962 said:


> goodness! I know that's old school "poetry" and whatnot, but that sounds like men's room graffiti!  I'll bet that W.B. Yeats has a few poems beginning with "there was an old man from Nantucket".  You old timers know what I mean.



Yeats is a good time.


----------

