G
Glark
Guest
If humans evolved from a monkey-man, God isn’t telling the truth in Genesis 2:7, where it describes Adam being formed from lifeless matter.
- Status
R
Rau
Guest
The theory is offered to explain the observations. We’ve heard your theory too. Problem is - that one does contradict thousands of observations. Scientists must be so stupid.
R
rossum
Guest
Observe the Monotremes. They are mammals that lay eggs. Before the pouch evolved the babies hatched from eggs.
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
Thank you for confirming that you have no explanation for the origin of complexity.
I do not explain the origin of a log cabin by assuming the prior existence of a log cabin. You are trying to explain the existence of complexity by assuming the prior existence of complexity. Your analogy does not work.
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
You do realise that monkeys were also formed from lifeless matter: “Let the earth bring forth…” Look at Matthew 1: 1 “Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham”. Sometimes the Bible leaves out intermediate steps. Genesis 2:7 is doing the same. The full process was lifeless matter → monkeys → man. The description is shortened, just as Matthew 1:1 is shortened. Jesus was not the direct son of David, there were intermediates. Adam was not the direct ‘son’ of earth, there were intermediates.
rossum
T
Techno2000
Guest
How would that work rossum, did they hatch from the egg and then hop into the pouch ?Techno2000:
Observe the Monotremes. They are mammals that lay eggs. Before the pouch evolved the babies hatched from eggs.
rossum
A
Aloysium
Guest
I am a nature nut. It is a major vehicle to the witness of God’s glory. Nature reveals God’s infinite wisdom and creativity. The Logos revealed in scripture from the first lines of Genesis can be found within it. Most biologists aren’t looking for Him, so they see things happening by themselves. From my perspective, however one puts it all together, it doesn’t matter as long as the tenets of the faith, as have been repeatedly posted throughout this thread, are maintained. But, this is how I see it:
While we did not evolve from monkeys, it seems certainly plausible to me that Adam was formed, as was each of us immediately and totally as an embryo. As Adam grew within an ancient womb, from his developing ribs, God fashioned immediately another embryo, Eve, in that moment, a total person. Matter, in the form of oxygen, water, minerals and organic compounds (including DNA, currently imbued with mystical powers by modern society), is used in the formation of our bodies at conception, their development and growth, as well as for their maintenance - our bodies and spirit, a unity, separated only in death. Is it any less debasing to have been conceived within a mammalian womb, and nurtured by that creature, than it was for God to have emptied Himself to be born of a woman, and have allowed Himself to be crucified by His creation?
While we did not evolve from monkeys, it seems certainly plausible to me that Adam was formed, as was each of us immediately and totally as an embryo. As Adam grew within an ancient womb, from his developing ribs, God fashioned immediately another embryo, Eve, in that moment, a total person. Matter, in the form of oxygen, water, minerals and organic compounds (including DNA, currently imbued with mystical powers by modern society), is used in the formation of our bodies at conception, their development and growth, as well as for their maintenance - our bodies and spirit, a unity, separated only in death. Is it any less debasing to have been conceived within a mammalian womb, and nurtured by that creature, than it was for God to have emptied Himself to be born of a woman, and have allowed Himself to be crucified by His creation?
Last edited:
R
rossum
Guest
Hatch from the egg and snuggle up to mother for milk – Monotremes produce milk. A pouch is just a fold in the skin. Kangaroo nipples are at the bottom of the pouch.
You ask a lot of questions. If you thought a bit more and studied you would not need to ask so many. All of this data is available at many good science and biology websites.
rossum
J
jas84173
Guest
Yes. Jesus the Christ is portrayed to every culture different . Yes in Europe he was portrayed as a white male. Most likely because the artists painted what they knew.
In Africa in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church he’s a black man. In India he looks like an Indian. The Christ is whoever we want him to be.
However the historical Jesus more than likely was an olive skinned middle eastern looking man.
Does that matter? No.
In Africa in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church he’s a black man. In India he looks like an Indian. The Christ is whoever we want him to be.
However the historical Jesus more than likely was an olive skinned middle eastern looking man.
Does that matter? No.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Yes I know that, but Jesus lived and walked the earth,Buddhist immaterial entities never did .
J
jas84173
Guest
Siddhartha Gautama aka the Buddah was a real life person. Ironically though people who say the Gospels were to far removed to be accurate never say the writings on the Buddah are…The earliest writings about the Buddah came 300 years after his death.
T
Techno2000
Guest
I wasn’t talking about Siddhartha Gautama. I was talking about…Devas, asuras, mahoragas, kinnaras, nagas .
T
Techno2000
Guest
E
edwest211
Guest
There is no Biblical support for this view. Adam was a special creation, as was Eve.
"Adam and Eve: Real People
"It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).
"In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).
“The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).”
Source: Catholic Answers
"Adam and Eve: Real People
"It is equally impermissible to dismiss the story of Adam and Eve and the fall (Gen. 2–3) as a fiction. A question often raised in this context is whether the human race descended from an original pair of two human beings (a teaching known as monogenism) or a pool of early human couples (a teaching known as polygenism).
"In this regard, Pope Pius XII stated: “When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).
“The story of the creation and fall of man is a true one, even if not written entirely according to modern literary techniques. The Catechism states, “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents” (CCC 390).”
Source: Catholic Answers
Last edited:
A
Aloysium
Guest
At conception we are all special creations, individual and unique expressions of mankind, first created in Adam. Whatever size, whatever stage of development we are at, whatever the configuration of one’s DNA, one is a person.
Pope Pius XII writing about Jesus, who is both man and God:
When I get more time I might post more from scripture and the Catechism to clarify my point of view. I’m not asking anyone to believe what I say. I’m just letting you know what I think, which to me is in accordance with the Church’s teachings and in line with some of what recent Pope’s have contributed to our understanding of the matter. I do very much respect and welcome your feedback. Thanks.
Pope Pius XII writing about Jesus, who is both man and God:
I would suppose God could have used an ovum from Mother Mary to begin the process of developing the body of our Lord. I see no problem in His creating mankind using matter that He had shaped over countless generations of life. He created us that He might enter into His creation, that through us it may come to know Him.
When I get more time I might post more from scripture and the Catechism to clarify my point of view. I’m not asking anyone to believe what I say. I’m just letting you know what I think, which to me is in accordance with the Church’s teachings and in line with some of what recent Pope’s have contributed to our understanding of the matter. I do very much respect and welcome your feedback. Thanks.
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
“The true origin of marriage, venerable brothers, is well known to all. Though revilers of the Christian faith refuse to acknowledge the never-interrupted doctrine of the Church on this subject, and have long striven to destroy the testimony of all nations and of all times, they have nevertheless failed not only to quench the powerful light of truth, but even to lessen it. We record what is to all known, and cannot be doubted by any, that God, on the sixth day of creation, having made man from the slime of the earth, and having breathed into his face the breath of life, gave him a companion, whom He miraculously took from the side of Adam when he was locked in sleep. God thus, in His most far-reaching foresight, decreed that this husband and wife should be the natural beginning of the human race, from whom it might be propagated and preserved by an unfailing fruitfulness throughout all futurity of time. And this union of man and woman, that it might answer more fittingly to the infinite wise counsels of God, even from the beginning manifested chiefly two most excellent properties - deeply sealed, as it were, and signed upon it-namely, unity and perpetuity. From the Gospel we see clearly that this doctrine was declared and openly confirmed by the divine authority of Jesus Christ. He bore witness to the Jews and to His Apostles that marriage, from its institution, should exist between two only, that is, between one man and one woman; that of two they are made, so to say, one flesh; and that the marriage bond is by the will of God so closely and strongly made fast that no man may dissolve it or render it asunder. “For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What, therefore, God bath joined together, let no man put asunder.”(2)”
Source: ARCANUM
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII
Source: ARCANUM
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII
S
Subrosa
Guest
The church has never read the creation stories in Genesis in literal terms. These are mythology which attempts too portray truth in creative terms. For instance, there must have been a first man and a first woman. They are called Adam and Eve in the story.
B
Bradskii
Guest
G: What’s that?
A: It’s a koala. You said I was to start work on the marsupialia this week.
G: No. I mean what’s that? In the front of the koala.
A: It’s a pouch. I’ve been putting them on most of the marsupials. It’s part of the design. It’s on the plans you gave me.
G: Really? Like this one you did on the kangaroo last week?
A: Yeah. Just like that.
G: And which way is the pouch facing on the ‘roo?
A: Well, to the front.
G: Quite right. And why is that?
A: Well, it’s obvious. So the joey doesn’t fall out.
G: Indeed. Reasonable design feature, wouldn’t you think?
A: Yeah. I like it. It’s very handy.
G: So which way is the pouch facing on the koala?
A: It’s facing…oh hell. How did that happen? It’s on the wrong way around…
G: You bet it’s on the wrong way round! Can you not read drawings? Didn’t you read the spec? I mean – what’s going to happen the joey in the koala’s pouch when it’s climbing up a tree?
A: Ummm. I guess…it might fall out.
G: Too right it’s going to fall out. You idiot! How on earth is anyone going to consider that a good design?
A: So, gee. Should I change it?
G: No, we haven’t got time. I need you to start the metronomes tomorrow.
A: So I’m not sure what we could…
G: Look, start on the platypus today. Forget the koala. I’ll fix it myself. I’ll have to put an extra muscle in so the koala can close the pouch when climbing trees. That’s all I can do.
A: Well, that’ll work, though.
G: Yeah, but it’s shoddy. It looks like it just happened that way. I spent all that time designing it and now it looks just like a random mutation. You don’t think people will notice that?
E
edwest211
Guest
“Genesis does not contain purified myths.” Pontifical Biblical Commission, 1909.
- Status