K
kbf1970060
Guest
Not really meant to sound as harsh, as it perhaps did. … order seemed to follow from a void.
- Status
A
Agatha813
Guest
Agreed!
I
iohannes13
Guest
Genesis is a creation myth story intended to transmit information about many things, especially about the human condition. Placing the writing of Genesis in its historical and cultural context, the culture that wrote Genesis was male dominated.
Science has shown that early primordial cultures were matriarchal but at some point, patriarchal cultures became dominant around the world. The Greek Myth of Perseus and Medusa is highlighted as one story reflecting on this transition. This story and other similar myths elevate/promote the patriarical figure almost like propaganda. Following this, the writer that wrote Genesis may have placed Adam first to promote and convey that the male is above the woman to maintain the male status. What woman can go against this?
Doesn’t it say somewhere in the New Testament that men and women are equal, but never the less men should be the head of the household and women should be obedient to this and to their husbands? Why should women do this especially if Jesus leveled the playing field for everyone? Because the new testament culture was patriarichal as well. So are we.
There are lizards and fish whose entire population consists of only females. These animals essentially clone themselves. Their offspring are exact duplicates of themselves. So technically, God did not need to create Adam (men) for the species to propogate!!! So why didn’t evolution take this route? Pesky viruses and deadly bacterias. These lizards and fish are defenseless against viruses and bacteria that hone in on them. Why? Their genetic makeup never changes while the viruses continue to evolve. They are easy targets. These animals are at very high risk of extinction. Science has proven that evolution has chosen sex because the genetic contribution of both the male and the female to the offspring creates limitless variations fortifying it against deadly viruses. Each individual offspring has a unique genetic make up, the viruses and bacteria have to learn how to beat the defenses of each individual. Much harder for them to break the codes and to keep up with all the variations. So in biological and evolution terms and need for survival, males and females are equal.
As some other poster highlighted that your question would generate a lot of jokes, I have plenty of jokes on this subject, But because of the tone of my post, I won’t add them. Or maybe just one blonde joke? Nah.
Science has shown that early primordial cultures were matriarchal but at some point, patriarchal cultures became dominant around the world. The Greek Myth of Perseus and Medusa is highlighted as one story reflecting on this transition. This story and other similar myths elevate/promote the patriarical figure almost like propaganda. Following this, the writer that wrote Genesis may have placed Adam first to promote and convey that the male is above the woman to maintain the male status. What woman can go against this?
Doesn’t it say somewhere in the New Testament that men and women are equal, but never the less men should be the head of the household and women should be obedient to this and to their husbands? Why should women do this especially if Jesus leveled the playing field for everyone? Because the new testament culture was patriarichal as well. So are we.
There are lizards and fish whose entire population consists of only females. These animals essentially clone themselves. Their offspring are exact duplicates of themselves. So technically, God did not need to create Adam (men) for the species to propogate!!! So why didn’t evolution take this route? Pesky viruses and deadly bacterias. These lizards and fish are defenseless against viruses and bacteria that hone in on them. Why? Their genetic makeup never changes while the viruses continue to evolve. They are easy targets. These animals are at very high risk of extinction. Science has proven that evolution has chosen sex because the genetic contribution of both the male and the female to the offspring creates limitless variations fortifying it against deadly viruses. Each individual offspring has a unique genetic make up, the viruses and bacteria have to learn how to beat the defenses of each individual. Much harder for them to break the codes and to keep up with all the variations. So in biological and evolution terms and need for survival, males and females are equal.
As some other poster highlighted that your question would generate a lot of jokes, I have plenty of jokes on this subject, But because of the tone of my post, I won’t add them. Or maybe just one blonde joke? Nah.
I
iohannes13
Guest
Wow, I learned something new and interesting reading your post. I see a lot of parallels/hints between the Genesis creation story and scientific findings/theories in evolution about the origins our of species and cultures. But I could never reconcile the metacondrial Eve and metacondrial Adam or however it’s spelled and however they are called to what the bible teaches. I appreciate the comment on how individuals butcher science to fit a desired conclusion. I get angry that some athiests mock and laugh at our belief in the virgin birth of Jesus asking “How can a women become pregnant with out having sex?” They somehow seem to overlook that it is possible for women to become pregnant without having sex (aritificial insemination). Not that I’m saying that is what God did. But science clearly answers their question. It’s possible. I will definintely plagarize your “butcher science” comment when I come across it. And I especially appreciate your tone.
I could never grasp (understand) Aquinas, too bad. Your posts make his arguments and writings sound amazing.
R
ReapReason
Guest
Finally somebody who doesn’t treat the bible as a false idol.
The realty is that the bodies of Adam and Eve evolved. Wake up!!!.
L
LaMusicaSenior
Guest
I have to disagree:
Evolution v. Creation
Code:
I have a wonderful friend who believes in the theory of evolution. I love this friend to death, but I have to disagree with her, and I support the biblical belief of creationism.
Now I know that even if evolution was proved to be a fact (instead of just a theory), the Church would never have been wrong. Archbishop Sheehan said, "But even if the proof were forthcoming tomorrow, that the body of hte fist man was evolved from lower animals, it would not be found to contradict any solemn, ordinary, or official teaching of the Church."
Yet I wanted to explain my thoughts on creation and the origin of man.Here’s a monkey…I think I’ll name him Adam.**
One of the main beliefs held by my friend is that, at one point during creation, God breathed a soul into a primate and that soul made the monkey the first man. This is a belief I cannot support and here is why:
“The LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.” - Gen. 2:7.
Some thoughts. First part of the verse: “…formed the man from the dust of the ground.” Looking at this closely, it doesn’t really “jive” with the belief that the first man was evolved from a monkey. God clearly made man from the dust of the earth, a fact we acknowledge on Ash Wednesday when we are told that we are dust and to dust we shall return. We are not told that God decided it was time for man to make an appearance, picked up a monkey and breathed him a soul. He made man from the dust, not some random monkey.
Second part of the verse: “…and the man became a living being.” This would mean that the materials used to make man had never been alive until this point. Now, if this was a monkey that had been used to now have a soul, the verse would have read: “…and the man became existent, no longer an ape, but a man in the image of God.”
Cross this line to de-evolve
Code:
Believing that Adam and Eve were the first on the earth, we believe that they existed very happily, even walking with God, in the garden of Eden. Then came original sin, and due to their blame game, Adam and Eve were kicked out of the garden, but with the promise of a savior that would come and rescue them from their sin as to open the gates of Heaven.
Here is where my next thought comes in. Adam and Eve were obviously advanced in knowledge enough to converse with God, name animals, and function as human beings. So when they crossed the threshold of the garden of Eden, did they de-evolve? Did they become reduced to grunting "cave men," hunched over, uncivilized, and animalistic? This would actually go against this bible verse:
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." - Gen. 1:26
Man was created to have dominion over animals, not to be reduced to being animalistic himself. as this would be de-evolution,
Also, one thing you have to love about God is that He is a God of order. For man to be created in God's image, then to be reduced to what we have learned as the "cave man," would go against God's beautiful plan of order in the universe He has created.Just some thoughts on the amazing love of God. Studied some of this in religion class tonight, had to share some of my thoughts!
Let me know what you think in the comments below!
God Bless you all,**
**
Chloe M. **
**taken from my blog!
G
Ghosty
Guest
I don’t know if there was a specific reason, but one that I can think of is that it is easier to show equality by having the woman come from the man than visa versa. This is because a man coming from a woman implies motherhood, and their relationship is not one of parent and child, but of equal adults. Since males do come from females in nature, however, it could easily lead to confusion about their relationship even if the same method of “taking a rib” was used, as people would natural imagine a mother-son relation.
Peace and God bless!
Peace and God bless!
R
ReapReason
Guest
I think that you may very well be close to the reason why the author used the analogy of the rib being taken from the man rather than the women.
Well done.
However i fear that the analogy was used partly because man feels himself to be greater than women in the eyes of God. I could be wrong, but i get the impression that the status of women in Judaic history was as such that the word of a women counted for nothing.
D
danielle90
Guest
I guess to show equality cause Eve was formed from Adam’s rib and all other men comes from women.
S
Simpleton
Guest
My guess is God didn’t create Eve first because He didn’t want Adam to be a man-child. I mean breast feeding would have just been weird.
T
TimeEntrance
Guest
I learned something from mgoforth’s post too - whether or not his points are accurate to X degree I don’t know.
At this present time I regard Adam and Eve, as well as the Great Flood tale, as fiction that use myth and narrative to provide moral and theological lessons.
It is possible that theory of evolution is wrong - has to be possible because scientific hypotheses and theories are required to be falsifiable contra dogmatic - however, I doubt the theory is wrong. It’s explanatory power is pretty great and the theory comes out stronger with every challenge made to it.
That, however, does not make it certain it is 100% true.
Some scholars say the first Adam in Genesis was written in a Hebrew word denoting or carrying the connotation of transsexual. I read this from a Jesuit. And apparently a number of liberal Reformed Jews believes this too.
If true, this would give further evidence that Adam is fictional character used in a narrative format to teach some moral and/or theological lesson.
In my opinion this does not mean Jesus was not God or that the Catholic and Protestant and Orthodox Churches are false teachers of sorts.
While I study science I feel perfectly fine, have perfect enough pride, in faith in the utter irrationality of Christianity. I don’t know that being rational is all it’s made up to be. Otherwise we probably need to get rid of a lot of poets and abstract artists. The human mind has it’s limitations anyways… no matter how many scientists and worshipers of science would like to protest that.
B
BGorski
Guest
Because if Eve had been created first, she would have been looking over God’s shoulder the whole time saying, “Honey, you should do it this way.” 
- Status