Theory of Crevolution

[Laugher]

What is 0 anyway if not a proposed lack of value amirite or amirite

[Pokesan]

Originally Posted by Laugher [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What is 0 anyway if not a proposed lack of value amirite or amirite

are you talking about daywolf or blitzers posts?

[Blitzers]

"Man's Link and Separation from Nature"

I would agree evolution existed, to an extent it played a role for a period of time, and achieved a desired result. Unfortunately evolution alone doesn't provide the full explanation man seeks in regards to the development of man. So would it not be derelict of man to ignore alternative sources?

Genesis 1:11 & 12
Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Notice the wording and sentence structure in the verses. The Author quotes God and then in the Author's narration attributes the vegetation as being produced by the land and its result was "good" in the eyes of God. Let's take a look at another couple verses.

Genesis 1:24 & 25
And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Notice the wording and sentence structure in these verses. See anything similar? They both begin with a quote from God, followed by the author's narrative in his own words what happened and its result being "good in the eyes of God. So, How could Moses, who wrote Genesis even conceive the notion that "the land" could produce "living creatures" without having some sort of audience with God? In Fact he could not, and his narration of verses 24 & 25 after the quote from God is Moses reconciling what God did and attributing it to creation rather then evolution. Moses doesn't attribute verse 11 & 12 to creation because it was self-evident through his own observation that "the land" produced vegetation. So how could Moses thousands of years before the "theory of evolution" be able to conjure such an idea in the 2nd quote from God if it did not come from God? He obviously couldn't fathom the idea when it came to living creatures so why would he use the almost identical wording and sentence structure to describe both events if he didn't have communication with God? So, we can assume that evolution existed, and it was God's instruction, to Nature, to develop, "Life." So where's man's link to Nature?

Genesis 2:7
Then 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.

Using what nature provided, God assembled man's physical body and because man wasn't an evolved state of nature, but an assembled work of God, God had to breath life into the "being" which is man.

Man's link to Nature is also man's separation. The substance of Man is Natural, but our formation is divine.

"The Instinct & Sentience of Man"

If you are still of the belief man evolved solely from Nature, then all that is man must be at the least concealed in Nature and at this point unidentifiable by modern science. Modern science has not been able to distinguish the "sentient traits of man" within Nature, so do those traits actually exist in Nature if "we" cannot observe them? Just like nothingness being unidentifiable by man, are these characteristics indistinguishable or non-existent because man cannot identify them in Nature? We can identify them, we can see, hear, and feel them. So where did man derive his sentience from? The only Source we have is the Constant/God.

If Nature cannot decipher "Good from Evil" and Nature is not conscious of its own actions, but man is, then God must have endowed man these capabilities absent of Nature.

Genesis 1:26
Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

We've already established that God assembled "Man's" physical form from what Nature provided, but in addition to the substance of man which came from Nature, God bestowed upon man his "likeness" or free will. So now we have a being unlike any that evolved from Nature. This is Man in his "original state." If you have ever seen the 1960 Movie "The Time Machine" I would suggest that the Eloi are as close as we are going to get as to describing man in his "original state." Now Remember the Land having the ability to bring forth life? The narrative that Moses composed suggested that God saw that it was good. Now is this just Moses' own rationale or is Moses attributing the word good to mean sufficient and the task was finished by the land. I contend God meant both, that the land's task of developing vegetation and life was both pleasing to God and the desired result was achieved. So Man's physical substance, who God formed from the dust of the land, was "good." I also contend this goodness is part of the natural instinct of man.

So now we have Man in God's image, free will, and natural instinct. Does man have a "purpose." Yes, here as instructed by God.

Genesis 1:28
God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

God gives man ownership:

Genesis 1:29 & 30

Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

Is Man sentient yet? No, he is not. Finally God gives man a commandment.

And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Man's state of oblivion leads him to be deceived by woman and woman by the serpent. Man now knows why, he can decipher good from evil and what does God say and do?

Genesis 3:22
And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.

Thus the Sentience of Man.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Blitzers [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If man and science is incapable in upholding the scientific standard of requiring evidence and or proof that nothingness exists, then the default position of a Constant must be true. The evidence needed to prove the existence of nothingness would disprove it. Would it not?

This is one of the dumbest fucking things I have ever read.

[Blitzers]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is one of the dumbest fucking things I have ever read.

Is that not the same standard applied when disproving the existence of God? There is no proof therefore it cannot exist?

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Blitzers [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Is that not the same standard applied when disproving the existence of God? There is no proof therefore it cannot exist?

Yes, nobody who really understands logic is going to go around trying to completely disprove some kind of God, because you can't, for the same reasons you can't prove it.

We can't make definitive statements about what conditions were like before the Big Bang, assuming that's an accurate model for expansion of the universe, because we have zero information. So we know nothing about the character of 'nothingness' or 'constant' or any of this stuff you're talking about. And the bible is not evidence of anything.

[Blitzers]

God curses all of the guilty, the Serpent, the Woman the Man, and finally the land, all which had a role in the disobedience of God.

^^^ this is to be placed between the Final line and the last biblical verse. Copying from notes on my iPhone please forgive me.

[maskedmelon]

Your quotes just illustrate the apathy of God and the presence of at least one other actor. All God does is talk. Who does the work? His wife perhaps? I am not so sure your source offers a complete accounting.

The Greeks offer valuable insight. Prometheus (God) actually did craft man from mud (wet dust, which makes more sense because people are mostly water) and life is actually breathed into him by Athena, so clearly man's origins were a collaborative effort.

[Blitzers]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Your quotes just illustrate the apathy of God and the presence of at least one other actor. All God does is talk. Who does the work? His wife perhaps? I am not so sure your source offers a complete accounting.

The Greeks offer valuable insight. Prometheus (God) actually did craft man from mud (wet dust, which makes more sense because people are mostly water) and life is actually breathed into him by Athena, so clearly man's origins were a collaborative effort.

I think "God" would be able to create/construct by just speaking it into existence, he is God ya know.

You did ask for a bridge, I provided the bridge, like God and Man you have the choice to cross it or not.

[Blitzers]

By the way, the Theory of Crevolution is not what I believe. I attribute that theory to those who believe solely in evolution and Nature as man's only Source.