Science in Adam and Eve?

you mean your ingenious toaster and microwave analogy?

 

you do realize how retarded that arguement sounds though, right? things such as carbon dating, the layers that theyre found in, ect gives you a geological timeline. All these epochs and eons of prehistoric, extinct fossils stretching back hundreds of millions of years doesnt really give your creatinist 7000 year old earth theory any credibility. I cant belive how dense you are, am I talking to a child?

 

People don't wanna fap so they start a religious fight thread. People are rude and condescending because they have an emotional attachment to their beliefs.

 

Sorry here to bust your bubble but your marrow stem cells can only differentiate into specialized blood cells and bonecells-blood cells no nucleus,white blood cells which produce antibodies and your platelets which help clot up wounds.I am not sure where you go information for regrowing damaged organs because it actually is just there to help in regrowing since many important parts of our body can regrow e.g livers.So yeah and dont pretend off saying saying scientists and doctors don't why rib is the only bone that can grow Jesus that article you read is probably outdated research was first properly done on this in 2014 and since then plenty more has been done.We don't just stop developing you know if we had no science heck everyone would still be trying to use leeches to solve problems so yeah science and religion complement each other but Adam and Eve seriously doesn't work even most Christians see at as symbolic.What is god creating humans can be the random particles in quantum physics doing random things leading to developments of amino acids leading to proteins leading to unicellular organism then symbiotic organism then evolving into many different species adapted to survive and reproduce. Thats the simple reasoning behind how we are created sure we might have had some helping hands but thats that.

 

This is just plain funny.Evolution was a theory and a logical more grounded one.Read a book

Darwin investigated natural selection which were the adaptions showcased by finches due to different environmental stimuli.These adaptions proved that creatures can essentially change.Agree with me up to here?. Alright now we find fossils,from different times which they measured from the depth at which it was uncovered in a similar area or an island.Now we know these creatures don't exist anymore hence the likely situation is extinction or evolution which is due to natural selection.Considering logic where rules of nature is followed this means all the creatures here cant have simply appeared out of nowhere and hence the fossils showed us what life there was before us and hence proving that life has changed since then due to natural selection,we have changed into us. we have uncovered bones shaping skeleton structures of our ancestors why do you fail to evolve to the new knowledge we have.These structure present a logical change over millions of years.According to you lot life only began a few thousand years ago.In fact christians are wildly regarded as narrow minded always twisting things to their perceptive.Hopefully you guys change look at buddhists and hindus they follow in the path of goodness and kindness.We don't try to disprove them because meditation and baths in nature demonstrate humanity look at the yoga,look at the culture.Then look at you lot.Culture-not much.Tradition -wildly commercialized .And the most disgusting thing i find in many not all devout christians is -selfishness look at the happiness of people living in Nepal without privileged conditions.They are happy.

 

I used to believe in creationism because of that but not anymore. The trouble is so much of the time we read the Bible like it was written today when it wasn't. Did Jesus know about evolution? Probably not. Did any of the Jews at the time know about evolution? Probably not. Did the Romans know about evolution? Probably not. Did anyone at the time know about evolution? Probably not. But just because they didn't know about it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

The Liturgists did a good podcast on Genesis and evlution. You can listen to it here.

I'd say so what we think about when we think about scripture never takes place in scripture. Like the nativity story - 60% of what happens in the nativity story isn't in the text. The images of Satan we have are not based on what is writen about it in the scriptures - it's from outside influences like Dante's Inferno and Paradise Lost. I think if you were to research Christianty in medieval Europe you'd see so much of how we think about the Bible comes from that time period. Like so much of the reformation was to get the writings of Paul to disprove the theology of the Catholic Church and as a result so much of what he wrote is misunderstood.

 

Not so, Christ refers to scriptures in a way that the Jews at the time would understand them. Had he started mentioning knowledge of things that weren't known to the Jews and weren't scriptural, he would've had a hard time trying to make his point clear. Its the same with his parables, he uses natural images like to mustard seed in order to reveal spiritual truths. These biblical events all have a spiritual meaning behind them. I believe that they are events that took place that describe the relationship between God and man, they may have not been %100 literal manifestations but they were events that did actually happen.

Personally I don't know if Adam was an actual person or not, or weather evolution happened or not but I think its irrelevant when it comes to the core pillars of our faith. Adam could have been simply the first evolved human to become self aware, hence he is the first human to obtain the image of God. Once again, who really knows...

 

Thanks but there are some who say that Genesis being literal is a major crux of the Christian faith. I've heard some Christians say too that the Genesis account reads like a historical account mentioning real people at real times.

 

Why does it seem very possible?

 

Well tell that to all the Christians who believe that He wasn't speaking metaphorically about human origins... they clearly interpret it differently.
There are Christians who say that a literal Genesis is quintessential to Christianity... they say that accepting evolution would mean that God is an ineffective communicator or is deceptive and it means that He used death to bring about life rather which would mean that death was always there rather than being a result of Adam's sin, it also means that the world was always imperfect and that God created an imperfect world from the beginning rather than it being fallen.

 

Literalist Christians struggle to understand contextual understanding of the scriptures because they completely throw out tradition and history. Luckily most Christians know not the take the bible literally. It's really only within the protestant denominations that you'll have this problem

 

Of course, they do. In fact not just Christians but atheists too. Rob Bell explains it in this video.

In a way you're right. In the Psalms, it says God is a rock but no one, not even the most fundamentalist Christians, believes God is literally a rock. On the other hand, many Christians I take so much literally. Most Christians I know reject evolution completely and believe the story of creation in Genesis literally happened. It might be because I've spent most of my days in evangelical/charismatic/word of faith/pentecostal churches.

 

How can one tell which parts of the Bible to take literally or metaphorically? And those literalist Christians actually have good points for eg. God using death bring about life through evolution rather than death entering the world through Adam's sin.