The Belief That Life Was the Result of an Accident Is Unscientific

[alang1216]

linky no worky

curious, worked for me?

More than 90% of women change their minds about having an abortion after seeing an ultrasound, Rachel Campos-Duffy says

It is not surprising that viewing ultrasounds under the care and direction of pro-life supporters would result in a much higher reversal rate than ultra sounds administered by abortion mill doctors.

And of course a liberal site like politifact is going to ignore the context.

How about this: before you can buy a gun you have to look at pictures of victims of gun violence and talk to the parents of a child killed by guns.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The heat beats at 3 weeks but the heart and lungs don't fully develop until a few weeks before birth. Probably not the compromise you're looking for.

Define 'fully developed'.

And why would that take precedence over simply having the organs at a functioning level at all?

Do we let people die if they have damaged and not fully functional hearts, lungs or brains?

 

[alang1216]

Why do leftists always try to redefine what makes one truly human so that they can rationalize slaughtering their target populations, like Jews, Kulaks and unborn babies?

I wish it was only leftists. Unfortunately it is everyone.

 

[JimBowie1958]

How about this: before you can buy a gun you have to look at pictures of victims of gun violence and talk to the parents of a child killed by guns.

I would be OK with that as a part of a CCW training class.

But the civil law part was what scared me into being reluctant to use my gun, lol.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why do leftists always try to redefine what makes one truly human so that they can rationalize slaughtering their target populations, like Jews, Kulaks and unborn babies?

I wish it was only leftists. Unfortunately it is everyone.

No, not everyone.

Only those who replace traditional morality with made up nonsense.

At least under the Inquisition you still had a few rights the prosecutors had to respect.

 

[alang1216]

Do we let people die if they have damaged and not fully functional [...] brains?

Yes.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Do we let people die if they have damaged and not fully functional [...] brains?

Yes.

No, we do not, Gawd forbid.

 

[danielpalos]

This is who we are. Just a pile of elements from the Periodic Table.
View attachment 152348

Same elements you will find all around you. When you die, those elements will continue to exist with no effect upon them. Carbon atoms will still be carbon atoms after you die.
View attachment 152347

No matter how accurate you are in combing all of the ratios of atoms in a living being, it is not going to become animated.

View attachment 152349

Atoms are not going to write Beethoven, they does not want to listen to Beethoven, nor does the pile of atoms care if it a living being lives or dies, because the elements have nothing to gain or lose either way. Atoms have no interest in talking to each other, laughing at funny cat videos, or even reading and responding on USMB. Atoms just do not care.

How anyone can delude themselves to believe atoms do have sentient life is beyond me.

AnCap theory could claim that Capitalism will happen, given enough time and enough, open interest.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There is no Biblical recounting of evolution. the Bible was written by barely literate people who were writing down the legends handed down by even less literate goat herders. they didn't even know the freaking Earth was round. Give me a break.

Wrong, you dunce.


1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.



2. Modern science has largely revealed the earth’s history with respect to the land and the seas. Coincidently, the first chapter of the Bible relates a formation, a creation narrative, strangely similar to scientific understanding.


a. Genesis 1: 6-10…”And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dryland appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.


b. “The formation of the sea as well as the land is chosen as the second stage in the creation on the Bible’s first page. Modern science reveals that land and sea certainly were in place before the next stage in the scientific account of the history of the universe.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p.54. What a coincidence….or confluence.


Curious, the author of Genesis lived in a landlocked region; and Moses wandered in the desert, not along the coast. Yet…sea and land appear in this prominent position in Genesis. Must be a coincidence….



3. The opening page of Genesis asserts that plant life appeared after the seas were formed, and names specifically, grass, herbs and fruit trees. According to the author of Genesis, this is the stage where life actually begins: this is the first mention life of any kind. Plant life. Yet, the simple forms of life that are considered plant life were not discovered until a couple of millennia after Genesis was completed. So…how come Genesis mentions grass, herbs, and fruit trees at precisely this moment on the creation narrative? Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter four.


a. Genesis 1: 11-12 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


b. “ From about 400 million years back to 600 million years, all kinds of complex multicellular life would have been confined to the waters of the earth….Our world's ecosystems depend upon photosynthesis to construct the fuel that all life runs on; in an ancient world with conditions similar to today's, you would need plants (as organisms that can make complex "fuel" molecules using simple building blocks and energy available from the environment, plants are known as one type of autotrophs, or "self-feeders") to evolve first, or there would be no bottom link to the food chain.” Biology of Animals & Plants - Origins & History of Life on Earth



4. Track the events in the creation account of Genesis and it’s amazing how closely the events conform to the current view of modern science. An explosion- the universe – oceans/land - plants- …And next, in verse 20, we find: And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.


Kind of unusual…since the author of Genesis, and, if we are to believe that the first one to speak those words, Moses, didn’t really live in a habitat that one might call ‘sea side.’


Would have been understandable if this space in the Bible had, instead, have focused on the numbers of land mammals, birds, or insects found in ancient Israel, wouldn’t it? But, instead, marine organisms are specifically named: ‘Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,…’


Wouldn’t it be interesting if science find lots and lots of marine organisms extant at this point? Imagine if Genesis actually parallels the history of life on earth as expounded by science. Be a heck of a coincidence.

a. A truly important development took place some 521 million years ago, in the geological period known as the Cambrian. “The most abundant and diverse animals of Cambrian time were the trilobites. Trilobites had long antennae, compound eyes, many jointed legs, and a hard exoskeleton like many of their modern arthropod relatives, such as lobsters, crabs, and insects. The Cambrian is sometimes called the "Age of Trilobites"…” Redirect


b. No earlier fossils were found during Darwin’s lifetime: “If the theory [evolution] be true it is indisputable that before the lowest Cambrian stratum was deposited ... the world swarmed with living creatures. [Yet] to the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these earliest periods. . . I can give no satisfactory answer. The case at present must remain inexplicable.” http://www.paleosoc.org/Oldest_Fossil.pdf

....life at this stage, about 500 million years ago, was entirely marine.

How could the Genesis writer have gotten this right?

That writer…he’s landlocked, knows little of diversity….what are the odds that ‘chance’ is the answer?


What are the odds?



5. The sequence of events from the creation of the universe, to the present, begin with great explosion that produces the universe, including the earth. The earth cools enough for oceans to form. The first life is plant life, able to photosynthesize, and add oxygen to the atmosphere. All sorts of simple non-plants fill the seas, most wormlike, with soft bodies. Along come the trilobites, hugely advanced, with hard bodies…and most amazingly, with true eyes! This makes them the primary predators….but, imposes enormous evolutionary pressure on the other organisms. The result is the Cambrian explosion, lots of small organisms with defensive armor and hard exoskeletons, some 521 million years ago. So says modern science.


a. “…Genesis shows remarkable accuracy when compared to the scientific story of life’s evolutionary journey. Here, the Genesis writer envisioned great creatures evolving from those tiny Cambrian forms, eventually making their way out of the sea….Genesis seems to have picked out all the events of the highest order of importance, and put them in the right order….I don’t know the odds against such a parallel- against making a successful guess at the scientific orthodoxy of three thousand year into the future from a knowledge base of nothing- but they must be extraordinarily long.” Parker, Op. Cit., p.163-164.


b. An interesting sidelight is the ‘evolution of the Bible’ itself. Christians have incorporated a great deal of science’s process. Early in the 20th century, the Scofield Reference Bible was published. This was a new version of the King James Bible with which added a note to Genesis, suggesting what is called the “gap theory.’ It allows that millions of years could have passed between God’s creation of the heavens and the earth, thereby freeing Genesis from the literal six-day process. “What it left was a series- the same series- of timeless events; and it is these that match the scientific account of life’s history.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p. 160.


6. Unavoidable is the recognition that, once the restrictions due to the ‘six-day’ view are removed, the order of events established by modern science conform to the sequence in the first chapter of Genesis, written millennia earlier: light from an explosion (the Big Bang), universe/earth formed, the seas from the cooling earth, plants as the first life forms; abundant sea life (the Cambrian explosion), the (evolution) of the flora and fauna we see today. Neat, eh?

Lucky guess by the author of the creation account of Genesis?


7. If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic. Following that, he had to have realized that an eye evolved in an early animal in the geological past, which triggered the evolution of all the major groups of animals that exist today. Still further, he must have felt that all of this occurred in the seas, before animals moved onto land, and only when they did move out of the water did mammals and birds evolve.


The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.


Wow! What an incredibly lucky guess! What a considerable stroke of good fortune!


The alternative explanation is divine intervention.

1. “ a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.” What do scientists think about religion?

What a laughable, steaming pile of shit that copy/paste job was. No, the Bible does not 'recount evolution".

In general, the default to vulgarity is an admission of losing the argument.

In your case it is both specific, and eternal.

You religious nutballs can turn any statement or word saladinto affirmation of yourselves. That's theluxurythat wielding magical thinking affords you. I could have said "goats like watermelon", and you would have proceeded to do a little victory dance. We all knew this before you even opened your mouth. No, I am not going to debate the utterly stupid and absurd idea that the Bible recounted evolution with you.

Many consider your belief that carbon atoms post on USMB to be a magical belief.

Well whoever thinks that is obviously a delusional idiot, as here we are, two sacks of chemicals, posting on a message board. I think you should work on articulating yourself a bit more well

 

[alang1216]

No, not everyone.

Only those who replace traditional morality with made up nonsense.

At least under the Inquisition you still had a few rights the prosecutors had to respect.

Whose tradition? I'm sure having rights was a relief to those being burned at the stake.

signing off

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If the question of when does life begin is so easy then when does life end? A car crash victim is declared brain dead by his doctors. Is removing his life support murder?

People have come back from 'brain dead' status to live normal lives. They pull the plug for financial reasons mostly. Health care is an industry and the notion that they regard human life as sacred is minority at best and ridiculous at worst.

IMO if there is no discernable breathing, heart pumping, or brain activity then they are dead after about a thirty second flat line status.

"People have come back from 'brain dead' status to live normal lives."

False.. In any case where that was implied, brain death was misdiagnosed.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You've just documented that you don't understand "God."

I beg to differ, I think I understand God just fine, I just don't agree with your concept of God. Doesn't make me a dunce or make you right. It means I prefer rationality to faith.

" I think I understand God just fine,"

Actually....we've proven that you don't.

The attributes of God are specific characteristics of God discussed in Christian theology.



Contents
[1Classification

• 2Enumeration
  • 2.1Aseity
  • 2.2Eternity
  • 2.3Goodness
  • 2.4Graciousness
  • 2.5Holiness
  • 2.6Immanence
  • 2.7Immutability
  • 2.8Impassibility
  • 2.9Impeccability
  • 2.10Incomprehensibility
  • 2.11Incorporeality
  • 2.12Infinity
  • 2.13Jealousy
  • 2.14Love
  • 2.15Mission
  • 2.16Mystery
  • 2.17Omnipotence
  • 2.18Omnipresence
  • 2.19Omniscience
  • 2.20Oneness
  • 2.21Providence
  • 2.22Righteousness
  • 2.23Simplicity
  • 2.24Sovereignty
  • 2.25Transcendence
  • 2.26Trinity
  • 2.27Veracity
  • 2.28Wrath

Attributes of God in Christianity - Wikipedia


Clearly, a number of those terms are beyond your ken.

Now...as far as
" I think I understand God just fine,".....
"Think" is a mighty strong way of putting what you do, isn't it?



What is it that God cannot do?

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you continue to ignore the astounding similarity between the modern version of evolution and the Biblical recounting of same?

I've got the new symbol for your party right here:

There is no Biblical recounting of evolution. the Bible was written by barely literate people who were writing down the legends handed down by even less literate goat herders. they didn't even know the freaking Earth was round. Give me a break.

Wrong, you dunce.


1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.



2. Modern science has largely revealed the earth’s history with respect to the land and the seas. Coincidently, the first chapter of the Bible relates a formation, a creation narrative, strangely similar to scientific understanding.


a. Genesis 1: 6-10…”And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dryland appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.


b. “The formation of the sea as well as the land is chosen as the second stage in the creation on the Bible’s first page. Modern science reveals that land and sea certainly were in place before the next stage in the scientific account of the history of the universe.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p.54. What a coincidence….or confluence.


Curious, the author of Genesis lived in a landlocked region; and Moses wandered in the desert, not along the coast. Yet…sea and land appear in this prominent position in Genesis. Must be a coincidence….



3. The opening page of Genesis asserts that plant life appeared after the seas were formed, and names specifically, grass, herbs and fruit trees. According to the author of Genesis, this is the stage where life actually begins: this is the first mention life of any kind. Plant life. Yet, the simple forms of life that are considered plant life were not discovered until a couple of millennia after Genesis was completed. So…how come Genesis mentions grass, herbs, and fruit trees at precisely this moment on the creation narrative? Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter four.


a. Genesis 1: 11-12 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


b. “ From about 400 million years back to 600 million years, all kinds of complex multicellular life would have been confined to the waters of the earth….Our world's ecosystems depend upon photosynthesis to construct the fuel that all life runs on; in an ancient world with conditions similar to today's, you would need plants (as organisms that can make complex "fuel" molecules using simple building blocks and energy available from the environment, plants are known as one type of autotrophs, or "self-feeders") to evolve first, or there would be no bottom link to the food chain.” Biology of Animals & Plants - Origins & History of Life on Earth



4. Track the events in the creation account of Genesis and it’s amazing how closely the events conform to the current view of modern science. An explosion- the universe – oceans/land - plants- …And next, in verse 20, we find: And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.


Kind of unusual…since the author of Genesis, and, if we are to believe that the first one to speak those words, Moses, didn’t really live in a habitat that one might call ‘sea side.’


Would have been understandable if this space in the Bible had, instead, have focused on the numbers of land mammals, birds, or insects found in ancient Israel, wouldn’t it? But, instead, marine organisms are specifically named: ‘Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,…’


Wouldn’t it be interesting if science find lots and lots of marine organisms extant at this point? Imagine if Genesis actually parallels the history of life on earth as expounded by science. Be a heck of a coincidence.

a. A truly important development took place some 521 million years ago, in the geological period known as the Cambrian. “The most abundant and diverse animals of Cambrian time were the trilobites. Trilobites had long antennae, compound eyes, many jointed legs, and a hard exoskeleton like many of their modern arthropod relatives, such as lobsters, crabs, and insects. The Cambrian is sometimes called the "Age of Trilobites"…” Redirect


b. No earlier fossils were found during Darwin’s lifetime: “If the theory [evolution] be true it is indisputable that before the lowest Cambrian stratum was deposited ... the world swarmed with living creatures. [Yet] to the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these earliest periods. . . I can give no satisfactory answer. The case at present must remain inexplicable.” http://www.paleosoc.org/Oldest_Fossil.pdf

....life at this stage, about 500 million years ago, was entirely marine.

How could the Genesis writer have gotten this right?

That writer…he’s landlocked, knows little of diversity….what are the odds that ‘chance’ is the answer?


What are the odds?



5. The sequence of events from the creation of the universe, to the present, begin with great explosion that produces the universe, including the earth. The earth cools enough for oceans to form. The first life is plant life, able to photosynthesize, and add oxygen to the atmosphere. All sorts of simple non-plants fill the seas, most wormlike, with soft bodies. Along come the trilobites, hugely advanced, with hard bodies…and most amazingly, with true eyes! This makes them the primary predators….but, imposes enormous evolutionary pressure on the other organisms. The result is the Cambrian explosion, lots of small organisms with defensive armor and hard exoskeletons, some 521 million years ago. So says modern science.


a. “…Genesis shows remarkable accuracy when compared to the scientific story of life’s evolutionary journey. Here, the Genesis writer envisioned great creatures evolving from those tiny Cambrian forms, eventually making their way out of the sea….Genesis seems to have picked out all the events of the highest order of importance, and put them in the right order….I don’t know the odds against such a parallel- against making a successful guess at the scientific orthodoxy of three thousand year into the future from a knowledge base of nothing- but they must be extraordinarily long.” Parker, Op. Cit., p.163-164.


b. An interesting sidelight is the ‘evolution of the Bible’ itself. Christians have incorporated a great deal of science’s process. Early in the 20th century, the Scofield Reference Bible was published. This was a new version of the King James Bible with which added a note to Genesis, suggesting what is called the “gap theory.’ It allows that millions of years could have passed between God’s creation of the heavens and the earth, thereby freeing Genesis from the literal six-day process. “What it left was a series- the same series- of timeless events; and it is these that match the scientific account of life’s history.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p. 160.


6. Unavoidable is the recognition that, once the restrictions due to the ‘six-day’ view are removed, the order of events established by modern science conform to the sequence in the first chapter of Genesis, written millennia earlier: light from an explosion (the Big Bang), universe/earth formed, the seas from the cooling earth, plants as the first life forms; abundant sea life (the Cambrian explosion), the (evolution) of the flora and fauna we see today. Neat, eh?

Lucky guess by the author of the creation account of Genesis?


7. If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic. Following that, he had to have realized that an eye evolved in an early animal in the geological past, which triggered the evolution of all the major groups of animals that exist today. Still further, he must have felt that all of this occurred in the seas, before animals moved onto land, and only when they did move out of the water did mammals and birds evolve.


The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.


Wow! What an incredibly lucky guess! What a considerable stroke of good fortune!


The alternative explanation is divine intervention.

1. “ a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41% say they do not.” What do scientists think about religion?

What a laughable, steaming pile of shit that copy/paste job was. No, the Bible does not 'recount evolution".

In general, the default to vulgarity is an admission of losing the argument.

In your case it is both specific, and eternal.

You religious nutballs can turn any statement or word saladinto affirmation of yourselves. That's theluxurythat wielding magical thinking affords you. I could have said "goats like watermelon", and you would have proceeded to do a little victory dance. We all knew this before you even opened your mouth. No, I am not going to debate the utterly stupid and absurd idea that the Bible recounted evolution with you.

How many times must you be proven to be a low-level dunce?

Shouldn't once be sufficient?


Let's review:
The events and the order of those events as outlined in the book of Genesis mirror the very same event and order of events posited by modern evolutionary biologists.


This:
1. God’s first command in Genesis is “Let there be light.” Nor is this the only introduction of light in the Genesis creation account, but it is the first, it represents the beginning of the formation of our solar system. And that was ‘The Big Bang’…some 13,700 million years ago. Quite an event…it lasted just 10 to the minus 35th seconds, beginning the universe, generating time and space, as well as all the matter and energy that the universe would ever, ever, contain! Big Bang…explosion….energy….light. But no atoms to form the sun for some time. Light…but no sun? So says science. And so says Genesis. Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter two.

a. For reference, Genesis 1, verses 1-4: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.



2. Modern science has largely revealed the earth’s history with respect to the land and the seas. Coincidently, the first chapter of the Bible relates a formation, a creation narrative, strangely similar to scientific understanding.


a. Genesis 1: 6-10…”And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dryland appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.


b. “The formation of the sea as well as the land is chosen as the second stage in the creation on the Bible’s first page. Modern science reveals that land and sea certainly were in place before the next stage in the scientific account of the history of the universe.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p.54. What a coincidence….or confluence.


Curious, the author of Genesis lived in a landlocked region; and Moses wandered in the desert, not along the coast. Yet…sea and land appear in this prominent position in Genesis. Must be a coincidence….



3. The opening page of Genesis asserts that plant life appeared after the seas were formed, and names specifically, grass, herbs and fruit trees. According to the author of Genesis, this is the stage where life actually begins: this is the first mention life of any kind. Plant life. Yet, the simple forms of life that are considered plant life were not discovered until a couple of millennia after Genesis was completed. So…how come Genesis mentions grass, herbs, and fruit trees at precisely this moment on the creation narrative? Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” chapter four.


a. Genesis 1: 11-12 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


b. “ From about 400 million years back to 600 million years, all kinds of complex multicellular life would have been confined to the waters of the earth….Our world's ecosystems depend upon photosynthesis to construct the fuel that all life runs on; in an ancient world with conditions similar to today's, you would need plants (as organisms that can make complex "fuel" molecules using simple building blocks and energy available from the environment, plants are known as one type of autotrophs, or "self-feeders") to evolve first, or there would be no bottom link to the food chain.” Biology of Animals & Plants - Origins & History of Life on Earth



4. Track the events in the creation account of Genesis and it’s amazing how closely the events conform to the current view of modern science. An explosion- the universe – oceans/land - plants- …And next, in verse 20, we find: And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.


Kind of unusual…since the author of Genesis, and, if we are to believe that the first one to speak those words, Moses, didn’t really live in a habitat that one might call ‘sea side.’


Would have been understandable if this space in the Bible had, instead, have focused on the numbers of land mammals, birds, or insects found in ancient Israel, wouldn’t it? But, instead, marine organisms are specifically named: ‘Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life,…’


Wouldn’t it be interesting if science find lots and lots of marine organisms extant at this point? Imagine if Genesis actually parallels the history of life on earth as expounded by science. Be a heck of a coincidence.

a. A truly important development took place some 521 million years ago, in the geological period known as the Cambrian. “The most abundant and diverse animals of Cambrian time were the trilobites. Trilobites had long antennae, compound eyes, many jointed legs, and a hard exoskeleton like many of their modern arthropod relatives, such as lobsters, crabs, and insects. The Cambrian is sometimes called the "Age of Trilobites"…” Redirect


b. No earlier fossils were found during Darwin’s lifetime: “If the theory [evolution] be true it is indisputable that before the lowest Cambrian stratum was deposited ... the world swarmed with living creatures. [Yet] to the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these earliest periods. . . I can give no satisfactory answer. The case at present must remain inexplicable.” http://www.paleosoc.org/Oldest_Fossil.pdf

....life at this stage, about 500 million years ago, was entirely marine.

How could the Genesis writer have gotten this right?

That writer…he’s landlocked, knows little of diversity….what are the odds that ‘chance’ is the answer?


What are the odds?



5. The sequence of events from the creation of the universe, to the present, begin with great explosion that produces the universe, including the earth. The earth cools enough for oceans to form. The first life is plant life, able to photosynthesize, and add oxygen to the atmosphere. All sorts of simple non-plants fill the seas, most wormlike, with soft bodies. Along come the trilobites, hugely advanced, with hard bodies…and most amazingly, with true eyes! This makes them the primary predators….but, imposes enormous evolutionary pressure on the other organisms. The result is the Cambrian explosion, lots of small organisms with defensive armor and hard exoskeletons, some 521 million years ago. So says modern science.


a. “…Genesis shows remarkable accuracy when compared to the scientific story of life’s evolutionary journey. Here, the Genesis writer envisioned great creatures evolving from those tiny Cambrian forms, eventually making their way out of the sea….Genesis seems to have picked out all the events of the highest order of importance, and put them in the right order….I don’t know the odds against such a parallel- against making a successful guess at the scientific orthodoxy of three thousand year into the future from a knowledge base of nothing- but they must be extraordinarily long.” Parker, Op. Cit., p.163-164.


b. An interesting sidelight is the ‘evolution of the Bible’ itself. Christians have incorporated a great deal of science’s process. Early in the 20th century, the Scofield Reference Bible was published. This was a new version of the King James Bible with which added a note to Genesis, suggesting what is called the “gap theory.’ It allows that millions of years could have passed between God’s creation of the heavens and the earth, thereby freeing Genesis from the literal six-day process. “What it left was a series- the same series- of timeless events; and it is these that match the scientific account of life’s history.” Parker, “The Genesis Enigma,” p. 160.


6. Unavoidable is the recognition that, once the restrictions due to the ‘six-day’ view are removed, the order of events established by modern science conform to the sequence in the first chapter of Genesis, written millennia earlier: light from an explosion (the Big Bang), universe/earth formed, the seas from the cooling earth, plants as the first life forms; abundant sea life (the Cambrian explosion), the (evolution) of the flora and fauna we see today. Neat, eh?

Lucky guess by the author of the creation account of Genesis?


7. If it is not evidence for the God, then the author of Genesis 1, or Moses, perhaps, must have understood that the universe formed first, then the seas appeared on earth, and that life forms were photosynthetic. Following that, he had to have realized that an eye evolved in an early animal in the geological past, which triggered the evolution of all the major groups of animals that exist today. Still further, he must have felt that all of this occurred in the seas, before animals moved onto land, and only when they did move out of the water did mammals and birds evolve.


The Old Testament was written, although not compiled, almost three millennia ago. It is extraordinary that the writer of the creation account in Genesis, chapter one, got it right in his exposition of the series of events: his sequence turns out to be scientifically accurate in terms of contemporary knowledge.


Wow! What an incredibly lucky guess! What a considerable stroke of good fortune!


The alternative explanation is divine intervention.

 

[JimBowie1958]

No, not everyone.

Only those who replace traditional morality with made up nonsense.

At least under the Inquisition you still had a few rights the prosecutors had to respect.

Whose tradition? I'm sure having rights was a relief to those being burned at the stake.

signing off

Lol, only a few thousand were burned at the stake and they had various rights from appealing to the Pope to criminal procedures through the local secular government.

Compared to the atheistic-secular regimes of the last centuries that was nothing.

 

[alang1216]

You've just documented that you don't understand "God."

I beg to differ, I think I understand God just fine, I just don't agree with your concept of God. Doesn't make me a dunce or make you right. It means I prefer rationality to faith.

" I think I understand God just fine,"

Actually....we've proven that you don't.

The attributes of God are specific characteristics of God discussed in Christian theology.

Clearly, a number of those terms are beyond your ken.

Now...as far as
" I think I understand God just fine,".....
"Think" is a mighty strong way of putting what you do, isn't it?

What is it that God cannot do?

Why would I accept that Christians know any more about God than I do? Saying you do is not convincing at all.

As for what God cannot do: laugh.

 

[alang1216]

No, not everyone.

Only those who replace traditional morality with made up nonsense.

At least under the Inquisition you still had a few rights the prosecutors had to respect.

Whose tradition? I'm sure having rights was a relief to those being burned at the stake.

signing off

Lol, only a few thousand were burned at the stake and they had various rights from appealing to the Pope to criminal procedures through the local secular government.

Compared to the atheistic-secular regimes of the last centuries that was nothing.

A difference of degree but not of kind.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Compared to the atheistic-secular regimes of the last centuries that was nothing.

A difference of degree but not of kind.

One is a religious organization that existed for over a thousand years and has had a body of ecclesiastical law that everyone has to abide by, even the Pope.

The others are made up ideological bullshit that dehumanized huge swaths of the human race and put them to death.

No, I am not groking the similarity in kind, not at all.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why would I accept that Christians know any more about God than I do? Saying you do is not convincing at all.

I wouldnt say that Christians know more than you do, but I would say that the accumulated wisdom of the church is more impressive, steady and helpful than any person as an individual.

As for what God cannot do: laugh.

oh, I dont know about that......

he made Starkey

 

[PoliticalChic]

You've just documented that you don't understand "God."

I beg to differ, I think I understand God just fine, I just don't agree with your concept of God. Doesn't make me a dunce or make you right. It means I prefer rationality to faith.

" I think I understand God just fine,"

Actually....we've proven that you don't.

The attributes of God are specific characteristics of God discussed in Christian theology.

Clearly, a number of those terms are beyond your ken.

Now...as far as
" I think I understand God just fine,".....
"Think" is a mighty strong way of putting what you do, isn't it?

What is it that God cannot do?

Why would I accept that Christians know any more about God than I do? Saying you do is not convincing at all.

As for what God cannot do: laugh.

Because you're not entitled to make up your own definitions for commonly accepted terms.

Even a dunce like you should understand that.

 

[alang1216]

Compared to the atheistic-secular regimes of the last centuries that was nothing.

A difference of degree but not of kind.

One is a religious organization that existed for over a thousand years and has had a body of ecclesiastical law that everyone has to abide by, even the Pope.

The others are made up ideological bullshit that dehumanized huge swaths of the human race and put them to death.

No, I am not groking the similarity in kind, not at all.

A Jew in Spain being burned at the stake by the Inquisition and a Jew in Russia being starved by Stalin would have had trouble discerning the difference.