Did The Writers of Genesis Goof in Story of Adam & Eve? (Jehovah, pray)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sometime, if you have a t.v., search for "The World in Two Hours." It is done by scientists. Of course they can't PROVE what they say about evolution. All they can do is SAY what they believe and use clever cartoons to try to make people think this is how it all really happened.
No, no, you need to actually read a solid scientific book on evolution, NOT a documentary designed to teach evolution to the least common denominator of intellects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
It's Okay Shirina if you don't know how tall Mt. Everest was in Noah's day. Yes, of course the flood waters covered all the mountains, but the question is: How tall were those mountains. You don't know. I'll give you a rather subtle hint: Mt. Everest was not at it's current height in Noah's day that it is today.
Now, speaking of critical thinking skills ... here is where yours seem to have failed you in a most epic fashion.
Do you know why Mt. Everest is rising? It's because the Indian subcontinent collided with Asia millions of years ago, and its momentum is still pushing against the Asian continent causing a slow increase in Everest's elevation. It's like when you accidentally kick the end of a carpet causing wrinkles (mountains) to appear in what was once a flat surface.
Even if Everest has been rising a FOOT every year, Everest would still have been over 23,000 feet tall or roughly 4.5 MILES high in Noah's day.
Everest would have to be rising at a rate of 8 feet and 3 inches per year from Noah's day until now in order for Everest to go from a few hundred feet to 25,000 feet since Noah - which is ridiculous. Considering today it is rising less than an inch per year and assuming a gradual slowdown of the Indian subcontinent, it means that, for some inexplicable reason, the Indian subcontinent would hit Asia at a very slow speed (pushing up Everest by only a few hundred feet), then India would have to speed up drastically (for no apparent reason) to push it up by 8.3 feet every year. But, since we know that it is only rising less than an inch per year now, it means that the initial speed would have had to have been MUCH greater during Noah's time, perhaps as much as 20 or 30 feet per year.
NO! Just no. Your apologetic junk science doesn't work. STOP listening to Kirk Cameron or whomever else you think has the right of it. They don't.
Dear Shirina,
How tall was Mt. Everest in Noah's day?
You can't say that since it has been rising 0.1576 inches each year that that has ALWAYS been its rate of rise. It may have been a few hundred feet tall in Noah's day.
Do you think I believe Noah crammed millions of animals on the ark? Noah's ark may have been longer than 450 feet if you go by the royal cubit.
"May have been"...... oh my, that is rich.....
The Himalayas formed about 65,000,000 years ago, and the first man (Homo Sapiens) evolved only about 400,000 years ago. Exactly where does your big boat fit into this timeline?
I was just reading last night, in Popular Science, an article proposing a world-wide flood of Noah proportions by studying all the same anomalies all over the world. Of course these studies were done by eminent scientists. And of course that wouldn't matter to you. You'll just find something flippant to say, something cheesy, something easy, something queasy, something sleazy.
And... what year was this article published in? I notice that you didn't give a citation.
And is this thread going to revert to the usual Flood Bullcrap that threads usually have done so in the past? Really?
If the Noah story didn't have a religious context, even Eusebius would be laughing at the story's fanciful stupidity.
But because it's in the Bible, by George, we all better straighten up and start believing in nonsense that, in any other venue, would be recognized instantly even by children as a balony factory the size of a small city.
It's funny you mention that, because Martin Luther - that fiery Protestant of the Age of Reason - was still enough of a reasonable man to realize that most of the stories in Genesis were clearly fanciful, and that the only reason he was "forced" to believe them is because of the "Authority of Scripture".
Speaking of the creation of Eve from the rib of the first man:
What, I ask you, could sound more like a fairy tale if you were to follow your reason? Would anyone believe this account about the creation of Eve if it were not so clearly told? ....
This is extravagant fiction and the silliest kind of nonsense if you set aside the authority of Scripture and follow the judgment of reason.
(Lectures on Genesis 1.123, cited by Hendel: The Book of Genesis: A Biography)
Even Martin Luther realized that in order to swallow the Genesis account clearly in opposition to reason, one had to favor the Authority of Scripture. He was not a stupid man. He wrote this knowing full well the irony.
No, no, you need to actually read a solid scientific book on evolution, NOT a documentary designed to teach evolution to the least common denominator of intellects.
Now, speaking of critical thinking skills ... here is where yours seem to have failed you in a most epic fashion.
Do you know why Mt. Everest is rising? It's because the Indian subcontinent collided with Asia millions of years ago, and its momentum is still pushing against the Asian continent causing a slow increase in Everest's elevation. It's like when you accidentally kick the end of a carpet causing wrinkles (mountains) to appear in what was once a flat surface.
Even if Everest has been rising a FOOT every year, Everest would still have been over 23,000 feet tall or roughly 4.5 MILES high in Noah's day.
Everest would have to be rising at a rate of 8 feet and 3 inches per year from Noah's day until now in order for Everest to go from a few hundred feet to 25,000 feet since Noah - which is ridiculous. Considering today it is rising less than an inch per year and assuming a gradual slowdown of the Indian subcontinent, it means that, for some inexplicable reason, the Indian subcontinent would hit Asia at a very slow speed (pushing up Everest by only a few hundred feet), then India would have to speed up drastically (for no apparent reason) to push it up by 8.3 feet every year. But, since we know that it is only rising less than an inch per year now, it means that the initial speed would have had to have been MUCH greater during Noah's time, perhaps as much as 20 or 30 feet per year.
NO! Just no. Your apologetic junk science doesn't work. STOP listening to Kirk Cameron or whomever else you think has the right of it. They don't.
In other words, you just do not know how tall Mt. Everest was in Noah's day.
You are extrapolating from data that just does not exist.
I don't know who Kirk Cameron is.
I know what caused the rise of the Himalayan range. But there is just no solid PROOF that it began rising millions of years ago.
So please do not insult my intelligence by saying the flood waters had to go above the present day height of Mt. Everest.
It's funny you mention that, because Martin Luther - that fiery Protestant of the Age of Reason - was still enough of a reasonable man to realize that most of the stories in Genesis were clearly fanciful, and that the only reason he was "forced" to believe them is because of the "Authority of Scripture".
Speaking of the creation of Eve from the rib of the first man:
What, I ask you, could sound more like a fairy tale if you were to follow your reason? Would anyone believe this account about the creation of Eve if it were not so clearly told? ....
This is extravagant fiction and the silliest kind of nonsense if you set aside the authority of Scripture and follow the judgment of reason.
(Lectures on Genesis 1.123, cited by Hendel: The Book of Genesis: A Biography)
Even Martin Luther realized that in order to swallow the Genesis account clearly in opposition to reason, one had to favor the Authority of Scripture. He was not a stupid man. He wrote this knowing full well the irony.
You don't need to tell ME that, but be sure to let Martin Luther know and the various translations that have traditionally translated it as a "rib".
The more probable explanation can be found in the actual Hebrew term translated as "rib": ṣēlaʻ. It means simply "bone" and does not denote a specific bone. Without going into a multitude of linguistic and historical details here, it is highly likely that like most of the stories in Genesis 1-11 it served an etiological purpose to explain why something was the way it was. In this case, why the male sexual organs have a developmental "seam" that runs underneath the pe..ni..s (spaced due to censorship of the forum) and is missing a baculum. It is this "seam" that is probably referred to as having been closed up once the obviously now-missing ṣēlaʻ of the penis had been removed. The reason this etiological tale was told is probably because the ancients were curious as to why human males did not have a baculum, while animals did. The baculum is a bone in the majority of mamals that stiffens the penis during sexual stimulation, but we humans do not have one. The ancients would have been very familiar with the anatomy of animals, especially due to their sacrificial and slaughtering practices.
So YHWH, God, caused a deep slumber to fall upon the human,
so that he slept,
he took one of his [ṣēlaʻ]s and closed up the flesh in its place.
(Genesis 2:21, SB Fox)
As I said, there are some very good arguments for this explanation that I won't go into here. See, especially and most recently, Ziony Zevit's What Really Happened in the Garden of Eden? (pp. 137-150, Yale University Press, 2013)
I am curious, however, how you see the "rib".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
