Creation from a different angle?

[SkyWriting]

Nope. Abiogenesis is an interesting topic but I don't understand the relevance of your question.

What basic, physical, organic properties of matter lead to the formation of life.
What chemistry "wants" to form life?
What about matter has an interest in life?
What benefit is life to chemicals?
What basic law of nature favors the creation of life?
What basic law of nature leaves open the option for life?

I'm also wondering which properties of matter are considered to be unnatural.

That would be illustrated by answers to the above questions.

 

[SkyWriting]

Writings? Do you seriously think Adam (if he even existed) could write? It is probably more likely that these were first orally transmitted, after which only once we (humanoids) learned to write, that such a thing was attended to. Meticulously, I may point out.

Yes. I believe Adam had the most intelligent mind man has ever possessed and that each generation has had a lower intellect since then.

Take a close look at any discoveries of ancient man. Not in a single case has the discovery suggested that ancient man was stupid. The older the discovery, the more likely that the evidence gave hints that ancient man used to be brilliant. I think it's likely that we are so dim that we can't even recognize how brilliant they were.

Would you like an example? Name ONE thing that a cell phone does to increase your own intelligence or helps you make a better decision without input from other people. How does the phone itself, help you?

 

[SkyWriting]

It has gone on to be a very robust doctrine of the church, one I find no reason not to uphold. In fact, and more directly on the topic, those components are found in the first three verses of Genesis 1.

Yes, the components are there.
But I could pick any three aspects of god and they would have support.

Nowhere , does the bible, support the concept of "the trinity."
Particularly the New Testament population, which is the only
group of people to actually experience the Holy Spirit which
came to the disciples after the resurrection.

They would have been the fist leaders to teach the new churches
about The Trinity, which they didn't. I'm not suggesting that it's
harmful. I'm opposed to the idea that's it's anything more than
a teaching tool. But it's not a scripturally supported concept.
You might as well teach that serpent's are bad advisers and
we should avoid their counseling.

 

[cerad]

What basic, physical, organic properties of matter lead to the formation of life.
What chemistry "wants" to form life?
What about matter has an interest in life?
What benefit is life to chemicals?
What basic law of nature favors the creation of life?
What basic law of nature leaves open the option for life?

That would be illustrated by answers to the above questions.

No idea. Except for the first one these questions seem to be woo based.

Is that your point? Creationism can be rejected out of hand because it's supernatural silliness?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I was thinking about Genesis chapters 1 verse one and two. As you know it's broken into three sentences:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.


What is your angle on these three sentences?

I think they should have been written/printed like this;

In The Beginning God Created The Heavens And The Earth. (Title)

The earth became an empty wasteland, and darkness covered the face of the deep. (Subtitle)

And then the Spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters. (Narrative begins.)

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Yes. I believe Adam had the most intelligent mind man has ever possessed and that each generation has had a lower intellect since then.

Take a close look at any discoveries of ancient man. Not in a single case has the discovery suggested that ancient man was stupid. The older the discovery, the more likely that the evidence gave hints that ancient man used to be brilliant. I think it's likely that we are so dim that we can't even recognize how brilliant they were.

Would you like an example? Name ONE thing that a cell phone does to increase your own intelligence or helps you make a better decision without input from other people. How does the phone itself, help you?

It might not be obvious to you, but don't you think that if Adam was its author -- it would be written from Adam's perspective

I used to think that Genesis is literal, but I find it very hard to sustain that view in the light of what I am learning about Evolution.

This is why this thread is my attempt at trying to deal with this -- it is subject of this thread.

During ""Lines of Evidence" and "Flood Geology" and ""Human Evolution Only" (threads, I am deliberately trying to learn more about Evolution in)

Evolution is Science, Genesis is NOT science, and it wasn't conceived as such -- if the authors were alive they would tell you to look at it as if you lived then.

Moses, Jesus and Paul were all MEN. They said things that show, that they only knew what they knew. In fact the whole Bible is like that.

One has to do proper Bible Study, taking these things into consideration and get the Big Picture : The Big Picture

 

[OldWiseGuy]

One has to do proper Bible Study, taking these things into consideration and get the Big Picture : The Big Picture

The big picture is the unseen supernatural/spirit world that surrounds and permeates the material universe. Man, without revelation, only believes what he can see, thus relegates the big picture to the material universe.

Verse 2 of Genesis 1 could well have read,

"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy."

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

The big picture is the unseen supernatural/spirit world that surrounds and permeates the material universe. Man, without revelation, only believes what he can see, thus relegates the big picture to the material universe.

Verse 2 of Genesis 1 could well have read,

"When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy."

Are you referring to the idea of Pre-Adamic races?
You must be aware the the Hebrew for this is, isn't really that convincing?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

[lewiscalledhimmaster;67066899]

Are you referring to the idea of Pre-Adamic races?

The angels weren't really a 'race'.

You must be aware the the Hebrew for this is, isn't really that convincing?

Then we should add a little Greek to the mix.

"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." Jude 1:6

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Please use the quote function properly.

The angels weren't really a 'race'.



Then we should add a little Greek to the mix.

"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." Jude 1:6

Oh, are you then presenting the idea of a repeat Nephelim idea.
Please explain your view with a little more detail please?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Oh, are you then presenting the idea of a repeat Nephelim idea.
Please explain your view with a little more detail please?

He created the earth especially for the angels, as an estate and habitation; their own little 'kingdom' if you will. It was intended for their pleasure (Eden). How they began to abuse it isn't known, but when they ascended to be 'equal' with God they were cast back down, their Eden-like kingdom destroyed and replaced by an austere landscape inhabited by monsters; the new bodies that God gave them that reflected what they had become to him.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

He created the earth especially for the angels, as an estate and habitation; their own little 'kingdom' if you will. It was intended for their pleasure (Eden). How they began to abuse it isn't known, but when they ascended to be 'equal' with God they were cast back down, their Eden-like kingdom destroyed and replaced by an austere landscape inhabited by monsters; the new bodies that God gave them that reflected what they had become to him.

Do you also employ the books of Enoch, in your idea?

 

[Gracchus]

Can you tell us which natural properties of matter lead to life?

Oh! Oh! I know this one! It is the laws of physics, subset chemistry.

What basic, physical, organic properties of matter lead to the formation of life.
What chemistry "wants" to form life?

That would be chemical reactions whose products catalyze the formation of the self-same products. This would include some proteins, RNA and DNA. Once such reaction products are formed they catalyze the formation of more such products.

What about matter has an interest in life?

Some matter is human beings, and some human beings have an interest in life. Some matter is even aware that life is not a substance but a pattern of dynamic processes.

What benefit is life to chemicals?

That is a meaningless question, kind of like "What benefit is a raven to a writing desk?"

What basic law of nature favors the creation of life?

The "Laws of Nature" are just observations that seem to hold true in all cases. They don't "favor" anything. You might as well ask "What is a rock's favorite color."

What basic law of nature leaves open the option for life?

You are imputing agency and intention to a reified abstraction. It's kind of like trying to describe the philosophical musings of a stone. The closest we can come to answering your question would be to indicate that any law of nature that does not make life impossible, "favors" life. And since there is life, there can be no law that makes it impossible. It may be improbable, of course, but it is obviously not impossible. (Cogito, ergo sum.)

That would be illustrated by answers to the above questions.

The questions you posed are not answerable because they have no meaning. They are rather of same basic meaninglessness as "What color are numbers."

These basic misunderstandings arise from the attempt to rationalize misunderstandings, paradoxes, contradictory premises, and cognitive dissonances. It is reductio ad absurdum.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Do you also employ the books of Enoch, in your idea?

Just the bible.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Just the bible.

Fair enough, will you please explain yourself (details) ?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Fair enough, will you please explain yourself (details) ?

I assembled a chain of scriptures that deal with the beginnings of earth, the angelic realm, God's relationship with the angels, etc. Followed the pattern of the Genesis re-creation, especially the creation of Eve, as well as the fall.

God created the angels to include other beings in what became his spiritual kingdom. He saw that while they had the close company of each other, he had no similar relationship, so he created an angelic being for himself as well. He then created the material universe as a display of his power and glory and as a material realm for the angels, who were yet but spirits. He then created, at their behest perhaps, a place of their own; the Edenlike earth. Eden means pleasure. So to enjoy this pleasure he gave them bodies, in which form we don't know, but probably much like ours. With these bodies they were able to enjoy the sensations, and the sensuality of this paradise; the feelings, tastes, smells, and other wonderful sensations. Perhaps even sex, the most delicious of sensations (I must say).

He set his companion as overseer of the angels in this paradise, much like a husband relinquishes rule over his children to his wife, their mother. This being too was given a body with which to enjoy their new habitation. God also clothed himself with flesh for that purpose. What intrigue that led to betrayal isn't known (perhaps Greek mythology can shed some light) but in time this being gathered one-third of angels into a conspiracy which sought to include equality with God. All were cast back to earth, as lightning, destroying their paradise and their beautiful bodies. Now disembodied God fashioned a series of terrible forms for them to inhabit over the millennia, until he set his hand to repair his kingdom (the restitution of all things) and replace the sinning angels with 'a new creation' in the form of man, who would become a 'work in progress' until perfected according to this purpose. We take up the story in Genesis 1.