Taking Questions on Genesis

[AV1611VET]

But hey, how about we start off by you explaining to me how God pulled off Eve's sudden increase in pain during childbirth.

Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

I somehow don't think Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego were writhing in pain in that furnace.

Do you?

Now ... had those three men blasphemed God during their tour inside this building, and God so chose, He could have withdrawn His anesthetic blessings, couldn't He have?

 

[partinobodycular]

Given that AV's God is omnipotent, why would that be an issue? If you wish to desconstruct or refute AV's thinking you will need do better than that!

Trust me, I'm aware. Then again, perhaps the purpose isn't to deconstruct AV's thinking, perhaps it's to deconstruct mine. Sharpening stones can come in some pretty unexpected forms.

 

[Ophiolite]

Trust me, I'm aware. Then again, perhaps the purpose isn't to deconstruct AV's thinking, perhaps it's to deconstruct mine. Sharpening stones can come in some pretty unexpected forms.

Aha! Yes, that makes perfect sense. Attempting to change AV's thinking is an exercise in pointlessness, for several reasons. But pursuing a line of reasoning can clarify one's own thoughts, or may influence those fence-sitting observers in a positive way. I think many of my posts are really directed at myself. (If only I paid attention!)

 

[partinobodycular]

I somehow don't think Shadrach, Meschach, and Abednego were writhing in pain in that furnace.

You seem to be suggesting that God intentionally inflicted pain on Eve. Her pain had nothing to do with a narrow pelvis, or the size of her offspring's skull. Which would suggest that Eve was anatomically different from modern females, and that her offspring had smaller brains.

That would suggest that we've evolved from a pre-bipedal Eve to the modern intelligent humans that we are today.

Hence Genesis supports evolution, and specifically the evolution of humans.

 

[AV1611VET]

You seem to be suggesting that God intentionally inflicted pain on Eve.

Well ... you know ... ya.

Her pain had nothing to do with a narrow pelvis, or the size of her offspring's skull.

Had she not sinned, I don't care if her pelvis was as narrow as a thread, she may not have felt any pain.

Dunno though.

Which would suggest that Eve was anatomically different from modern females,

Why?

... and that her offspring had smaller brains.

I suspect your attempts to analyze what happened in the Garden through modern academics is confusing you; and you don't even know it.

Science, if allowed to hike through the Bible, will leave a trail of confusion, misunderstanding, and ignorance in its wake.

That would suggest that we've evolved from a pre-bipedal Eve to the modern intelligent humans that we are today.

Listen to your word choices.

You're trying so hard to find evolution in Genesis, you can't hear how ... well ... mistaken you are.

Hence Genesis supports evolution.

Um ... no.

Nice try though.

 

[AV1611VET]

Which would suggest that Eve was anatomically different from modern females, and that her offspring had smaller brains.

Don't forget what God did to the serpent beast:

Genesis 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

I'm surprised you don't think the Bible supports Lamarckism.

(Or do you?)

 

[AV1611VET]

Aha! Yes, that makes perfect sense. Attempting to change AV's thinking is an exercise in pointlessness, for several reasons. But pursuing a line of reasoning can clarify one's own thoughts, or may influence those fence-sitting observers in a positive way. I think many of my posts are really directed at myself. (If only I paid attention!)

I'm still waiting for someone to bring up Jacob's flock as an example of bad science in the Bible.

 

[partinobodycular]

I don't care if her pelvis was as narrow as a thread, she may not have felt any pain.

Science, if allow to hike through the Bible, will leave a trail of confusion, misunderstanding, and ignorance in its wake.

Might I suggest that it's actually your rejection of science that's the source of confusion. The simplest explanation for the transition from Eve's less painful childbearing to that of modern females is that Genesis is describing the evolution from pre-bipedal, arboreal primates to modern agricultural humans.

The entire process is meticulously laid out in Genesis. All that you have to do is look.

 

[Laodicean60]

This isn't about Genesis, but I always find the book of Job amazing because many statements made in that book couldn't be known to ancient man without modern science.

 

[AV1611VET]

Might I suggest that it's actually your rejection of science that's the source of confusion.

Go right ahead, my friend!

The simplest explanation for the transition from Eve's less painful childbearing to that of modern females is that Genesis is describing the evolution from pre-bipedal, arboreal primates to modern agricultural humans.

Simple isn't always correct.

You're assuming Eve wasn't a "modern female."

That's academic nonsense.

The entire process is meticulously laid out in Genesis.

Uh-huh.

And I'm Genghis Khan.

All that you have to do is look.

Where?

In the Bible? or into a microscope?

 

[AV1611VET]

This isn't about Genesis, but I always find the book of Job amazing because many statements made in that book couldn't be known to ancient man without modern science.

Yes, indeed!

My favorite is the mention of electronic communications.

Job 38:35 Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?

 

[Ophiolite]

This isn't about Genesis, but I always find the book of Job amazing because many statements made in that book couldn't be known to ancient man without modern science.

Don't keep us in suspense. I read the Book of Job five or six weeks ago and didn't see any. Perhaps the particular translation was the problem. (KJV). Please do enlighten me.

 

[BCP1928]

Might I suggest that it's actually your rejection of science that's the source of confusion. The simplest explanation for the transition from Eve's less painful childbearing to that of modern females is that Genesis is describing the evolution from pre-bipedal, arboreal primates to modern agricultural humans.

The entire process is meticulously laid out in Genesis. All that you have to do is look.

As meticulously laid out as any other explanation. But no explanation is needed. Genesis 2 is a Just-So story:
"...an untestable narrative explanation for a cultural practice, a biological trait, or behavior of humans or other animals."

All cultural traditions have such stories because all peoples ask the same questions: Who are we? How did we get here? and Why is everything always so screwed up when we know it could be better?

There is no need to find a scientific explanation for or to defend it against contrary scientific findings.

 

[partinobodycular]

You're assuming Eve wasn't a "modern female."

I'm doing that based upon the text, which implies that before the fall childbearing wouldn't have been as painful for Eve as it is now. Which means that she must've been anatomically different than modern females. I.E. had a wider pelvis. A feature that progressively disappeared with the evolution of bipedalism.

Go right ahead, my friend!

Another curious fact. Eating the 'fruit' would supposedly make Adam and Eve like God, having the 'knowledge of good and evil'. This would seem to be a reference to something that modern human's possess that other animals don't... intelligence. Paleoanthropology tells us that one of the first signs of intelligence is the use of tools. Among primates one of the first forms of tool use is the use of stones to crack open nuts. What's really, really curious about this is that among primates such tool use is more frequently undertaken by females, and it's the females that teach such skills to their young.

Wild chimpanzee mothers teach young to use tools, video study confirms

So now we have four more ways in which Genesis conforms to evolution. One, Eve wasn't as intelligent as we are. We know this because she lacked the knowledge of good and evil. Two, the evolution of intelligence was likely induced by the exploitation of a new food source. Three, this exploitation was likely predominated by the females. And four, it's the females that passed this knowledge on to the males.

It's looking more and more like Genesis is actually a study in paleoanthropology.