Taking Questions on the Creation

[Caduceus]

By "again", I meant, "Explain it again?"

Well then explain why these two accounts differ. Either the original state of the universe was a watery chaos (Genesis 1. 1-2) or the original state of the universe was a waterless waste (Genesis 2. 4-5). Which was it?

Nor does either account claim creation ex nihilo as some Theists like to allege.

 

[AV1611VET]

I wouldn't say you're all wrong. A TE could go either way, really. A TE could include spontaneous generation as a source for abiogenesis by pushing the theistic act of creation farther back, to the creation of the initial matter of the universe rather than the creation of life itself. The universe was created, but life arose afterwards through abiogenesis.

I suppose it depends on what kind of Theist we are talking about.

Okay --- thanks --- I wasn't too sure on that and didn't want to misrepresent them.

 

[Cabal]

I don't know, Cabal --- I don't think like a TE.

I would assume that TEs take Genesis 1 - 11 allegorically, and that the whole point of Genesis 1 & 2 is to simply show us that God is behind what exists.

I could be mistaken, but according to the TE mindset, if you reverse-engineer the Animal Kingdom, it will lead back to God as the Cause of abiogenesis.

Unlike Atheistic Science, TEs wouldn't include spontaneous generation as a viable source of abiogenesis.

Again, though, I could be all wrong.

Yeah, I don't think you're all wrong on that, depending on whatever brand of theist you're talking about (I tend to forget about the non-Christian TEs, I should have been more specific, sorry.)

I guess from my point of view, God is the cause of abiogenesis, although I don't think it's spontaneous as such, if it occurred via a naturalistic process e.g chemical reactions given the right settings, then fair enough, but God is still the architect of all, no matter how it unfolded.

IMO, of course

 

[AV1611VET]

Well then explain why these two accounts differ. Either the original state of the universe was a watery chaos (Genesis 1. 1-2) or the original state of the universe was a waterless waste (Genesis 2. 4-5). Which was it?

Nor does either account claim creation ex nihilo as some Theists like to allege.

Here's the 411 on the Creation --- QV please.

And as far as a "waterless waste" is concerned, the answer was in the next verse ---

But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Yes.And I don't plan to, either. The difference between a self-fulfilling prophecy and God's prophesy, is that God's prophecy cannot be prevented from happening, no matter how hard you try. Self-fulfilling prophecies are a dime-a-dozen, the trick is to prevent it from happening.

Luckily, the British government listened closely to people like Herbert Samuel, who openly stated that a good reason to recreate the Jewish state was that so many Protestants wanted the prophecies to be fulfilled. If that's not a self-fulfilling prophecy, nothing is.

Of the 333 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ, He fulfilled 109 of them at His first advent, and will fulfill the other 224 at His second advent. Mathematically, 10[sup]50[/sup] constitutes an impossibility

Nonsense. Anything with a probability higher than 0 is possible. Besides, could you please provide a list of these 333 prophecies?

--- Jesus did the impossible at His first advent (109 x 108 x 107...)

Even assuming that so many prophecies even exist (I didn't even find close to 300 examples on Wikipedia, and most of these are vague enough to fit on everyone and their grandmother), that's not impossible, merely unlikely.

and will do it again with an even higher weight of impossibility (222 x 221 x 220...)

See above. An event with a probability of 1:10^50 isn't impossible.

 

[AV1611VET]

Luckily, the British government listened closely to people like Herbert Samuel, who openly stated that a good reason to recreate the Jewish state was that so many Protestants wanted the prophecies to be fulfilled. If that's not a self-fulfilling prophecy, nothing is.

Well, we'll see which comes first then --- the Rapture, or the return of Israel to another Diaspora; and since a third Diaspora was never prophesied, I'll place my faith in the Rapture.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Well, we'll see which comes first then --- the Rapture, or the return of Israel to another Diaspora; and since a third Diaspora was never prophesied, I'll place my faith in the Rapture.

Nothing will happen, not next year, not in twenty years, not ever. Of course you will continue to believe that it will happen in your lifetime, just like millions of Christians have done for the last 2000 years and will do so in the future, and of course you will be just as wrong in the end as they were.

Do you mind sharing those 333 prophecies?

 

[Cabal]

Self-fulfilling prophecies are a dime-a-dozen, the trick is to prevent it from happening.Of the 333 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ, He fulfilled 109 of them at His first advent, and will fulfill the other 224 at His second advent. Mathematically, 10[sup]50[/sup] constitutes an impossibility --- Jesus did the impossible at His first advent (109 x 108 x 107...), and will do it again with an even higher weight of impossibility (222 x 221 x 220...)

I'm guessing the actual prophecy "probabilities" aren't integers like "109", but that aside, I strongly suspect that given that they all applied to one entity, Jesus, and that he knew most of them, then those are very unlikely to be independent probabilities, so they wouldn't just be multiplied together.

This is, of course, assuming that probability maths can be applied to history/events described in a religious text.

Aside: (Not saying that you're doing this here, AV) Anyone notice that low probability gets used by ID fans to "prove" that evolution couldn't have happened, and yet this kind of low probability argument is used to "prove" that God did do it as regards fulfilling prophecies? By this logic, you can't have God using ID and fulfilling Messianic prophecies.

Also, surely if someone believes that God will fulfil a prophecy, then your faith would give you a probability of 1? I don't want my all-powerful God to be batting with a 1/10^50+ average, thank you very much.

 

[Caduceus]

Here's the 411 on the Creation --- QV please.

That is merely your own subjective interpretation.

And as far as a "waterless waste" is concerned, the answer was in the next verse ---

Yet in the NRSV translation the text clearly states that:

These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created.

In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth.... .

While Genesis 1 states:

In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters..

These are clearly two different accounts. Genesis 1 is generally assigned to the editorial activity of post-Exilic writers, while the second is dated to a much earlier period, possibly at about the time of the beginning of the Monarchy.

In Genesis 1 the work of creation is assigned to Elohim and is divided into six separate operations, each belonging to one day. Genesis 2 is assigned to Yahweh – Elohim and no note of time is given.

In addition to these two main accounts there are various references in Hebrew poetry to the divine activity in creation, suggesting that other forms of Creation myth may have been current in Israel. In Psalm 74:12-17 there is an account of how Yahweh, in contest with the waters, smote the many headed Leviathan and then proceeded to create day and night, the heavenly bodies, and the order of the seasons.

This is not dissimilar to the Akkadian Epic of Creation - Marduk’s slaying of the chaos dragon, Tiamat, is followed by his ordering of the universe and by the building of Esagila [the great temple in Babylon with its ziqqurat]. It is also widely accepted that in the Hebrew word Te-hom, used to denote the abyss of waters, [Genesis 1:2] there is a reference to Tiamat. In the passage from Psalm 74 the name of the water dragon Leviathan is the same as the Ugaritic Lotan - the monster slain by Baal. Hence it is probable that the Hebrew poet was acquainted with the Canaanite form of the myth.

It can therefore be seen that the two separate traditions recording the primaeval state of the universe before the process of creation began, were very different from each other and that there was an awareness of other creation myths which were clearly influential.

As mentioned earlier neither of these accounts is concerned with the problem of creation ex nihilo. They both assume the existence of some kind of material world and deal with the question of how the ordered universe, in which it was possible to live, came into being. However, in each of them the act of creation consisted in bringing order out of chaos, not of bringing matter into existence from nothing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nothing will happen, not next year, not in twenty years, not ever. Of course you will continue to believe that it will happen in your lifetime, just like millions of Christians have done for the last 2000 years and will do so in the future, and of course you will be just as wrong in the end as they were.

In that case, Israel will go into another Diaspora? Or what?

Do you mind sharing those 333 prophecies?

Of course not --- since a picture is worth a thousand words:

 

[Caduceus]

I'll place my faith in the Rapture.

You are, presumably, aware, that this idea is of very recent origin?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

In that case, Israel will go into another Diaspora? Or what?

Not necessarily - though I'm sure that should Israel as we know it ever cease to exist, you and your apocalyptic brethren would produce a brilliant theological explanation for that too.

Of course not --- since a picture is worth a thousand words:

Gee, and here I thought there actually were 333 prophecies about Jesus. Oh well, I'll go with Wikipedia. There's only about 30 as far as I could see and some of them are heavily disputed, but that's better than nothing.

 

[pgp_protector]

In that case, Israel will go into another Diaspora? Or what?Of course not --- since a picture is worth a thousand words:

So to the question "Do you mind sharing those 333 prophecies?"
You give 1 Picture = 1000 Words with 1 Picture.
So that gives about 3 Words Per prophecies. (After All you wouldn't do the abomination of lying would you ??? )

So what are these 333 3 word Prophecies ?

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm guessing the actual prophecy "probabilities" aren't integers like "109", but that aside, I strongly suspect that given that they all applied to one entity, Jesus, and that he knew most of them, then those are very unlikely to be independent probabilities, so they wouldn't just be multiplied together.

When I say Jesus fulfilled 109 prophecies, I don't mean He fulfilled all 109 of them consciously. There were some prophecies He had absolutely no control over. Such as:

1. The visit by the Wise Men.
2. His rejection.
3. The 30 Pieces of Silver.
4. The soldier piercing His side.

Even His tomb fulfilled Isaiah 53:9-10.

Aside: (Not saying that you're doing this here, AV) Anyone notice that low probability gets used by ID fans to "prove" that evolution couldn't have happened, and yet this kind of low probability argument is used to "prove" that God did do it as regards fulfilling prophecies? By this logic, you can't have God using ID and fulfilling Messianic prophecies.

Low probability rates are used to show that it couldn't have happened by coincidence.

Sans God, Jesus couldn't have fulfilled all those prophecies (actually there wouldn't be all those prophecies); and sans God, from a TE perspective, there would be no evolution (actually there would be nothing to evolve).

Also, surely if someone believes that God will fulfil a prophecy, then your faith would give you a probability of 1? I don't want my all-powerful God to be batting with a 1/10^50+ average, thank you very much.

With God in control, probability can take a hike.

 

[Cabal]

With God in control, probability can take a hike.

My point exactly; which is why these types of probability-based arguments seem to me to be quite useless.

 

[Skaloop]

In that case, Israel will go into another Diaspora? Or what?

Or neither happens.

There are essentially four possible outcomes as to what might occur in the future regarding the rapture and Isreali diaspora.

A) Only the rapture happens.
B) Only the diaspora happens.
C) The diaspora happens, then the rapture happens.
D) Neither the diaspora nor the rapture happen.

You've stated you are going with option A. I myself go with option D. There are our two prophecies. How long must we wait to conclude which prophecy is correct? It's already been 2000 years or so for yours; how much longer? Just order of magnitude would be fine; ten years, one hundred years, one thousand years, ten thousand years, one hundred thousand years, one million years...

So far, my prophecy is 100% correct. Yours is 100% incorrect.

 

[AV1611VET]

That is merely your own subjective interpretation.

Caduceus, don't make the mistake of using some copyrighted book to glean your Theology from, or you'll end up with the wrong perspective of the universe.

I want you to notice something closely here, please:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Now watch ---

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

See something new in 2:1 that isn't in 1:1?

In 2:1, heaven has an ess on the end of it --- meaning it's plural; but in 1:1, Heaven is singular.

Note what Paul says here ---

Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Notice how Paul is making it very clear that seed is singular, not plural?

Even adding an ess on to a word can lead to the wrong interpretation.

 

[AV1611VET]

You are, presumably, aware, that this idea is of very recent origin?

Yes --- it's only 2000 years old.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not necessarily - though I'm sure that should Israel as we know it ever cease to exist, you and your apocalyptic brethren would produce a brilliant theological explanation for that too.

Gee, and here I thought there actually were 333 prophecies about Jesus. Oh well, I'll go with Wikipedia. There's only about 30 as far as I could see and some of them are heavily disputed, but that's better than nothing.

30???

I suppose I'll have to go there myself and look.

Probably something you're missing --- like the word MAJOR or something --- but I'll go have a look.

ETA: Well, it does give 41 prophecies, but it hits on the ones that were documented as fulfilled by the Gospel writers.

 

[Naraoia]

I agree with you (and, yes, I'm talking about micro-evolution).

I have made the point that, according to evolution, the first human woman would have had to have engaged in beastiality, since Adam supposedly didn't come along until thousands of years later.

And that point is wrong, but it appears you kind of know why.

There's also another reason why you are wrong: evolution doesn't suggest that a non-human suddenly gave birth to a fully fledged human. If you could follow our ancestors generation by generation, you would only see something less human-like giving birth to something slightly more human-like (goodness, I'm starting to sound like Dawkins ). "Eve" only ever had to pair up with her own species.

A rainbow is a good analogy: if you start at the red end and move along the spectrum in small steps you wouldn't be able to exactly pinpoint where red ends and orange begins. Neighbouring wavelenghts (successive generations) are similar enough to be considered the same colour (species or "kind" if you like), yet if you take enough small steps you will get to a point where you could no longer call the colour "red".

Ring species are really useful because they illustrate the continuum of speciation over space rather than time. So you can see this kind of rainbow without having to watch a population for a hundred thousand years.

(BTW, new species can emerge in a single generation or very few generations by hybridisation, but to my knowledge animals rarely do that. Plants are in many respects much less fussy than animals.)

They answer that by saying (if I get this story right), Eve's DNA, known as mtDNA, can be traced back further in time than Adam's DNA (Y-chromosome). [Evidently, mtDNA is easier to trace.]

Well, mtDNA can be traced further because women have less variation in the number of their children than men.

In any species where males compete for females and mate with more than one, some males will have a lot of offspring and many will have none, while females (in high demand) will usually have some but never as many as the most successful males (let's face it, it takes rather less time and effort to father a child than to carry and raise it. And that also applies to eggs). Successful (or lucky) Y-chromosomes can spread much faster than mitochondria (and paternal lines are also more likely to die out).