Where Did Humans Come From?

[BobRyan]

So Bob, why do you think the Lord mentioned His own six days in this verse? Why not just keep the passage short - simply command them to work six days?

He is hard wiring Ex 20 days in a week to Gen 1 days for the reader... leaving no wiggle room

 

[The Barbarian]

Because All those Hebrews lived in a condition where there is a sun --- but in Genesis Moses is being shown the genesis of the Sun, moon and all life on Earth so in THAT context all that is needed is a rotating planet and a light source on one side of Earth rather than on all sides.. At least for the first 3 days... and that alone gets you a 24 hour day and evening and morning.

If you have to redefine words to make your beliefs work, that's a pretty good indictation that they don't work.

What you "need" is the right set of amino acids as "a very basic start" and you don't have it in abiogenetic nature.

As you just learned they form abiotically. They've been found in the interior of meteorites, for example. Try again?

You "need" proteins composed of L-amino Acids exclusively in your supposed "synthesis" if you want an actual viable prokaryote or eukaryote.

Then you'll probably be surprised to note that there are an excess of L-forms in those meteorites.
All earthbound meteors catch an excess of one of the two polarized rays. Breslow said that previous experiments confirmed that circularly polarized light selectively destroys one chiral form of amino acids over the other. The end result is a five to ten percent excess of one form, in this case, L-amino acids. Evidence of this left-handed excess was found on the surfaces of these meteorites, which have crashed into Earth even within the last hundred years, landing in Australia and Tennessee.


Breslow simulated what occurred after the dust settled following a meteor bombardment, when the amino acids on the meteor mixed with the primordial soup. Under “credible prebiotic conditions”— desert-like temperatures and a little bit of water — he exposed amino acid chemical precursors to those amino acids found on meteorites.


Breslow and Columbia chemistry grad student Mindy Levine found that these cosmic amino acids could directly transfer their chirality to simple amino acids found in living things. Thus far, Breslow’s team is the first to demonstrate that this kind of handedness transfer is possible under these conditions.


On the prebiotic Earth, this transfer left a slight excess of left-handed amino acids, Breslow said. His next experiment replicated the chemistry that led to the amplification and eventual dominance of left-handed amino acids. He started with a five percent excess of one form of amino acid in water and dissolved it.


Breslow found that the left and right-handed amino acids would bind together as they crystallized from water. The left-right bound amino acids left the solution as water evaporated, leaving behind increasing amounts of the left-amino acid in solution. Eventually, the amino acid in excess became ubiquitous as it was used selectively by living organisms.
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/...vered-the-seeds-of-earths-left-hand-life.html

Maybe God's smarter than you thought He is?

 

[JAL]

He is hard wiring Ex 20 days in a week to Gen 1 days for the reader... leaving no wiggle room

So in your literal view, God wanted us to be sure that He literally worked six days and rested on the seventh?

If God wants us to take this literally, why did He need a rest on the 7th day? Why were the six days of work strenuous for Him?

 

[BobRyan]

So in your literal view, God wanted us to be sure that He literally worked six days and rested on the seventh?

Moses is writing about 2000 years after creation -- the account of creation given 2000 years later would hardly be a tool to go back in time and audit God while He is creating Earth - so it is confusing that you seem to want to view it that way.

If God wants us to take this literally, why did He need a rest on the 7th day?

There is the thing about God said it... so believe it. That appears all throughout the Bible not just with creation but also with the birth of Christ, miracles in the Bible and Christ's ascension into heaven.

a Lot of people here go along with the Bible being a reliable historic account of the real actions of God in real time.

 

[BobRyan]

But "morning" and "evening" are quite specific in Hebrew. And defined by a sun.

Because All those Hebrews lived in a condition where there is a sun --- but in Genesis Moses is being shown the genesis of the Sun, moon and all life on Earth so in THAT context all that is needed is a rotating planet and a light source on one side of Earth rather than on all sides.. At least for the first 3 days... and that alone gets you a 24 hour day and evening and morning.

Unless you know of some restriction on God that would prevent Him from creating such an effect if the exact science of that effect were not first fully explained to the observer "Moses" in this case.

If you have to redefine words to make your beliefs work, that's a pretty good indictation that they don't work.

Hmmm -- which word did I redefine???

Is it our claim that having the same evening and morning effect on Earth in Gen 1-2 as in Ex 20:11 (just as God said it was) is too difficult for the reader to follow???

Well we have some pretty good evidence that this is not at all hard for the readers to follow -- such as this

===============


Atheists often don't mind "admitting" to what the Bible says - they simply reject the idea that what it says is actually true. As in rejecting the virgin birth, the bodily ascension of Christ, the miracles of the bible and in this example they freely admit to what the Bible says - while rejecting it as 'truth'.


Professor James Barr, Regius Professor of Hebrew at the University of Oxford, has written:


‘Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that:

(a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience

(b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story

(c) Noah’s flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark.

Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know.’



My Comment: And that poses a problem for Christians who need the bible to "say something else"

 

[JAL]

Moses is writing about 2000 years after creation -- the account of creation given 2000 years later would hardly be a tool to go back in time and audit God while He is creating Earth - so it is confusing that you seem to want to view it that way.



There is the thing about God said it... so believe it. That appears all throughout the Bible not just with creation but also with the birth of Christ, miracles in the Bible and Christ's ascension into heaven.

Deflection.

"2By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done."

Is God a liar? The language of this text is a strong indication of strenuous work crying out for a rest.

Are these texts literal, or not?

 

[BobRyan]

Deflection.

"2By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done."

Is God a liar?

Apparently not.

Here is what God actually said about it --

Gen 2:
And so the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their heavenly lights. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because on it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

7 the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living person. 8 The Lord God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed.


Ex 20:11
For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in them, and He rested on the seventh day; for that reason the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

 

[BobRyan]

The language of this text is a strong indication of strenuous work crying out for a rest.

Your creative "insert" is entertaining but it is not a compelling rework of the text so as to be taken as more than "insert" or "preference".

You have free will of course and can insert as you please - but the rest of us do need something a bit more compelling to join in with you on that idea.

 

[JAL]

Apparently not.

Ok, I think you don't want to take all of Genesis 1 literally.

For example those Hebrew professors would probably see God anchoring the stars in a solid dome. And you probably don't want to take that literally.

Then you need to be open to the idea that the six days of God's work are longer than 24-hour days. The pot shouldn't call the kettle black, right?

 

[JAL]

Your creative "insert" is entertaining but it is not a compelling rework of the text so as to be taken as more than "insert" or "preference".

You have free will of course and can insert as you please - but the rest of us do need something a bit more compelling to join in with you on that idea.

What have I inserted? The text defines a "day" as a period of light interspersed with periods of darkness called "nights". I have not departed one iota from GOD'S definition in Gen 1. Should I go with God's definition in Gen 1? Or yours?

 

[JAL]

@BobRyan

Let's get some things straight. I take literally:

- The solid dome anchoring the stars.
- God's need for rest on the seventh day.

I think my reading is more literal than yours.

 

[The Barbarian]

And it ends the usual way.
Attempts to redefine words to fit a new doctrines.
Accusations of calling "God a liar" if one doesn't accept the new doctrines.

 

[JAL]

And it ends the usual way.
Attempts to redefine words to fit a new doctrines.
Accusations of calling "God a liar" if one doesn't accept the new doctrines.

Shallow accusations.

 

[JAL]

He is hard wiring Ex 20 days in a week to Gen 1 days for the reader... leaving no wiggle room

This response cuts both ways, right? Paraphrasing your words: The language of Genesis 1 tends to strike the reader as very non-literal. To convince the reader that Gen 1 is literal, then, God needed Exodus 20:11.

In that case, if Gen 1 taken at face-value seems non-literal, you can't much fault the non-literalists.

 

[JAL]

@BobRyan

Since the discussion has come this far, I think I'll get to the crux of the matter. Does God merit praise? Does He merit praise for creating the universe and planet Earth? There is only one possible definition of merit:

Merit is a status achieved by freely choosing to labor/suffer for a righteous cause, over an extended period of time.

The cross is a great example. Had there been no labor/suffering over time, the cross would merit no praise.

How much strenuous labor/suffering do people engage in? They labor/suffer about six days a week for roughly 50 years.

How much labor/suffering did God endure to create the world, in YOUR view? Six 24-hour days - of what? Six lazy speeches? In other words NO WORK AT ALL ???? So who merits more praise?

...(A) People who labored/suffered 50 years, six days a week.
...(B) God, who never labored/suffered.

This is a serious problem, because God says that His ways are HIGHER than our ways - higher than the heavens are above the earth. And yet He robs US of praise that we EARNED for 50 years by arrogating it to Himself unearned? What kind of a jerk do you think God is?

Since we work 50 years, and God says that He merits more praise than us - more than the heavens are higher than the earth - it LOGICALLY FOLLOWS that creation cost God exponentially more than 50 years of strenuous labor/work. That is why I say that Genesis INSISTS on an old earth.

Why was it strenuous? You've taken college courses, right? Study can be EXTREMELY strenuous. My claim is that God was engaged in a process of learning and experimentation, initially with lesser species and culminating with the creation of Adam and Eve.

 

[JAL]

@BobRyan,

I want to back up my last post by introducing another angle on Exodus 20:11. Suppose I said to my son, "Follow my example of hard labor", but in fact I happen to be someone who never worked a day in his life. That would make me a total hypocrite and a liar, right? In fact, a great leader sets a great example - he is generally someone who already toiled much longer and harder than what he is currently asking of his subordinates. Enter Exodus 20:11, where God sets forth HIS example of labor/suffering as the model for us all to follow:

"Six days you shall work...for in six days the Lord created the heavens and the earth"

Since a great leader sets a great example, an exponentially great leader sets an exponentially great example. Therefore it LOGICALLY FOLLOWS that it was six long days ERGO an old earth.

 

[Tolworth John]

As explained at Post 3, six literal days allows for billions for years.

No 6 literal days does not allow for millions of years, ignoring the plane meaning of scripture because of a presupposition does that.

 

[The Barbarian]

Sure. Life has randomly formed in a laboratory. It's all figured out. Gotcha.

You're still stuck in thinking that the best God could do is "random." The more we learn about things early on, the more it appears that God is right about the earth bringing forth life.

I might, if I believed evolutionary conclusions to be wholly unbiased. Ultimately evolution is one interpretation of the data.

It's directly observed. Perhaps you don't know what biological evolution is. What do you think it is?

(regarding the idea that cells were simple)

In freshman high school biology, in the early 60s, we knew better. How old are you?

Older than I care to admit, and I was never interested in my biology textbook back then - or read any science book since.

Ignorance can be a real impediment to understanding, yes. "People are usually down on things they aren't up on." - Everett Dirkson.

I sense a likelihood of impending ad hominem but, again, abiogenesis and macro-evolution are beliefs/interpretations.

Science has yet to establish that the earth produced life, but we do have God's word on it, so I'm confident that it did. And of course, speciation is an observed fact. So you're definitely wrong about that. Perhaps you don't know what "macroevolution" means. What do you think it means?

 

[JAL]

No 6 literal days does not allow for millions of years, ignoring the plane meaning of scripture because of a presupposition does that.

Scripture deems Yahweh WORTHY of the things praised for. He MERITS this praise. As stated, there is only possible definition of merit. When you dis-acknowledge this, you classify Him as a lazy and unaccomplished sloth who demands praise for things that He did not work for.

 

[BobRyan]

@BobRyan,

I want to back up my last post by introducing another angle on Exodus 20:11. Suppose I said to my son, "Follow my example of hard labor", but in fact I happen to be someone who never worked a day in his life. That would make me a total hypocrite and a liar, right?

Yes - but that is not what we see in Ex 20:11

. Enter Exodus 20:11, where God sets forth HIS example of labor/suffering .

There is no "God labors and suffers for six days" in Genesis or in Exodus 20

It is an entertaining insert - but not compelling as it would be had the text actually said it.

Our God is the Great Creator and He enjoys the work of His hands - His vocation. Just as many people today enjoy their vocation rather than hating it or suffering it.