Author Topic: Genesis, 2001, and Darwin  (Read 17480 times)

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« on: March 02, 2005, 08:13:34 AM »
I will outline one of my personal beliefs on what Genesis tells, giving sources where I may.  Agree, disagree, whatever you want, just don't flame.  If you disagree or add a point, try to find a source (religous, scientific, philosophical) so we aren't just poorly parroting the arguments of others that we only half remember at each other.

Post your own personal belief system you have developed.

I'll occassionaly add sources as I find them.  Gathering sources is a long job though, so I'll post what I have so far.

Note that I cannot prove that there is a God, or that my personal religous beliefs are true, or other such basic points.  Therefore, I assume them as axioms, the same way mathematical proofs are based on unprovable axioms.  Disregard what you will.

Feel free to find logic flaws in my postulates or workings.  For bonus points find the name of the logical fallacy.  (Ad Hominid, etc.)

Overall Hypothesis: God, an immortal ET of great spiritual power, honed the evolution of the Earth through a similar process that we evolve bots in DB, or control the planet in SimEarth.  That is, a largely macromanagemental level.  When the physical form of man had evolved to the desired form He granted them sentience (the gift of a reasoning soul) through the fruit of the tree of good and evil, similar to how the monolith affected the homonids at the beginning of 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Limitations: Does not address the reported 'immortal' nature of Adam prior to 'the fall'.

Postulate: God is an ET.
Source(s): Dictionary.com says an ET is something "Originating, located, or occurring outside Earth".
Reasoning: Genesis states that God created the Earth.  What 'created' means is open to interpretation, but a being cannot 'create' a place it itself was created on.  Therefore, if we assume that there is indeed a Creator, He could not have been created on Earth.  If he always was as he is now, then he never was created anyway, so there is no place of His creation, therefore God could not have come to exist on Earth.  Therefore, by definition, if God exists He must be an ET.

This seems a rather obvious point to make.  By making it, I am attempting to shift the rather egocentric view that the Earth is somehow the center of the universe (if not literally than figuratively).

That is, it is extremely arrogant of us to think that God has the time or desire to individually design every organism.  See the last postulate below.

Postulate: Man's physical form existed prior to Adam.
Source(s): Any basic biological textbook.
The widely held belief that Adam was roughly 6000 B.C.
Fossil Record.

Postulate: The state of Adam before the fall represented a state of non-sentience, similar to what modern Chimpanzee's possess.
Sources:
Reasoning: This is harder to prove outright.  One must read between the lines.

First off, higher apes can be taught basic language skills.  These language skills present a state of mind likely no more advanced than a Down syndrome person or a young child.

Neither young children nor retarded people are generally considered accountable for their actions (religously anyway).  Why is this?  We may say it is because they lack what we define ourselves as possessing.  A reasoning soul, sentience, agency, whatever you want to call it.

Thus you see I group apes, young children, and the retarded in that category I call 'non-sentient'.  Note that I am not insulting the intelligence of young children or retarded people, but praising the intelligence of the great apes, which has unfortunately been underestimated over the years.

Now, the truly telling sign of the non-sentience of man prior to the fall can be seen in God's reaction to Adam deciding he was naked.  Most ape researchers have noticed deceptive behavior in their subjects (ie: lying).  Children also often lie.  Both do so transparently.  Researchers and parents alike aren't fooled by their charges' deceptions, but often play along to teach a lesson or show a point.

When God discovers that Adam has hidden himself, He does not seem angry.  He asks "have you eaten from the tree I told you not to?"  He obviously knows the answer (he's God afterall, and Adam probably wasn't very good at lying), so this is like a mother asking a child with chocolate all over his face "did you eat the candy bars you weren't supposed to?"  The mom already knows the answer.  She wants the kid to learn to fess up.

God's reaction to Adam seems much more similar to the relationship between researcher and ape, or parent and small child, than to the relationship between capable reasoning beings.

Postulate: Adam's 'fall' was predesigned, not an accident.  God used this as the delivery system for sentience to man.
Sources: LDS doctrine:
Plan of Salvation
Another link to Plan of Salvation that tells the importance of the fall
Reasoning: I am LDS, so I accept the basic idea of the plan of salvation.  Therefore, I accept the idea of the fall as a predesigned step in the progression of children that God crafted in spirit first.

In the same way that it is now hypothesized that AI comparable to our own cannot be developed by a program that has not lived in the world, so did our growth into sentient life demand a physical body like what God has.

The fruit of the tree of good and evil, wether actual fruit or in some way figurative, was like the monolith from 2001.  Except, in 2001 the advent of sentience resulted in weapons of war.  In the bible, the advent of sentience resulted in the idea of morality, of agency.

Postulate: God was a mutater (like what schvarz likes to do) who groomed life on earth over a long period of time (at least several million years.  Probably more).
Reasoning: There once existed many subspecies of homonids, many existing contemporaneously.  There now is only one.

It may be argued that God 'weeded' out the undesirable strains as he attempted to groom a physical being he found aesthetically pleasing and similar in form to his own.

The case against intelligent design is strong.  It seems much more probable that God (if you assume there is such a person) simply directed the process of evolution over time.  This does not negate the idea that God created us.  If one of us mutates a new strain of bot we claim ownership of it.  We were responsible for the conditions through which this new bot came to be.


That's it.   :bigginangel:  :devil:
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 08:14:59 AM by Numsgil »

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #1 on: March 02, 2005, 09:27:02 AM »
More on this subject later when I have the time to give it a worthy answer. For the moment just take a look at this short story that I wrote in about 1997.

Yes I am a Science fiction writer too.  :evil:

 :bigginangel:  PY  :bigginangel:
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 09:27:26 AM by PurpleYouko »
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #2 on: March 02, 2005, 11:42:27 AM »
Anybody out there want to post the "literal genesis" point of view.

Any YEC (Young Earth Creationists) on the forum.

Now there is a debate I would love to get into  :evil:

 :bigginangel:  PY  :bigginangel:
« Last Edit: March 02, 2005, 11:42:47 AM by PurpleYouko »
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2005, 03:53:24 PM »
:laugh: I dont know about that, but I do know: a bunch of Jewish computer geeks found a way to tell the past and possibly future using the old testiment.


They do stuff like search for a match of "food" in the letters skip 5 (They line up the rows correctly , probebly remove stuff like spaces and camas) , then they get somthing like:

A B C D E [you]F[/you] B V D E
A B C D E [you]O[/you] W E I N
A B C D E [you]O[/you] N M R T
A B [you]C[/you] D E [you]D[/you] A B C D
A B C [you]H[/you] E D A B C D
A B C H [you]I[/you] D A B C D
A B C C B [you]K[/you] A B C D
A B C C B K [you]A[/you] B C D
A B B H B K B [you]N[/you] C D

wow "chickan" is how bau spells a type of food , we found somthing....  :laugh:
« Last Edit: March 03, 2005, 03:57:56 PM by Botsareus »

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2005, 04:04:58 PM »
Are you talking about the Da-Vinci code?

 :D  PY  :D
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2005, 04:06:47 PM »
That kind of study is numerology, plain and simple.  It's little better than ouji boards.

It's quite obvious that God was an English major, not a mathematician or biologist.  The only proffessional, non spiritual level that the bible works on is as a work of literature.  All that symbolism.  Isaiah.  Yep, God was an English teacher.

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2005, 04:09:47 PM »
They managed to get supposedly mystical messages out of "Moby Dick" too

Bunch of crap!  :sleep:

 <_<  PY  <_<
« Last Edit: March 03, 2005, 04:10:09 PM by PurpleYouko »
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline shvarz

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 1341
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2005, 04:12:23 PM »
Hmm, hate to spoil your fun Nums...  but if you need some logical derivations to believe in God, then you don't beleive in him anyway (and will not be saved).  Because logical arguments can be disputed.  Real faith defies logic and arguments.  It is just there (or not)  :pokey:
"Never underestimate the power of stupid things in big numbers" - Serious Sam

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #8 on: March 03, 2005, 04:17:54 PM »
"God was an English teacher. "

Sorry Num the text was never translated into english, its all done in Hebro(if I spelled it correctly)

"Bunch of crap!"
I was expecting that ans. and I think of it 90% the same way...

Its just people need somthing to beleave in , thats all.

Anyway the other 10% tells me that "The End of Days" has come, So by 2012 we will have a Giant meteor to blow up...
(Thats the stuff from the future they found)
« Last Edit: March 03, 2005, 04:19:56 PM by Botsareus »

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #9 on: March 03, 2005, 04:30:53 PM »
Okay, maybe not 'English' teacher.  Litarature if you prefer.

Either way, the point is that Jesus told parables full of symoblism, not word problems.  Definately a literature teacher.

Offline Botsareus

  • Society makes it all backwards - there is a good reason for that
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 4483
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #10 on: March 03, 2005, 04:32:28 PM »
I dont know , but I got this of the History Channel. Kinda solid source there.

(H is no Sifi)
« Last Edit: March 03, 2005, 04:32:57 PM by Botsareus »

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #11 on: March 03, 2005, 04:35:35 PM »
I recently followed a thread in another forum where a Young Earth creationist was arguing with a geologist about the existence and provability of the great flood.

Every point that the YEC tried to make was countered by logical factual information about the geological column and various rock formations and stuff.

Eventually the YEC cam right out with it and stated this.

"I know that the flood happened because it says so in the bible. If science can't be made to agrre with Genesis then there must be something fundamentally wrong with science."

I was completely speechless at this. (That is not something that normally happens to me)

How can you argue with logic like this?

Faith absolutely denies anything that doesn't fit in with the person's beleifs.

I am also completely sick of people making the claim that there is absolutely zero evidence for Evolution.
The evidence is everywhere.

  :blink:  PY  :blink:
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #12 on: March 03, 2005, 04:49:09 PM »
An LDS leader (Talmadge) once said:

Quote
Discrepancies that trouble us now will diminish as our knowledge of
pertinent facts is extended. The creator has made record in the rocks for
man to decipher; but He has also spoken directly regarding the main
stages of progress by which the earth has been brought to be what it is.
The accounts can not be fundamentally opposed; one can not contradict
the other; though man’s interpretation of either may be seriously at fault.

That is the best counter I know.

Check out these articles on what my church's position on evolution and the record of science is.  We're probably the only orthodox religion that actually doesn't say science is wrong.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2005, 04:50:14 PM by Numsgil »

Offline PurpleYouko

  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 2556
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #13 on: March 03, 2005, 05:54:56 PM »
Actually Catholics have an official line that it is OK to believe that evolution happened providing that it is accepted that God endowed Mankind with an immortal soul.

I had links to the speeches a while ago. I could probably look them up if need be.

Also your counter can be used both ways here.

Look at this point of view with regards to any religion at odds with science over geology.

"God wrote the rocks.

Man wrote the bible"

The rocks are there. Anybody can look at them, examine them, test them with all of the knowledge of modern science. Millions of hours of painstaking research all come to the same conclusions about the age of the Earth and the absence of any record of a flood.

If God made the Earth then the rocks are the truth, not some man self contradictory made book, written by uneducated goat herders, then handed down through millenia and changed at the whim of every religious leader who got the chance.

I know which I would beleive.

 :D  PY  :D
There are 10 kinds of people in the world
Those who understand binary.
and those who don't

:D PY :D

Offline Numsgil

  • Administrator
  • Bot God
  • *****
  • Posts: 7742
    • View Profile
Genesis, 2001, and Darwin
« Reply #14 on: March 03, 2005, 06:09:41 PM »
You also have to think 'if I were God, how would I explain this to a pre-tech society?'  For instance, Genesis doesn't mention the creation of bacteria.  It jumps straight to plants as the first life.  That doesn't necessarily mean that God didn't make bacteria.  Then again it doesn't mean he did.

So the account we recieve in the bible goes like this:

God->Moses->supersticous, pagan Israelites -> Ancient people's tendancy for exageration and non-linear story telling (both were acceptable and normal)-> thousands of years of transcription, possible mutations over time.

And you wonder why the Bible doesn't seem to agree with science?  When in doubt, I'll trust the science record.  God only tells us what we are capable of understanding.  Can you imagine if the creation account read like a bio textbook?  It would've taken thousands of years for anyone to figure out what the heck it's talking about.

That's just bad Godhood.