Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Possible Bible theory of Evolution?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#16    Hmm

Hmm

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 195 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New England

  • Prove it.....with FACTS!

Posted 20 October 2005 - 08:23 PM

What if man became man when god placed a soul into an evolved ape?  Therefore god created man by crafting his soul.  Adam was the first ape to receive the human soul.  
Not saying I believe this, mind you


#17    Rufio85

Rufio85

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 195 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Work out your own salvation. Do not depend on others.

Posted 20 October 2005 - 09:34 PM

Quote


What if man became man when god placed a soul into an evolved ape?  Therefore god created man by crafting his soul.  Adam was the first ape to receive the human soul.  
Not saying I believe this, mind you


I think it distinctly says in the Bible that man was made from dust/dirt (something like that anyways)

We could come up with thousands of theories if parts of the Bible are beleived and parts are cast away. But carry on, it's rather interesting  original.gif

Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.

#18    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Banned
  • 6,229 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 October 2005 - 10:37 PM

Satan is also mention in the Book of Jubilees leading the dragons (destroyers) that would destroy the Egyptian first born in the Exodus.  But this is just more proof that he had not offended God or fallen from heaven over the Eden incident.  But how can we even accept the Eden story when it is simply a partially forgotten version of a Sumerian story written down 1000 years before the Bible?  We can find historical proof for many of the later occurences in the Bible, but it would be naive to accept the Flood and Eden stories as completely accurate, when we know the much earlier Sumerican versions WERE the original stories the Hebrews knew,  for this was their own culture before their migratgions, but in the course of hundreds of years of illiterate, nomadic, oral storytelling tradition, we can see how elements of the stories have changed a bit.   But if we have the original 3,5000 year old stories, before they were distorted after hundreds of years of passing the stories down with changes, shouldn't they be given more credence?  It is only common sense, but unfortunately, common sense and religion do not seem to be very compatible.

Edited by draconic chronicler, 20 October 2005 - 10:39 PM.


#19    jagerthorn

jagerthorn

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 345 posts
  • Joined:19 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:In the pantry.

  • A product of the demented imagination of a lazy drunken hillbilly with a heart full of hate who has found a way to live out where the real winds blow.

Posted 20 October 2005 - 11:21 PM

Quote


But how can we even accept the Eden story when it is simply a partially forgotten version of a Sumerian story written down 1000 years before the Bible?  We can find historical proof for many of the later occurences in the Bible, but it would be naive to accept the Flood and Eden stories as completely accurate, when we know the much earlier Sumerican versions WERE the original stories the Hebrews knew,  for this was their own culture before their migratgions, but in the course of hundreds of years of illiterate, nomadic, oral storytelling tradition, we can see how elements of the stories have changed a bit.


draconic chronicler, I agree with most of what you say. Can you please give me some refrences of the Sumerian stories that the Hebrews learned, that seemed to turn into some of the stories in the Bible itself? Thanks  original.gif

--clickie clickie--
I'm feelin' like a monster truck at the botanical garden.


#20    jagerthorn

jagerthorn

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 345 posts
  • Joined:19 Oct 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:In the pantry.

  • A product of the demented imagination of a lazy drunken hillbilly with a heart full of hate who has found a way to live out where the real winds blow.

Posted 21 October 2005 - 12:26 AM

Well, you have to know that actual 'men' wrote the Bible, and being that it was hundreds of years ago written, who knows what they thought of how long it took to evolve? I have a feeling some estimation of numbers or dates in the Bible are either exaggerated, or made up. Hope that cleared some things up  wink2.gif

Edited by TheThirdAngel, 21 October 2005 - 12:30 AM.

--clickie clickie--
I'm feelin' like a monster truck at the botanical garden.


#21    mako

mako

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,770 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2005

Posted 21 October 2005 - 01:01 PM

Quote

Ah no, chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and humans belong to the family Hominidae, all of which are apes

You are right, thanks for the correction, they evidentially changed the designations since I studied this in college (back in the old stone age), but the fact remains that we are not descended from apes (the ancestor of apes was not considered an ape) and even under the new classifications, the pongids are a subfamily and we are another.  yes.gif

Our earth is degenerate in these latter days.  There are signs that the world is speedily coming to an end.  Bribery and corruption are common,   Children no longer obey their parents.  Every man wants to write a book, and the end of the world evidently is approaching.
                    Assyrian tablet circa 2800 BCE

#22    draconic chronicler

draconic chronicler

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Banned
  • 6,229 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 22 October 2005 - 12:13 PM

Obviously, Adam and Eve were not the only humans in the world.  This is supported by both the scientific/historical evidence AND the Bible itself.  When Cain killed Abel he fled to live "with other men".  So is there any way to acknowledge this apparent gross contradiciton in the Bible?  
Yes, if we recognize that Adam and Eve were not the first humans, which of course had been evolving millions of years before that moment, but instead were the first, so-called  "Chosen People" of God..  This said, one could recognize the creation of man in an evolutionary process, which Genesis does suggest, remarkably stating life began in the sea, fish, later great monsters (dinosaurs), birds, mammals, and finally humans, in a fairly scientifically chronological order. (What are the chances of that if it were all a complete myth?).  This would also explain the "Cain's people" analomy, and also why the Old Testament God unflinchingly allowed, and even induced the wholesale extermination of of anyone who wasn't one of the "Chosen"who to him, which he regard with no more worth than any animal.   As modern scholars now know, the "fallen Angel Lucifer' was just a translators's error, and never existed in the Old Testament, which reconfirms what the Bible actually said, that from his creation, Satan and the "Heavenly Host" of additional "fiery and flying serpents" (Seraphim) were perfect, purposely designed, winged reptilian,  "weapons of mass destruction" created for the wholsale destruction of certain "non-chosen" elements of mankind as many Biblical texts, and indeed, world-wide "dragon" legends confirm.  For example, consider in the book of Job, the same Satan and other seraphim "destroyers" who liquidated the Egyptian firstborn (recorded in Jubilees), is not allowed to harm Job, and must have God's specific permission to harm one of the "Chosen" people.  

The real purpose of Jesus then, wasn't some nonsensical requirement to "die for man's sins", but essentially to give the rest of mankind the same "status" (right to live) as God's original "chosen people", which understandably may have disappointed Satan and the other Seraphim previously allowed to consume and terrorize them, as Jesus once warned his disciples, (and might explain the somewhat adversarial climate, when the highest heavenly servant creature came to test Jesus' fidelity to God in the wilderness).  There is no evidence however that this induced a "War in Heaven" for this is merely an invention to give Christianity and post-exile Judasism a then popular, pagan dualistic slant based on exposure to Persian Zorastrianism.

Edited by draconic chronicler, 22 October 2005 - 12:24 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users