Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,331 Year: 3,588/9,624 Month: 459/974 Week: 72/276 Day: 0/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Genesis Claims about Gender
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 1 of 11 (626277)
07-27-2011 5:02 AM


Edited by Admin, : Original proposal hidden, see Message 3 for the opening post.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 07-27-2011 6:44 AM Larni has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13013
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 2 of 11 (626278)
07-27-2011 6:44 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Larni
07-27-2011 5:02 AM


The quote from IamJoseph covers a lot of ground, from cosmology to astronomy to geology to biology. Can you narrow it down to just one topic area?

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Larni, posted 07-27-2011 5:02 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Larni, posted 07-27-2011 12:42 PM Admin has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 3 of 11 (626279)
07-27-2011 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
07-27-2011 6:44 AM


What part of Genesis is supported by 21 century science?
IamJoseph writes:
My personal vew is that Genesis is better aligned with real science and evidenced reality.
EvC Forum: What is the creation science theory of the origin of light?
In this post IamJoseph makes the following assertion:
...in this first creation chapter is the premise that all life was initiated in a positive/negative gender duality, then separated as independent positive and negative genders. Darwin does not explain the gender variances, nor accounts the pivotal factor of the host seed.
Can IamJoseph or anyone else support this assertion with evidence?
'Is it Science?', please.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 07-27-2011 6:44 AM Admin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by purpledawn, posted 07-28-2011 7:31 AM Larni has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13013
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 4 of 11 (626281)
07-28-2011 6:35 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Genesis Claims about Gender thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3475 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 5 of 11 (626287)
07-28-2011 7:31 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Larni
07-27-2011 12:42 PM


No Biblical Support
The sad part is that the Bible writings don't support the idea of a single being and then separated into two beings (if that is what IamJoseph is stating).
Genesis 1:27
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created mankind. The him refers back to mankind, not a man.
Then the second part states that God created mankind with males and females.
IMO, one would need to know the purpose of the writing before trying to align it with today's knowledge.
My question is, where does IamJoseph get the idea that "life was initiated in a positive/negative gender duality"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Larni, posted 07-27-2011 12:42 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Larni, posted 07-28-2011 10:57 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 6 of 11 (626301)
07-28-2011 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by purpledawn
07-28-2011 7:31 AM


Re: No Biblical Support
My understanding is that IamJoseph means that the Genesis account of the origin of the two sexes is mirrored by the scientific consensus.
Therefor, as it is written in Genesis, it must also be so in reality else his/her assertion is contradicted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by purpledawn, posted 07-28-2011 7:31 AM purpledawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 07-28-2011 11:04 AM Larni has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 7 of 11 (626305)
07-28-2011 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Larni
07-28-2011 10:57 AM


Re: No Biblical Support
And just as with so many claims made in Genesis, reality refutes the claim.
The order of creation as outlined in Genesis is factually wrong.
Not all things are created male and female.
Genesis is simply wrong.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Larni, posted 07-28-2011 10:57 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Larni, posted 07-28-2011 1:44 PM jar has seen this message but not replied
 Message 10 by purpledawn, posted 08-01-2011 6:15 AM jar has replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 8 of 11 (626331)
07-28-2011 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by jar
07-28-2011 11:04 AM


Re: No Biblical Support
Well I'm basically waiting for IamJoseph to support his point.
I can't imagine anyone else in the world would be willing to try to support IamJoseph's position.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 07-28-2011 11:04 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 182 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 9 of 11 (626621)
07-30-2011 4:07 PM


Bump for IamJoseph
Bumpity bump bump bump.

  
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3475 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 10 of 11 (626979)
08-01-2011 6:15 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by jar
07-28-2011 11:04 AM


Not All is Male and Female
quote:
Not all things are created male and female.
So true. I didn't read his quote close enough.
My guess is that asexual reproduction wasn't known at that time, least of all by a priest.
I don't think the author was trying to be factually right. I think he was more interested in religious ideas, as opposed to reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 07-28-2011 11:04 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by jar, posted 08-01-2011 8:21 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 11 of 11 (626987)
08-01-2011 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by purpledawn
08-01-2011 6:15 AM


Re: Not All is Male and Female
Of course it is not factually correct and the author was not trying to be factually correct.
In addition to asexual reproduction their are critters that are born one sex but change as they mature, things that are male and female at the same time and things that are neither male or female.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by purpledawn, posted 08-01-2011 6:15 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024