Deconstructing Genesis

immortalitylost said:
We are not slaves. We are a part of God, and created by God.
Click to expand...
Sure we are created by God and are a part of God, but slavery has always been a major issue on earth with humans.

Do you have a social security # ?
Your name is printed in all capital letters on your gov't documents ?
Then you are a slave.
Just like a soldier is a slave.
They cannot do as they like and their lives are not their own.
There are different degrees of slavery to be sure.
But whether your master is kindly, or beats you, is not the issue.

As for the story of man being made to be slaves of a technologically advanced species who came to earth eons ago....who knows.
I don't know if it is true or not.
Just another flower from the compost heap.
But it is just as plausible as man evolving by accident from sea slime and it is just as plausible as all the other myths.

Every last single idea of the origins of man are all speculation.
Nobody really knows.
But many say they do.
Tis just wishful thinking on their part.
 
True, true. Tis as good a story as any I suppose.

God do I know I am a slave. In the "freest country in the world" no less...
But only to man. ;)

And only in the most general way.

I don't think anyone will ever know the complete truth. It's just one of those things... :D
 
wil said:
As parent, to me, Genesis is the result of millenia of children tugging at your clothing saying, why?, why?, why is the sky blue, where did we come from, why are the stars there, what makes a rainbow, who says...why why why...a compilation of the acceptable answers...
Reminds me of this conversation between Calvin (from the comic strip 'Calvin and Hobbes') and his Dad:

Calvin: Why does the sun set?

Dad: It's because hot air rises. The sun's hot in the middle of the day, so it rises high in the sky. In the evening then, it cools down and sets.

Calvin: Why does it go from east to west?

Dad: Solar wind.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Genesis has a lot of depth and nuance telling about a peoples' relationship with God. I think essentially it is a story that describes our moral autonomy and how we (mis)use it.
 
Dondi, lol. Cute story.

I believe that Genesis is whatever people make of it, and was meant to be all along. Not by the humans who wrote it, but by God who created man knowing that it would be written. The difference in opinion of what it means causes people to study it. From that studying, people glean knowledge, and knowledge, wisdom, and experience of all things is the reason for our existence. IMHO, of course... *bows and leaves the room* lol.
 
shawn said:
Sure we are created by God and are a part of God, but slavery has always been a major issue on earth with humans.

There are different degrees of slavery to be sure.
But whether your master is kindly, or beats you, is not the issue.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

shawn said:
As for the story of man being made to be slaves of a technologically advanced species who came to earth eons ago....who knows. (I)t is just as plausible as man evolving by accident from sea slime and it is just as plausible as all the other myths.
Click to expand...

I love my tinfoil hat. :D

shawn said:
Every last single idea of the origins of man are all speculation.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but....

At least some of the ideas about the origins of "man" are supported by archeological finds that are more than mere speculation. We can hold a piece of stone in our hands that has been knapped in the past into what we think is a scraper. We may not know with absolute certainty that it was actually used as a scraper, but depending on where and how it was found, what is already understood from previous finds and including observation of tribes that exist now that still use ancient ways, and considering the find within the overall context of the site as a whole, we can make a pretty good educated guess that the stone we found is indeed a scraper. Maybe it was actually a saw, and we wouldn't really have any way to confirm that. But we can say with certainty that some people of that period of time in that place were definitely using stone tools, and that has a list of associated repercussions such as how it reflects on the thinking capabilities of those humans.

Where did those people learn that craft from? *That* would be speculation. They could have learned organically, through a flash of insight. Could have been a dream, or a "spirit gift." Could have been through watching a human from another tribe, or even a chance observation of another animal. The evidence is insufficient to support any direct speculation. So the accepted speculative theory is to consider this in the overall context, and those speculations that can't really be supported are ignored.

Sure, there are speculations by those like Von Daniken and Sitchin, suggesting things like the Nazca drawings being landing markers for interstellar landing crafts...but without evidence of the crafts themselves it is hard to support.

Fermi's Paradox suggests that interstellar travel in a vessel may not even be possible. Nothing we have devised in practice yet has countered that. In *speculation* we have all kinds of proposals and even presumptions that "one day" humans will be able to traverse the stars, all of which to this point presume some type of vessel...hence the landing markers in Peru, etc. What if vessels were not even necessary? Just as valid, speculatively speaking, is the suggestion that these beings may not require a vessel, that they are sufficiently *evolved* to traverse the stars in their bodies or minds like an advanced form of astral projection. Another possibility is some kind of "stargate" that negates the use of a vessel. So even thinking the Nazca drawings are landing markers really demands a certain degree of speculative assumption that may (a couple of hundred years from now) prove to be totally and childishly impossible. We simply have no way of knowing with the little info we have.

Besides, if we are "slaves" for some interstellar race, don't you think they could have given us just a bit more to work with from the git go if they were really "advanced?" Like, maybe the ability to peacefully co-exist?
 
Last edited:
Netti-Netti said:
G-d specifically assigned A&E dominion over the animals, which implies a separateness.
Click to expand...

In what way, though?

Doesn't the lion also have dominion over animals in its realm?

In which case, isn't man having dominion over the animals essentially a recognition of humans as at the top of the ecological chain?

Separate in one way, but still essentially animal? Until awakened into knowledge?
 
juantoo3:
Besides, if we are "slaves" for some interstellar race, don't you think they could have given us just a bit more to work with from the git go if they were really "advanced?" Like, maybe the ability to peacefully co-exist?
Click to expand...
But perhaps we serve too well as entertainment or something of like nature, maybe an ongoing, long-term lab experiment and so things are the way they are for such reasons.
There has been enough evidence of all our religions being tinkered with by..ahem... "extra-terrestrials" since the beginning of recorded history.
Some seem to be helpful (like in floods and other disasters) and others steer us with religious propaganda (as angels of the Lord).
So it is hard to say.
But there are enough anomalies, and things that make you go hmm....
to cause any rational, critical thinker to be skeptical of all theories.
All stories are then seen through such lenses.
I am merely discontent with all the simple-minded-true-believer types who rabidly promote their "truth" as being the only "truth", when really it isn't TRUTH at all, merely speculation based on some premise or some shards of evidence.
I promote a deeper look at things and suggest that we not be so adamant and violent when others have a different idea.
I am disturbed by peoples pig-headedness and opinionation, which happens all too much in our world.
 
I just present these notions as another string of plausible speculation at this religious sideshow.
( PS: It makes just as much sense to me as the "just evolved by accident" theory, and in fact, takes less faith to believe in.)
At the end of the day...who knows.
We can have our preferences, but those who say that they know....prove it.
If there is no proof, then add the caveat that it is just a cherished theory, don't present it as a certainty.
A little honesty is all I seek.
 
Ah, I see. I agree, also. But those with faith in one particular theory would not and I can see why. Especially if their faith in the theory corresponds with their faith in their deity.

Tis tough to convince away someone's faith, and I never try to do it. They are perfectly welcome in my mind to keep their theories and call them fact or anything else. Doesn't effect me. Doesn't really bother me.

I have a theory also. Not stating it as fact by any means, but a theory nonetheless.

What if God was the impetus behind evolution. He started it off as it were. And it grew, as he knew it would into what it is today. Kind of corresponding to Jesus's parable of the mustard seed (being the smallest seed) growing into the greatest tree.

Not saying that's where I got the theory from, but I was just reading that portion of the bible and I saw a correlation. Feel free to disregard, or whatever you like with the theory. Just puttin it out there. :)
 
I have no problem with that version.
The Hebrew word for day actually means an indeterminate span of time (not 24 hrs exactly), kind of a period of time, so the myth/story of the 6 creative "days" can be correctly interpreted to mean 6 creative periods or stages which could have taken billions of years.
You know, it really pays to study the language which a text is written in if one wishes to do more with it than just peruse it in passing.
This is a huge problem which the fundamentalist literalists of all religions and stripe and creed need to address as they just look really stupid to those who have.
Certainly God could have just snapped His proverbial fingers and presto a universe unfolds like a giant sunflower.
But it is not at all a stretch to imagine that things unfolded over huge spans of time.
(and what is time anyway???? RELATIVE..... relative to what? one's perspective? So what to us takes billions of years could be an instant from a larger point of view.)
So then a gradual evolution (creating man from the dust of the earth) could have happened and be the basis for that story.
But it is not at all implausible to imagine that some of evolutions great leaps forward occurred as a result of an outside influence
(feel free to speculate wildly as to what form or forms that could have taken)
 
lol, I know what you mean about the original language of the text. I read the bible and I'm like But what does this really mean? What would it have meant to the people hearing it? And so on, and so on.

Oh yeah, I'm sure that being omniscient, God would see begining middle and end simultaneously. But the way I see it, he planted the life here knowing what it would become without him having to get involved. If he did get involved it would be purely for his own reasons and who knows what those might be. Just IMHO, of course.

I wish I could see events that were written in the bible, and throughout history so that I'd know what really happened. That'd be better than even the closest study of the original text seeing as even it was usually written some time after events had occurred. That'd be perfect.
 
shawn said:
Certainly God could have just snapped His proverbial fingers and presto a universe unfolds like a giant sunflower...
So then a gradual evolution (creating man from the dust of the earth) could have happened and be the basis for that story.
But it is not at all implausible to imagine that some of evolutions great leaps forward occurred as a result of an outside influence
(feel free to speculate wildly as to what form or forms that could have taken)
Click to expand...

I prefer to think that He guides all aspects of evolution, much as a potter forms clay. Like one continuing experiment. Some would claim that because God is perfect that what He makes ought to be perfect. I see it more as being a scientist in a laboratory, fiddling around with different designs. Man, being made in His image, does the same thing. Take the evolution of the automobile, always tinkering to improve performance and design. Of course, that would imply that God is learning. But wouldn't that go against the idea that He is all-knowing? Not necessarily. A person can go through 8 years of med school and gain all knowledge to treat the human body, but until one actually treats a human body, that knowledge is useless. Experiential knowledge is just as important as book knowledge.
 
So you are suggesting what Dondi?
That the creation/material universe is.....field work?
(*pun intended*)
 
Dondi said:
I prefer to think that He guides all aspects of evolution, much as a potter forms clay. Like one continuing experiment. Some would claim that because God is perfect that what He makes ought to be perfect. I see it more as being a scientist in a laboratory, fiddling around with different designs. Man, being made in His image, does the same thing. Take the evolution of the automobile, always tinkering to improve performance and design. Of course, that would imply that God is learning. But wouldn't that go against the idea that He is all-knowing? Not necessarily. A person can go through 8 years of med school and gain all knowledge to treat the human body, but until one actually treats a human body, that knowledge is useless. Experiential knowledge is just as important as book knowledge.
Click to expand...


Well, what if the world as it is is perfect in God's eyes? Who says that this world isn't just how he wants it? He made it after all, and according to you is constantly shaping it. Being omniscient tho, I kinda think that he could have just planted a very intricate seed in the beginning, knowing what it would become.

I think that the idea that God just hasn't quite gotten it right yet does go against the idea that he is all knowing. And all powerful. And an analogy that compares him to a human doctor really doesn't prove your point to me. Not tryin to be mean or anythin. A good theory should be tested, right? ;):)
 
immortalitylost said:
Well, what if the world as it is is perfect in God's eyes? Who says that this world isn't just how he wants it? He made it after all, and according to you is constantly shaping it. Being omniscient tho, I kinda think that he could have just planted a very intricate seed in the beginning, knowing what it would become.

I think that the idea that God just hasn't quite gotten it right yet does go against the idea that he is all knowing. And all powerful. And an analogy that compares him to a human doctor really doesn't prove your point to me. Not tryin to be mean or anythin. A good theory should be tested, right? ;):)
Click to expand...

How does one learn to ride a bike? You can know all the physics about leverage and force and balance that goes into riding a bike, but that doesn't mean you can ride it or have ridden it. That's what I mean by experiential knowledge.

I'm all for testing a theory. How do you suppose we test this one?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawn
So you are suggesting what Dondi?
That the creation/material universe is.....field work?
(*pun intended*)I was implying Em fields and unifying field theory, but I didn't really explain that.

Response by Dondi:
Perhaps. If God created the world for His pleasure, what kind of pleasure do you imagine He would enjoy?
Click to expand...
We do not know that that is the reason for the universe to exist.
Maybe if one considers that the highest state of being (for people) is one of bliss and make a comparison, as we are alleged to be made in the creator's image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top