Are humans somehow "unnatural"?

[Etritonakin]

The wearing of hats? Animals don't wear hats. It's unnatural. Don't give me that hermit crab thing, either. That's not a hat.

Also.... we have essentially interrupted/changed the course of our own "natural" evolution -so we have made ourselves unnatural -the same is true of the changes we've made in other species -which would eventually affect everything to some degree.

 

[Etritonakin]

I was thinking recently about the fact that humans have much more mental capacity than it takes to simply be humans.
Our bodies are presently keeping us from doing much of what we can imagine doing.
Other species are pretty much balanced. A horse has the mental capacity to be great at being a horse, but not much else -that sort of thing.
Just a thought.

It is also interesting to note that about the time Adam is said to have been created, things began to be rather different in the world.

As for Adam's creation, it would seem -from the scriptures -that Adam was not the first humanoid on earth -but more like a modification to a/the species already present (though created directly alongside).

I don't think a writer hoping to be taken seriously would claim that the first ever humanoid on earth was directly created in Eden -had only two kids AT THE TIME -and one of them mysteriously went and found a wife in Nod somehow after slaying his brother, even though there were only supposed to be three people in existence at that time. The same kid was also worried about being killed by other people.
Then there is the distinction between the sons of God and the daughters of men (which some have believed referred to angels/demons).... but anyway...

Adam was the first to be made in the image and likeness of God -not the first "man" by scientific definition.

God is not credited with the only the creation of the Earth and the things therein -but of the heavens -the worlds -and that by processes -so it is not as if people back then believed that everything suddenly popped into being 6,000 years ago.
Adam's creation is specified to be about that time -given provided genealogies -but the incorrect assumption that the entire Earth was created initially at that time may simply be due to an improper translation of the word for "was" -which can just as correctly be translated "had become" -which leaves an unspecified amount of time from the completion of the earth (at which the angels shouted for joy in Job) -and its becoming waste and ruin for some reason -and to an unspecified degree -not necessarily resulting in a completely lifeless Earth.

Anyway -my point is that if pre-Adam humanoids came about as a result of "natural" evolution alone (which may well be indirect creation -and any minor tweaks made along the way would be difficult to pinpoint), Adam could be considered "unnatural".

Regardless, it is extremely interesting that an ancient book would specify a time 6,000 years ago as a point when man was made similar to "God" - and given the destiny to become literally like God.
It is also interesting that drastic changes began to occur about that time compared to previous "human" history. Man very much did begin to become -at the very least -much more like the one all-powerful God they conceptualized for whatever reason -especially compared to previous "human" history.

Meanwhile...... our closest living relatives learned how to get ants with a stick!

...and, apparently, where we keep our pumpkins


hehehehehehehe -that one on the right looks so proud of himself

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Reminds me of this speech thingy Corey Taylor gave in the eponymous Stone Sour album when he said "you're not a freak of nature, you are nature." We are nature, and though we have manipulated nature to achieve things not otherwise seen in the natural world, it too is a part of nature.

There are numerous problems with that chart. Europe didn't have a printing press until the mid 1400s and printing in China began around 600 BC, the Chinese first used gun powder around the 9th century not 900 AD, the earliest plastics were 1600 BC, and the earliest form of the internet and electronic communications dates back to WWII, with the Internet coming around during the mid-90s, and the first mobile phones came to be during the 1970s.

 

[Etritonakin]

Reminds me of this speech thingy Corey Taylor gave in the eponymous Stone Sour album when he said "you're not a freak of nature, you are nature." We are nature, and though we have manipulated nature to achieve things not otherwise seen in the natural world, it too is a part of nature.

There are numerous problems with that chart. Europe didn't have a printing press until the mid 1400s and printing in China began around 600 BC, the Chinese first used gun powder around the 9th century not 900 AD, the earliest plastics were 1600 BC, and the earliest form of the internet and electronic communications dates back to WWII, with the Internet coming around during the mid-90s, and the first mobile phones came to be during the 1970s.

I really didn't check the chart all that well -but it doesn't make a difference to the overall point.

God being the one by whom all things consist and creating everything would be nature, too.
(God would have done similar to this -similar to us [being gods on a smaller scale]... " manipulated nature to achieve things not otherwise seen in the natural world".... but essentially of himself/itself -being all that is -that which can act and that which can be acted upon)
That's why it is good to specify what is meant. Because we are relatively new and ignorant in relation to all that has ever been, words must be somewhat elastic until we become certain.

It is interesting that it was considered so long ago that a being with complete knowledge (whether you believe one exists or not) would be able to create a perfect language.
Zep 3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

 

[Etritonakin]

I really didn't check the chart all that well -but it doesn't make a difference to the overall point.

God being the one by whom all things consist and creating everything would be nature, too.
That's why it is good to specify what is meant. Because we are relatively new and ignorant in relation to all that has ever been, words must be somewhat elastic until we become certain.

It is interesting that it was considered so long ago that a being with complete knowledge (whether you believe one exists or not) would be able to create a perfect language.
Zep 3:9 For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent.

Whew -check this out.....

Natural.....

1. 1 : based on an inherent sense of right and wrong <natural justice>
   
   
2. 2 a : being in accordance with or determined by nature b : having or constituting a classification based on features existing in nature
   
   
3. 3 a (1) : begotten as distinguished from adopted; also : legitimate (2) : being a relation by actual consanguinity as distinguished from adoption <natural parents> b : illegitimate <a natural child>
   
   
4. 4 : having an essential relation with someone or something : following from the nature of the one in question <his guilt is a natural deduction from the evidence>
   
   
5. 5 : implanted or being as if implanted by nature : seemingly inborn <a natural talent for art>
   
   
6. 6 : of or relating to nature as an object of study and research
   
   
7. 7 : having a specified character by nature <a natural athlete>
   
   
8. 8 a : occurring in conformity with the ordinary course of nature : not marvelous or supernatural <natural causes> b : formulated by human reason alone rather than revelation <natural religion> <natural rights> c : having a normal or usual character <events followed their natural course>
   
   
9. 9 : possessing or exhibiting the higher qualities (as kindliness and affection) of human nature <a noble … brother … ever most kind and natural — Shakespeare>
   
   
10. 10 a : growing without human care; also : not cultivated <natural prairie unbroken by the plow> b : existing in or produced by nature : not artificial <natural turf> <natural curiosities> c : relating to or being natural food
    
    
11. 11 a : being in a state of nature without spiritual enlightenment : unregenerate <natural man> b : living in or as if in a state of nature untouched by the influences of civilization and society
    
    
12. 12 a : having a physical or real existence as contrasted with one that is spiritual, intellectual, or fictitious <a corporation is a legal but not a natural person> b : of, relating to, or operating in the physical as opposed to the spiritual world <natural laws describe phenomena of the physical universe>
    
    
13. 13 a : closely resembling an original : true to nature b : marked by easy simplicity and freedom from artificiality, affectation, or constraint c : having a form or appearance found in nature
    
    
14. 14 a : having neither flats nor sharps <the natural scale of C major> b : being neither sharp nor flat c : having the pitch modified by the natural sign
    
    
15. 15 : of an off-white or beige color
    

 

[Zosimus]

As for Adam's creation, it would seem -from the scriptures -that Adam was not the first humanoid on earth -but more like a modification to a/the species already present (though created directly alongside).

I don't think a writer hoping to be taken seriously would claim that the first ever humanoid on earth was directly created in Eden -had two kids -and one of them mysteriously went and found a wife in Nod somehow, even though there were only supposed to be three people in existence at that time. The same kid was also worried about being killed by other people.

Please, you're just embarrassing yourself. Adam and Eve are supposed to have had 33 sons and 23 daughters for a total of 56 kids.

 

[Etritonakin]

Please, you're just embarrassing yourself. Adam and Eve are supposed to have had 33 sons and 23 daughters for a total of 56 kids.

At the time Cain left for Nod?

I did write "at that time" -and timeline is important to this subject. I never said or meant that they did not have more children.

Gen4:16And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

The Descendants of Cain

17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. 18And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech. 19And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. 20And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. 21And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. 22And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.

23And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.

24If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

Seth and Enosh

25And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. 26And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

Why should I be embarrassed?

Please note new bold edit of the post you quoted -to reiterate that I meant "at that time" as originally stated -and also note what I actually said in it originally.

Also -what is your actual point?

Are you saying that what is meant is that Cain went out of Eden were there was no humanoids and Adam and Eve's other children eventually showed up -from which he took a wife?
Are you saying you have information about the specific timeline of all of Adam and Eve's other children?
If so, please provide it here.

 

[Zosimus]

At the time Cain left for Nod?

I did write "at that time" -and timeline is important to this subject. I never said or meant that they did not have more children.

Gen4:16And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

The Descendants of Cain

17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. 18And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech. 19And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. 20And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. 21And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. 22And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.

23And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.

24If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

Seth and Enosh

25And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. 26And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.

Why should I be embarrassed?

Please note new bold edit of the post you quoted -to reiterate that I meant "at that time" as originally stated -and also note what I actually said in it originally.

Also -what is your actual point?

Are you saying that what is meant is that Cain went out of Eden were there was no humanoids and Adam and Eve's other children eventually showed up -from which he took a wife?
Are you saying you have information about the specific timeline of all of Adam and Eve's other children?
If so, please provide it here.

Yes, that's right. Adam was, according to tradition, 130 years old when his wife bore Seth. So Adam was stoked because he had a son to replace Abel, whom Cain had killed. Now let me ask you this: How many kids do you think you might have in 130 years? Even assuming that you didn't get busy till you were 30, and you only had 1 kid every 10 years, we're still talking 11 kids, 3 of whom were male (Abel, Cain, and Seth). And you're wondering how Cain might have found a woman? Seriously?!

If Adam had 56 kids in 930 years that's one kid every 16.6 years or so. So a different way of estimating would have Adam at 7.8 kids at the time Seth popped out. Again, three of those were boys, so we're still thinking that some 4.8 girls were running around. And you're wondering how in the world Cain could have gotten a wife?

Please... stop. You're just embarrassing yourself.

 

[Etritonakin]

Yes, that's right. Adam was, according to tradition, 130 years old when his wife bore Seth. So Adam was stoked because he had a son to replace Abel, whom Cain had killed. Now let me ask you this: How many kids do you think you might have in 130 years? Even assuming that you didn't get busy till you were 30, and you only had 1 kid every 10 years, we're still talking 11 kids, 3 of whom were male (Abel, Cain, and Seth). And you're wondering how Cain might have found a woman? Seriously?!

If Adam had 56 kids in 930 years that's one kid every 16.6 years or so. So a different way of estimating would have Adam at 7.8 kids at the time Seth popped out. Again, three of those were boys, so we're still thinking that some 4.8 girls were running around. And you're wondering how in the world Cain could have gotten a wife?

Please... stop. You're just embarrassing yourself.

I'm not wondering how Cain might have found a woman -but why it is assumed that the bible teaches that Cain's wife must have been of Adam and Eve's line.

I don't feel embarrassed -and certainly don't feel bound to "tradition". "Tradition" is where you get things like young earth creationism -which is extremely embarrassing.

"Tradition" replaces Passover with Ishtar -replaces the kingdom of God with heaven -the truth for a lie -knowledge with common belief, etc.

Are you saying that you believe all persons now living came from Adam and Eve -or that the bible states such?

I'm not embarrassing myself -so you can stop saying that.

Why do you keep saying that? Do you feel uneasy when questioning long-held beliefs? Are you afraid you will not be accepted?

 

[Zosimus]

I'm not wondering how Cain might have found a woman -but why it is assumed that the bible teaches that Cain's wife must have been of Adam and Eve's line.

I don't feel embarrassed -and certainly don't feel bound to "tradition". "Tradition" is where you get things like young earth creationism -which is extremely embarrassing.

"Tradition" replaces Passover with Ishtar -replaces the kingdom of God with heaven -the truth for a lie -knowledge with common belief, etc.

Are you saying that you believe all persons now living came from Adam and Eve -or that the bible states such?

I'm not embarrassing myself -so you can stop saying that.

Why do you keep saying that? Do you feel uneasy when questioning long-held beliefs? Are you afraid you will not be accepted?

Uhm... yeah, it does. It says so in Genesis 3:20. Eve = mother of all living. Thank you, drive through.

That means that, according to the Bible, Cain's wife was descended from Eve.

As for you not being bound to tradition, I'm happy for you. Truly. But don't say "Since I'm not bound to tradition, the Bible doesn't really say that God made the Earth is 6 days and rested the 7th" because the Bible says exactly that. I can show you right where it says that.

So you either believe it... or you don't. But don't torture the text to try to make it say something it doesn't so that you can reconcile neo-Darwinism with the Bible. They're not reconcilable.

 

[1137]

As I've said elsewhere:

Nature is the objective universe that we all share, which exists free of all minds, and follows understandable and uniform laws. It can besaid that nature is deterministic, in that events in the objective universe slaved to cause and effect, there is a very thorough mechanism behind things, and it is made of physical matter. When a drop an object from your roof it will fall, if you touch a hot stove it will burn your hand, your car cannot go faster than the speed of light, you get my meaning. Further, nature does not rely on an abstract mind to exist.

While nature – the objective universe – exists, it is also clear that many subjective universes exist as well. Since Paleolithic period, humanity has showed an exponentially increasing ability for abstract thought. This has included entire pantheons of fictional beings, myths and folklores, heroic journeys. Over time our abilities increased to forming societies and agriculture, creating language and writing. Examples continue getting more extreme such as medication and sanitation, the internet, and discoveries in psychology, philosophy, and neuroscience.

In nature (mechanistic, deterministic, predictable) someone who lost a limb would remain limbless. Hell, in many species they would likely be doomed to die. Human beings, however, have come up with a way to create strong, artificial limbs, including hands, to replace lost limbs with. This technology is only increasing, to were something like Luke’s artificial hand in Star Wars is getting less and less unrealistic. In nature, an individuals with depression would either be slaved to the cycles of their sadness, or outright lead to suicide if doing so was a possibility. Human beings can use medication, created through the understanding and manipulation of nature, to help affect the physical aspects of depression, or therapy and counseling to affect the mental aspects of depression. Even placebos, straight belief that that something fictional is going to help, can causephysiological changes in the brain.

 

[Etritonakin]

Uhm... yeah, it does. It says so in Genesis 3:20. Eve = mother of all living. Thank you, drive through.

That means that, according to the Bible, Cain's wife was descended from Eve.

As for you not being bound to tradition, I'm happy for you. Truly. But don't say "Since I'm not bound to tradition, the Bible doesn't really say that God made the Earth is 6 days and rested the 7th" because the Bible says exactly that. I can show you right where it says that.

So you either believe it... or you don't. But don't torture the text to try to make it say something it doesn't so that you can reconcile neo-Darwinism with the Bible. They're not reconcilable.

Your ideas about the bible -your assumptions about the words written -and scientific fact are not reconcilable -but what the bible actually says -and what the language used allows for -are a different story.

Eve=mother of all the living -literally or figuratively
chay
khah'ee
From H2421; alive; hence raw (flesh); fresh (plant, water, year), strong; also (as noun, especially in the feminine singular and masculine plural) life (or living thing), whether literally or figuratively: - + age, alive, appetite, (wild) beast, company, congregation, life (-time), live (-ly), living (creature, thing), maintenance, + merry, multitude, + (be) old, quick, raw, running, springing, troop.

-which could also refer to the fact that they had the opportunity to live forever thenceforth -similar to Christ referring to those alive and not on the path toward salvation as "the dead".

Also.... the definition of the word translated "WAS" in the first verses of Genesis is just as correctly translated "HAD BECOME" -leaving any mount of time between its initial completion -spoken of in job as causing the sons of god to shout for joy -and its becoming waste and ruin.
It is likely that that particular ruinous state was due to the rebellion of the angels against the throne of God (which was put down) -who ascended above the heights of the clouds to do so.
That rebellion took place before the events in Eden -as Satan had already turned against God -and had been cast back down.

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
Isa 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
Isa 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Isa 14:17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners

While it seems that it is clearly stated that God made every last thing in 6 days....

Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

...the above verse refers to that which was described previously -which was not the creation of the entire universe, Earth, life, etc. "Made" does not necessarily mean initial creation or completion.

God did do what was described in 6 "days" -but you must consider what was described. The heavens and earth were made -then, at some point, THE EARTH HAD BECOME...
(H1961
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass.....)

...waste and ruin.

What happened next? Making it not waste and ruin (not extremely specific) in preparation for man.... in 6 "days" -that has nothing to to with what happened before the earth had become waste and ruin.

You cannot simply take one verse -it must be referenced with all others.

Isa 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

 

[Zosimus]

Your ideas about the bible -your assumptions about the words written -and scientific fact are not reconcilable -but what the bible actually says -and what the language used allows for -are a different story.

Eve=mother of all the living -literally or figuratively
chay
khah'ee
From H2421; alive; hence raw (flesh); fresh (plant, water, year), strong; also (as noun, especially in the feminine singular and masculine plural) life (or living thing), whether literally or figuratively: - + age, alive, appetite, (wild) beast, company, congregation, life (-time), live (-ly), living (creature, thing), maintenance, + merry, multitude, + (be) old, quick, raw, running, springing, troop.

-which could also refer to the fact that they had the opportunity to live forever thenceforth -similar to Christ referring to those alive and not on the path toward salvation as "the dead".

Also.... the definition of the word translated "WAS" in the first verses of Genesis is just as correctly translated "HAD BECOME" -leaving any mount of time between its initial completion -spoken of in job as causing the sons of god to shout for joy -and its becoming waste and ruin.
It is likely that that particular ruinous state was due to the rebellion of the angels against the throne of God (which was put down) -who ascended above the heights of the clouds to do so.
That rebellion took place before the events in Eden -as Satan had already turned against God -and had been cast back down.

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
Isa 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
Isa 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Isa 14:17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners

While it seems that it is clearly stated that God made every last thing in 6 days....

Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

...the above verse refers to that which was described previously -which was not the creation of the entire universe, Earth, life, etc. "Made" does not necessarily mean initial creation or completion.

God did do what was described in 6 "days" -but you must consider what was described. The heavens and earth were made -then, at some point, THE EARTH HAD BECOME...
(H1961
hâyâh
haw-yaw'
A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass.....)

...waste and ruin.

What happened next? Making it not waste and ruin (not extremely specific) in preparation for man.... in 6 "days" -that has nothing to to with what happened before the earth had become waste and ruin.

You cannot simply take one verse -it must be referenced with all others.

Isa 28:13 But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.

Again–torturing the text. The word in question, H1961 הָיָה occurs 76 times. Here are some examples:

And the earth was H1961 without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
----------------
So you want to translate this as "The earth had become without form?"

And God said, Let there be H1961 light: and there was light.
----------------
So you want to translate this as "Let there had become light?"

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be H1961alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
----------------
So you want to translate this as "It is not good that the man should had become alone?"

Seriously?

 

[Quagmire]

What I mean is, is there anything about humans that could not have come about through natural evolutionary processes?

Some claim that the minds and abilities of humans are so advanced and complex to the point that they could not have come about through natural processes alone. Some view this complexity as the result of aliens or mysterious deities.

I disagree with this opinion and think there was no intervention, agreeing with the current scientific evidence that humans are merely the product of evolution as all species on Earth are.

What say you? Present evidence and state your reasoning, if you can be so obliged.

We do seem to be the only species that's managed to over-ride the natural checks and balances all other species seem to be subject to.