Genesis 5: 1-2, God created man, in the likeness of God made he HIM. male and female he created them; and blessed them and called their name Adam or rather Man: an androgynous multi celled being who is the likeness of God.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
how did man appear on earth
- Thread starter zenzero
- Start date
Genesis 5: 1-2, God created man, in the likeness of God made he HIM. male and female he created them; and blessed them and called their name Adam or rather Man: an androgynous multi celled being who is the likeness of God.
Caladan
Agnostic Pantheist
'Adam' Does appear before Genesis 2:19, the word Adam appears in the first chapter of the book of Genesis, in the verse you cited (Genesis 1:26) In Hebrew the word Man reads as Adam.
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ
~Genesis 1:26
אדם=Adam/Man
Adam is the masculine form of the Hebrew word Adama, meaning Earth.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
elesam,
One of the problems you're having here is that you're debating entirely by naked assertion. In other words, you've offered nothing at all except your own say-so. You assert that H. habilus "has been proven to be a monkey", yet you fail to back this up with anything at all. Who "proved" it? How did they do it?
See...no one here is going to take your word as unquestioned gospel, especially when you tell us things that most people are pretty sure are wrong (and some of us know are wrong).
If you want to discuss science, you'd better be prepared to do some work. Here's a good place to start: What sort of characteristics would you expect to find in a human/ape transitional fossil? Try and be as specific as you can.
One of the problems you're having here is that you're debating entirely by naked assertion. In other words, you've offered nothing at all except your own say-so. You assert that H. habilus "has been proven to be a monkey", yet you fail to back this up with anything at all. Who "proved" it? How did they do it?
See...no one here is going to take your word as unquestioned gospel, especially when you tell us things that most people are pretty sure are wrong (and some of us know are wrong).
If you want to discuss science, you'd better be prepared to do some work. Here's a good place to start: What sort of characteristics would you expect to find in a human/ape transitional fossil? Try and be as specific as you can.
Luminous
non-existential luminary
Ah, God is [like] a man. that verse in no way points to the bias of the writer as he was making the stuff up
.
Last edited:
Hebrew: Earthly red. English: Red Earth, Adam means of the 'Red Earth' = 'The land of Nod, Mars, Cain, Lucifer the light bearer, etc, a subject that needs more research before I am prepared to enter into any debate at this point in time.
Last edited:
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
What counts as a "man"?
is this a 'man'?
or this?
wa:do
is this a 'man'?
or this?
wa:do
What counts as a "man"?
is this a 'man'?
or this?
wa:do
Neither. Man is a triad being consisting of a physical body, which is activated by the divine animating principle which pervades the entire cosmos which is the eternal soul that we all share, man is a living body (male or female) in which there develops a mind = spirit which is the supreme personality of that body. The above is nothing more that pictures of animal bone.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Good one mate: Aussie for Thank you.
Last edited:
Neither. Man is a social construct built from arbitrary ideas we've chosen, to distinguish ourselves from other creatures and other things, including the idea that one of these skulls might constitute part of "us".What counts as a "man"?
is this a 'man'?
or this?
wa:do
What counts as a "man"?
is this a 'man'?
or this?
wa:do
Putting aside my previous faceitious comment, I must admit that I do not know If both, one , or neither are the skulls of the ancient ancestors of mankind, and would appreciate your further comment on this subject.
Friend Peace has this to say:
Quote:
No, humans haven't just appreared haphazardley, they were created by God. The first human being that was created is Adam then Eve and we are all their progeny, it's very simple. We Muslims don't believe in Darwin's idea of human evolution.
Like everyone to respond this.
Love & rgds
And God said "let the earth bring forth the living creature each after its own kind"
therefore it is the earth that develops species?
Adam from memory was a son of god who brought sin into the world-a rebellious nature
the Knowledge of Good and Evil then being seperated from God. People sometimes say how does one know good if there is no bad.It is this balance that needs to be fulfilled in man. If one looks at behaviours today it is seen that something is in the conscious and mind of man that produces these. Death is the penalty, but science is now understanding aging and it is interesting.
Quote:
No, humans haven't just appreared haphazardley, they were created by God. The first human being that was created is Adam then Eve and we are all their progeny, it's very simple. We Muslims don't believe in Darwin's idea of human evolution.
Like everyone to respond this.
Love & rgds
And God said "let the earth bring forth the living creature each after its own kind"
therefore it is the earth that develops species?
Adam from memory was a son of god who brought sin into the world-a rebellious nature
the Knowledge of Good and Evil then being seperated from God. People sometimes say how does one know good if there is no bad.It is this balance that needs to be fulfilled in man. If one looks at behaviours today it is seen that something is in the conscious and mind of man that produces these. Death is the penalty, but science is now understanding aging and it is interesting.
I don't understand your point, eselam. What does stance have to do with anything? Some animals are bipedal, some quadrupedal. Hominids have walked fully upright for millions of years -- long before we developed the large brains and intelligence we're known for.
This tired argument has been done to death.
There is clear evidence that creatures change over time. Many of the mechanisms by which this happens have been described and used commercially and experimentally to alter and create new forms.
Have you ever studied the mechanisms of evolution? They are simple, and understandable.
Do you believe in heavier-than-air flight? If so, why? -- It seems unlikely.
Talk about unlikely, if you're going to condemn something because it seems counter intuitive or because the mechanism behind it is not immediately clear, what is your opinion on atomic energy or even photovoltaics?
Unlike the clear, understandable mechanisms behind evolution, the workings of atomic physics are wildly fantastic and fly in the face of everything we experience in everyday life.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Like "kind" I find "man" or "human" to be words that have virtually no meaning in creationist discussions.
The way they are used is so broad as to be essentially useless in any meaningful discussion.
Where does the line between man and animal get drawn?
wa:do
The way they are used is so broad as to be essentially useless in any meaningful discussion.
Where does the line between man and animal get drawn?
wa:do
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
So other species that show religious behavior are what then?
wa:do
wa:do
Neither did the automobile or the creations of it's kind that came later, such as the planes, the space shuttle etc, appear hapazardley, they were created by man who is the likeness of God the ultimate creator, but you cannot deny that it was through the process of the evolution of the mind of man over many tens of thousand years from the wheel to the day that he had gathered the required data and had created the necessary infractructure to begin the creation of the higher order, and so it is with the invisible mind that is God, which Mind=spirit is made manifest in the creation itself.
Romans 1: 18, God's anger is revealed from heaven against all the sin and evil of the people whose evil ways prevent the truth from being known. God punishes them, because what can be known about God is plain to them, for God himself made it plain. It is in the creation itself that his invisible qualities, both his eternal power and his divine nature, have been clearly seen, they are perceived in the things that God has made. So these people have no excuse at all! They know God (the invisible mind that pervades the entire Cosmos), but they do not give give to him the honour that belongs to him, nor do they thank him. Instead, their thoughts have become complete nonsense, and their empty minds are filled with darkness. The say they are wise, but they are fools; instead of worshipping the immortal God, they worship images (Mental or otherwise) made to look like (One of the creations of the invisible mind that is God) mortal man etc.
Last edited:
Runewolf1973
Materialism/Animism
Not entirely sure what you mean by "merging with the whole". If All is One, then there is no merging with anything is there? There is only One. From my perspective, the animals and other creatures and even Man are already One with the Whole. It is only Man who with the human "mind" has perceived a separation where there actually is none. Humans must realize they are just another part of that Whole as well. Humans are not superior, they only "think" they are. But that's just my perspective.
Last edited:
I agree with Runewolf. I believe Humans are animals that suffer from the delusion that they are separate from the whole. Certain other animals may suffer from the same delusion to some degree, but not even close to the extent that humans do. Even to hold such a delusion requires a high degree of sentience.