The Creation of Woman

[Thief]

Although it must be said. This was not the creation of women. This was the creation of Eve.

Men and Women were around for thousands of years procreating outside of Eden before Adam and then Eve were even created inside of Eden.

We call these humans the 6th day creations.

Adam and Eve if you trace the geneology were created to bring Jesus into the world, eventually many generations later when the time was right. And they was not made until after the 7th day in which God rested.

so you HAVE been reading my posts over the last several years!!!!!!

but I would step away from stating Adam and Eve were intended to bring Jesus into the world

Jesus is believed to be God's Son
by action of God ....immediately played
not evolved

 

[Enoch07]

so you HAVE been reading my posts over the last several years!!!!!!

but I would step away from stating Adam and Eve we re intended to to bring Jesus into the world

Jesus is believed to be God's Son
by action of God ....immediately played
not evolved

Mary wasn't chosen at random. It played out as God intended. Begat after begat.

 

[Thief]

Mary wasn't chosen at random. It played out as God intended. Begat after begat.

I agree....Mary was chosen
but that implies choices to choose from

Adam was a chosen son
and Eve was cloned....apparently for genetic applications

I suspect Mary was chosen...but not for her genetics

she lived in a land where the people believed in a God
not having a name
not having a body
she was chosen for territory

Jesus came to correct a belief that had not ...'gelled' sufficiently

the genetics of Jesus may have been good....really good
but His frame of mind is not an evolved item

 

[Enoch07]

I agree....Mary was chosen
but that implies choices to choose from

Adam was a chosen son
and Eve was cloned....apparently for genetic applications

I suspect Mary was chosen...but not her her genetics

she lived in a land where the people believed in a God
not having a name
not having a body

Jesus came to correct a belief that had not ...'gelled' sufficiently

the genetics of Jesus may have been good....really good
but His frame of mind is not an evolved item

Agreed, but the genetics are important to some degree.

Not in the sense of it means one type of people of a certain genetic makeup are greater than any other. This is more commonly known as race realism or scientific racism. Which I believe is foolish nonsense.

The genetics are important for the story telling. In helping us understand the who, what, where, when, how, and why. That's all I am pointing out.

 

[Thief]

Agreed, but the genetics are important to some degree.

Not in the sense of it means one type of people of a certain genetic makeup are greater than any other. This is more commonly known as race realism or scientific racism. Which I believe is foolish nonsense.

The genetics are important for the story telling. In helping us understand the who, what, where, when, how, and why. That's all I am pointing out.

I would say evolution is important and was well under way on Day Six
and then I look at Chapter Two of Genesis
which I believe is NOT a retelling of Chapter One

Man was evolving but not in spirit
So....a chosen specimen ..Adam
in ideal living conditions.....the garden
and cloning to produce a change in the human body

Eve was a receptacle for a new branch of human
her altered genetics blending and redirecting the genetics of Man

 

[Enoch07]

I would say evolution is important and was well under way on Day Six
and then I look at Chapter Two of Genesis
which I believe is NOT a retelling of Chapter One

Man was evolving but not in spirit
So....a chosen specimen ..Adam
in ideal living conditions.....the garden
and cloning to produce a change in the human body

Eve was a receptacle for a new branch of human
her altered genetics blending and redirecting the genetics of Man

That is more or less my interpretation of Genesis.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Theory of evolution is very ancient science known during the 9th century, they knew that life was
evolved but was created and not by luck.

The theory actually was named the the Mohammedan theory,

The 14th century influential historiographer and historian Ibn Khaldun wrote the Muqaddimah or Prolegomena ("Introduction") on what he referred to as the "gradual process of creation." He stated that the Earth began with abiotic components such as "minerals." Slowly, primitive stages of plants such as "herbs and seedless plants" developed and eventually "palms and vines." Khaldun connects the later stages of plant development to the first stages of animal development. Finally, he claims that the greater thought capabilities of human beings was "reached from the world of the monkeys."[17]

In his 1874 book titled History of the Conflict between Religion and Science, John William Draper, a scientist and contemporary of Charles Darwin, criticized the Catholic Church for its disapproval of "the Mohammedan theory of the evolution of man from lower forms, or his gradual development to his present condition in the long lapse of time."[18]
Islamic views on evolution - Wikipedia

The Englishman John William Draper famously referred to “The Mohammedan Theory of Evolution” in his 1874 book History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science, probably in reference to the Arabic scholar Ibn Khaldun, who wrote in his 14th century The Muqaddimah,

creation ... started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish ... the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group.


The theory of biological evolution in its complete form was presented by a great early zoologist, al-Jahiz in the ninth century.
Did Arabic Scholars Discover Evolution in the Ninth Century? | HuffPost

I can't help if if you have no clue. The theory of evolution is a 19th century discovery. Some people may have had similar beliefs but they were not theories. You need to learn some basic science. A theory is much more than a mere belief, it is a powerful explanation that explains all sorts of observed facts and phenomena. Your ninth century explanation does not qualify. That was not a theory.

Try again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Did you see, I said you need to be creative and your answer that you communicate very well.
I have to respect the forum's laws anyway.

No, lying may be "creative" but it is not a valid debating technique. To debate properly one must use proper terminology. With your method all one can do is to make obviously false claims.

 

[FearGod]

I can't help if if you have no clue. The theory of evolution is a 19th century discovery. Some people may have had similar beliefs but they were not theories. You need to learn some basic science. A theory is much more than a mere belief, it is a powerful explanation that explains all sorts of observed facts and phenomena. Your ninth century explanation does not qualify. That was not a theory.

Try again.

You should tell that to the 19th century scientists who named it the Mohammedan theory, and those scientists
were well known and not like you, I trust their knowledge than yours if you have any.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You should tell that to the 19th century scientists who named it the Mohammedan theory, and those scientists
were well known and not like you, I trust their knowledge than yours if you have any.

You do not even appear to know what science is. By the way, I have not had to lie to support my claims. I have not had to play any games. What 19th century scientists called evolution "Mohammedan theory"? That is a new claim and it is a lulu.

 

[FearGod]

No, lying may be "creative" but it is not a valid debating technique. To debate properly one must use proper terminology. With your method all one can do is to make obviously false claims.

You're insisting in your opinion that you have been evolved and my position that you were
born and developed in 9 months, that's the reality, you're a creation and your mother's womb
was the factory.

Evolution has no place in your mother's womb, evolution has no relation to creation
and if changes happened gradually and made us something else then we;re still a creation,
I know you didn't study that in school and will be hard for you to understand what I'm trying
to explain to you.

 

[FearGod]

You do not even appear to know what science is. By the way, I have not had to lie to support my claims. I have not had to play any games. What 19th century scientists called evolution "Mohammedan theory"? That is a new claim and it is a lulu.

You aren't even reading my posts, you're insisting in your opinion blindly.

The Englishman John William Draper famously referred to “The Mohammedan Theory of Evolution” in his 1874 book History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science, probably in reference to the Arabic scholar Ibn Khaldun, who wrote in his 14th century The Muqaddimah,
Did Arabic Scholars Discover Evolution in the Ninth Century? | HuffPost

John William Draper (May 5, 1811 – January 4, 1882) was an English-American scientist, philosopher, physician, chemist, historian and photographer. He is credited with producing the first clear photograph of a female face (1839–40) and the first detailed photograph of the moon in 1840. He was also the first president of the American Chemical Society (1876–77) and a founder of the New York University School of Medicine. One of Draper's books, the History of the Conflict between Religion and Science, popularised the conflict thesis proposing intrinsic hostility in the relationship between religion and science. It was widely read, and was translated into several languages.[1] His son, Henry Draper, and his granddaughter, Antonia Maury, were astronomers, her younger sister, Carlotta Maury was a paleontologist, and his eldest son, John Christopher Draper, was a chemist.[2]
John William Draper - Wikipedia

Should I believe you or John William Draper.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're insisting in your opinion that you have been evolved and my position that you were
born and developed in 9 months, that's the reality, you're a creation and your mother's womb
was the factory.

Once again this is an equivocation fallacy on your part. Repeating your errors does you no good at all. And please, do not lie about me. It is not merely my opinion. I can support what I know. You can only confirm that you do not understand the terms that you misuse. You should not use the word "creation" in this sense. It is dishonest. You are not being consistent in your use of terminology, that results in equivocation fallacies on your part.

Evolution has no place in your mother's womb, evolution has no relation to creation
and if changes happened gradually and made us something else then we;re still a creation,
I know you didn't study that in school and will be hard for you to understand what I'm trying
to explain to you.

Once again you lose when you misuse terminology. I will simply remind you of this error every time that you make it.

By the way what the Muslims had was not a scientific theory. Some people misuse the word "theory" but their errors do not support your claims. A scientific theory must be testable. If you can't tell us how an idea can be falsified it is by definition not a scientific theory. What reasonable test would falsify the "Mohammedan theory"? If you can't think of one then it is not a proper scientific theory. It is merely a misuse of the term.

This may help you:

What Is a Scientific Theory?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You aren't even reading my posts, you're insisting in your opinion blindly.

The Englishman John William Draper famously referred to “The Mohammedan Theory of Evolution” in his 1874 book History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science, probably in reference to the Arabic scholar Ibn Khaldun, who wrote in his 14th century The Muqaddimah,
Did Arabic Scholars Discover Evolution in the Ninth Century? | HuffPost

John William Draper (May 5, 1811 – January 4, 1882) was an English-American scientist, philosopher, physician, chemist, historian and photographer. He is credited with producing the first clear photograph of a female face (1839–40) and the first detailed photograph of the moon in 1840. He was also the first president of the American Chemical Society (1876–77) and a founder of the New York University School of Medicine. One of Draper's books, the History of the Conflict between Religion and Science, popularised the conflict thesis proposing intrinsic hostility in the relationship between religion and science. It was widely read, and was translated into several languages.[1] His son, Henry Draper, and his granddaughter, Antonia Maury, were astronomers, her younger sister, Carlotta Maury was a paleontologist, and his eldest son, John Christopher Draper, was a chemist.[2]
John William Draper - Wikipedia

Should I believe you or John William Draper.

If you can't find a reasonable test that the Muslim scholars have then you should believe me. Draper merely misused the term. It was a belief, and in fact Darwin was not the fist western scholar to believe in evolution. Darwin went much further, he developed a testable scientific theory that explained how evolution works. Your "Mohammedan theory" does not do that. It is a mere belief. It was not a theory. it was merely an ad hoc explanation and those are not of much use in the sciences.

 

[FearGod]

Once again this is an equivocation fallacy on your part. Repeating your errors does you no good at all. And please, do not lie about me. It is not merely my opinion. I can support what I know. You can only confirm that you do not understand the terms that you misuse. You should not use the word "creation" in this sense. It is dishonest. You are not being consistent in your use of terminology, that results in equivocation fallacies on your part.

I know you hate the word creation, but that's the reality, you were created by a process that took 9 months.
I don't like philosophy, but I know you do because you don't have a creative mind.

Once again you lose when you misuse terminology. I will simply remind you of this error every time that you make it.

By the way what the Muslims had was not a scientific theory. Some people misuse the word "theory" but their errors do not support your claims. A scientific theory must be testable. If you can't tell us how an idea can be falsified it is by definition not a scientific theory. What reasonable test would falsify the "Mohammedan theory"? If you can't think of one then it is not a proper scientific theory. It is merely a misuse of the term.

This may help you:

What Is a Scientific Theory?

Once again, you should blame John William for calling it the Mohammedan theory and not me

 

[FearGod]

If you can't find a reasonable test that the Muslim scholars have then you should believe me. Draper merely misused the term. It was a belief, and in fact Darwin was not the fist western scholar to believe in evolution. Darwin went much further, he developed a testable scientific theory that explained how evolution works. Your "Mohammedan theory" does not do that. It is a mere belief. It was not a theory. it was merely an ad hoc explanation and those are not of much use in the sciences.

I don't agree with you, a little search then you can learn that fossils were studied long time before Darwin.
History of paleontology - Wikipedia

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know you hate the word creation, but that's the reality, you were created by a process that took 9 months.
I don't like philosophy, but I know you do because you don't have a creative mind.

No, I hate the abuse of the word creation. If you can't properly use terminology you lose. That is not my problem.

Once again, you should blame John William for calling it the Mohammedan theory and not me

I am not blaming him. We were discussing scientific theories. I am not sure if scientific theories were even well defined at that time. The usage of words change over time. If you try to use his work to support the claim of a theory you are demonstrably wrong. You confirmed that you were wrong by running away from a perfectly reasonable question. Once again, what reasonable test would show Mohammedan theory to be wrong? If there is no such test then by definition it is not a scientific theory.[/QUOTE]

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't agree with you, a little search then you can learn that fossils were studied long time before Darwin.
History of paleontology - Wikipedia

WTF?? How does that support your claim? You simply have no idea what you are arguing about. We need to go over the basics of what science is so that you do not keep making these errors.

Let's start with the scientific method. Here is a simplified illustration of the steps involved:

Let's go over the steps in that illustration. Then you should be able to see your errors. Are you ready?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I admire your optimism in spite of everything telling us that the opposite is happening.

Nothing tells us we are doomed. Life has adapted, overcome, and survived a few mass-extinctions, and numerous disasters. There is no reason we can't have a better tomorrow. But it's difficult when you have those who give up and hand things over to god. We need to unite, as a people, as a species, and together work for a better tomorrow.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

but the reality today you're a human being created in your mother's womb.

No one is denying that. However, evolution is a constant, past, present, future, and ongoing process. Where there is life, there is evolution, and life will continue to evolve until life is no more.