What came first, The chicken or The egg? Science vs Religion

[Carl in Michigan]

Ultimate cause: dirt.Edit: Sea dirt maybe? OK; ocean fluids with nutrients from dirt...or rock stuff.

It doesnt say the birds were created in the ocean. Good Allah, can ANYBODY actually read?

According to his reading ability, 2:19 could say the birds were created in the sky.

 

[gtopa1]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

Please show me where the creation account contradicts science.

Use the verse(s) and no ad hominems.

Yes there are conflicts between the Bible and science.

The Book of Genesis cannot be used as evidence of Earth's creation. Contrary to popular belief, there is no single Creation account in Genesis; rather there are two separate creation accounts. The first creation story is told in Genesis 1:1 to 2:3, and the second story is from Genesis 2:4-25. The problem is these two accounts contain multiple contradictions. The first major contradiction between these two stories involves the order of Creation.

According the First Chapter of Genesis, on day five the fishes and birdies were brought forth; and on day six all other creatures great and small were created, and then and only then were Adam and Eve created together. Here is how the Bible describes the creation of man on the sixth day:

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Genesis 1:26, 27, KJV)

However, there is another creation account in the Second Chapter of Genesis which says that Adam was created first, then the animals, and finally Eve.:

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.....And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

“And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” Genesis 2:7, 8, 18-23

Now it is evident from the quoted scripture that God first created Adam, then the animals and finally Eve. The flow of the narrative leaves no doubt about the order of creation, It is logically and linguistically impossible to read the above verses and interpret the order of creation in any way other than this: First Adam, then the animals, then Eve.

The First Chapter of Genesis says Adam and Eve were created after the animals, but the Second Chapter of Genesis says that Adam was created before the animals and Eve was created after them. There are other contradictions between the two versions, such as Genesis 1:20 which says that birds and fowl were created out of the water and Genesis 2:19 which claims they were created out of the ground. This has caused many Christians to claim the Genesis accounts are not to be taken literally, but allegorically. Several denominations, including the Catholic Church do not believe in a literal translation.

Since there are two separate and contradictory Creation accounts, at least one must be wrong and in conflict with science. Another point of disagreement between the Bible and science is is that the first Creation account states the Earth and its inhabitants were created in six days. Science disagrees on this point as they should. Some Christian's argue that each day could be a thousand years or more. They rely on 2 Peter 3:8 which states “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (KJV). There are two serious flaws in this argument. First, the Bible was not written for God but for Man and to each man a day is one single complete rotation of Earth. Second, the Bible described a day as being a period of time embracing a single evening and a single morning. For example after God created the animals and the first pair of humans, the Bible says, “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day” (KJV). Note: It is difficult to understand how the first three days could include an evening and a morning when the “lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night”” were not created until the fourth day (see Genesis 1 14-18).

Most Christians do not believe in a literal six-day Creation. Many Church leaders, including St. Augustine, one of the most respected early Christian Church Fathers believed everything was created all at once.

“In City of God, Augustine rejected both the immortality of the human race proposed by pagans, and contemporary ideas of ages (such as those of certain Greeks and Egyptians) that differed from the Church's sacred writings. In The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, Augustine took the view that everything in the universe was created simultaneously by God, and not in seven calendar days like a literal interpretation of Genesis would require. He argued that the six-day structure of creation presented in the Book of Genesis represents a logical framework, rather than the passage of time in a physical way – it would bear a spiritual, rather than physical, meaning, which is no less literal. One reason for this interpretation is the passage in Sirach 18:1, creavit omnia simul ("He created all things at once"), which Augustine took as proof that the days of Genesis 1 had to be taken non-literally.”

Augustine of Hippo - Wikipedia

Yes there are contradictions between science and the literal interpretation of the Bible. One of the most amazing things about Genesis is that no one has the slightest idea how Moses, the purported author of the Book, knew about the Creation. The Bible is complete silent regarding the source of the information.

Yeah: I'm with Augustine...I think.

Can't see how you can "believe in " Science at all seeing that it changes. As new data is observed then theories gotta be adjusted. It is what it is.

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

I like Popper on Science. If you're serious this is a handy read.

http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/popper-logic-scientific-discovery.pdf

It was a bit hard going when I first read it what; forty years ago? I read it every ten years or so just to keep it fresh.

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

Eggs are yummy; boiled (soft,hard), omelettes, Benedict, etc etc, and they've been around a lot longer than chooks. Since Cambrian times I think.

Greg

 

[gtopa1]

Ultimate cause: dirt.Edit: Sea dirt maybe? OK; ocean fluids with nutrients from dirt...or rock stuff.

It doesnt say the birds were created in the ocean. Good Allah, can ANYBODY actually read?

According to his reading ability, 2:19 could say the birds were created in the sky.

Eggs were.

Greg

 

[Penelope]

Thats easy. The egg.

What made the egg? Well I asked Alexa and she said Neil degrasse Tyson said the egg and he is pretty smart so she believe him. Egg, laid by a different bird. So what does that tell you?

 

[Penelope]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

Please show me where the creation account contradicts science.
Use the verse(s) and no ad hominems.

Genesis says God made Adam from the soil. Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism

No some guy wrote that.

 

[Penelope]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

You said this in your post:

If science was right then there would be no meaning to life.

Just the opposite, if this was your only life it becomes even more precious, and all life becomes more precious and all of nature and earth become more precious.

 

[Indeependent]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

Please show me where the creation account contradicts science.
Use the verse(s) and no ad hominems.

Genesis says God made Adam from the soil. Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism

Of course you know to the molecule how much soil God had to use.
Speaking of which, how do we define a single cell organism?
Cell are by no means simple as even the Greeks, Romans and Jews knew well over 2,000 years ago, if not more.
The word A-dahm, in Hebrew, does not mean "soil", that's just another in a long series of muck ups in the KJV.
A-dahm mean earth.
Of course Adam was most probably created as an adult because otherwise you would criticize the fact that God had to diaper a baby.

Let's take this from a different point of view, getting more to the crux of the matter...
Do you believe in any way whatsoever that an infinite being could have possibly created something from nothing?
If not, you have the conclusion to your question before there's even a discussion.

I, for one, do not believe matter existed forever.

Did I not say I believe the bible over science when it comes to the creation of life. If I believe in god why would I not believe that an infinite being could create something from nothing. Genesis states that god made adam from soil from the earth and eve from his rib. All I'm saying is that its easier for me to believe that, even how impossible that may sound, then the science version. I just cant believe or picture a bunch of humans being created from a singe cell organism out in the wild. How could the first humans care for themselves? How could they protect themselves? Like seriously just picture a single cell organism evolving into a human. Picture what it would look like at the different stages of the process. What guidance did they have?
There had to be something there that would of made sure the survival of this process. If there was nothing over looking the process, we could of easily been wiped out before we even existed. We would of been food for something higher up in the food chain. Seriously think outside the box, open your mind, and do some creative thinking.
You are trying way to hard for a discussion soley based on my creative thinking. If I cant believe we evolved from a singe cell organism and bel

I have a better idea...do what I'm doing everyday and study the Bible for yourself!
Nothing on Google substantiates your statement.
I don't have time for your nonsense just as you have no time to ever pick up a Bible except to prove you're a racist.
You have a Link? Post it.

So you have nothing to explain why the Greeks called the area from India all the way to and including present day Africa Ethiopia then?

Trust me I have studied the Bible and there is nothing in the bible that supports your claim.

I Google your claim and nothing.
The account in Genesis up to Noach and his family leaving the ark leave you in the dust.
You're expecting me to type in the entire Bible until Chapter 10.
You're a phony.

Thats funny. Maybe if you tried harder you would have found it.

“It seems certain,” declares Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, “that classical historians and geographers called the whole region from India to Egypt, both countries inclusive, by the name of Ethiopia, and in consequence they regarded all the dark-skinned and black peoples who inhabited it as Ethiopians. Mention is made of Eastern and Western Ethiopians and it is probable that the Easterners were Asiatics and the Westerners Africans.” (History of Ethiopia, Vol. I., Preface, by Sir E. A. Wallis Budge.)

You just proved you're a colossal idiot.
First of all, your Copy/Paste has no year...what a shock
No Link as you pulled it out of your ass and obviously nobody took this guy seriously enough to put this in book form.
I know, I know, Google books that's probably putting our conversion somewhere right now.
There's a ton of Judaic literature going back over 2,000 years, prior to this fool, that fully recognizes the swath of travel between India and Egypt and the varieties of people along the way as Jews were traveling that route for over 2,000 years.
Like, try reading your Talmud.

Indeependent

[QUOTE="WinterBorn, post:nal language in order to make a comparison.

 

[Indeependent]

I feel like this conversation got heavily derailed at some point : S

Yeah Independent got his feelings hurt when I said Genisis is an African creation story

I got hurt because you're a racist?
Hardly.
I don't know who you are and if I put you on Ignore I would forget about your racism in about a day.

So then you must be claiming the Talamud is racist? You can read in Genesis who populated what areas. Why dont you just show us something that supports your claim.

The Talmus is factual.
Regardless of the creation story regarding the people of Cush, the Talmud, as always, has great admiration for the moral character of the Cushites as individuals, if not as a people.
It's obvious the Prophets, via God's message, relate that God is not happy with their overall society.
But I'm sure you have some obscure Google Book fragment that says the Cushites invented the Internet.

 

[Freewill]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

Your whole pretense is wrong. Religion and Science are not polar opposites as you not only imply but said.

Take the one mystery that science may never be able to answer, the beginning of the Universe. We know an event happened, and we know that goal of science is to understand the causality of events. So we have an event there must be a cause. Science can't explain the origin of the universe, other than the big bang but religion does. BTW the Big Bang theory was first postulated by a Catholic Priest.

Did those of religion do things that seemingly held back science? Well I would think yes at times the Catholic church persecuted those who went against doctrine but that only makes the RCC wrong in what the DID.

Isaac Newton, perhaps the greatest mind in history was not only a scientist he was a theologian. He got it right.

What we do know is there is a God/god. And everyone believes in a God/god. It is just a matter of whom we chose to be God/god, God or ourselves.

EDIT: AN egg had to have come before the TRUE chicken. TWO non-Chickens would have to mate lay an egg then the DNA formed in that egg produced the first true chicken. The only way to pass on genetic differences is through the egg. So I change my answer to the egg.

 

[ThatDude30]

What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.

Your whole pretense is wrong. Religion and Science are not polar opposites as you not only imply but said.

Take the one mystery that science may never be able to answer, the beginning of the Universe. We know an event happened, and we know that goal of science is to understand the causality of events. So we have an event there must be a cause. Science can't explain the origin of the universe, other than the big bang but religion does. BTW the Big Bang theory was first postulated by a Catholic Priest.

Did those of religion do things that seemingly held back science? Well I would think yes at times the Catholic church persecuted those who went against doctrine but that only makes the RCC wrong in what the DID.

Isaac Newton, perhaps the greatest mind in history was not only a scientist he was a theologian. He got it right.

What we do know is there is a God/god. And everyone believes in a God/god. It is just a matter of whom we chose to be God/god, God or ourselves.

EDIT: AN egg had to have come before the TRUE chicken. TWO non-Chickens would have to mate lay an egg then the DNA formed in that egg produced the first true chicken. The only way to pass on genetic differences is through the egg. So I change my answer to the egg.

Never said they were opposites. I am comparing the 2 versions of creation of life. I am not comparing the whole bible with science. All I'm saying is I don't believe the scientific Theory of Evolution that we involved from a single cell organism, and that theory isn't any more possible then God creating man from soil.
Also my pretense is wrong? Pretense is a false claim, so you're saying my false claim is wrong? So you're saying that my attempt of trying to make a falsehood appear true? So me expressing my opinion and creative thinking and curiosity about how human life was first created, even when I stated that nobody will never know, is me attempting to make a falsehood appear true? I'm just making this stuff up? The bible never said God created Adam from soil? Science never said we evolved from a single cell organism? If you haven't noticed I asked a lot of questions in this thread? I was sharing my opinion on the 2 versions on how human life was created, but I'm wrong? Yet no one was ever able to prove any theory on how life was created?
It makes sense that the egg had to come first I get that. What I'm saying is, how can the single cell organism create two different sexes so that the species could continue to reproduce on their own? Sperm emerging with an egg transform into a zygote which is a eukaryotic cell which is a SINGLE CELL with a complex structure. So this single cell organism had to be a zygote or something very similar? Supposedly this single cell organism no longer exists?
So this single cell organism just slowly transformed into an egg in the wild? There was nothing to act as a womb?
How come this Single cell organism that created life no longer exist but life does?
Did every life form start as an egg? That could be believable but what nourished and regulated the egg? There were just eggs everywhere slowly forming out in the open, with yet again with nothing acting as a womb?
To me God created man from earth sounds no more impossible then evolving from a single cell.

 

[Marxist_Trash]

There's really no point of difference unless you believe Genesis is the almighty truth

If the Bible is the Word of God, then of course it is, you moron.

If it is a LIE (you say it's a lie), then God has abandoned us and left us NOTHING.

The edits and selective additions made to the Bible by the Council of Nicaea under the supervision of Emperor Constantine guarantees that Genesis is not the word of God, even in the religious context.

Also nice unwarranted ad hom.

 

[Marxist_Trash]

What I'm saying is, how can the single cell organism create two different sexes so that the species could continue to reproduce on their own? Sperm emerging with an egg transform into a zygote which is a eukaryotic cell which is a SINGLE CELL with a complex structure. So this single cell organism had to be a zygote or something very similar? Supposedly this single cell organism no longer exists?
So this single cell organism just slowly transformed into an egg in the wild? There was nothing to act as a womb?
How come this Single cell organism that created life no longer exist but life does?
Did every life form start as an egg? That could be believable but what nourished and regulated the egg? There were just eggs everywhere slowly forming out in the open, with yet again with nothing acting as a womb?
To me God created man from earth sounds no more impossible then evolving from a single cell.

The generally accepted theory about how eukaryotes (organisms, generally more complex than bacteria and the like, that have nuclei to protect their DNA) could have realistically evolved from prokaryotes (bacteria, simple single celled organisms without a nucleus to protect their DNA), is that it began with symbiosis. Small cells became a part of larger cells in exchange for protection, and in turn provided energy to that larger cell...which let it grow larger, divide more, etc.

Why do I think this is the case? If you look at cellular structure, you'll see that there are structures in most eukaryotes called Mitochondria. These structures are the so-called powerhouses of the cell, that provide energy to it by helping to formulate ATP. However, here's the interesting part: they have their own, diffferent set DNA, that is protected by the eukaryotic cell, and replicated during cell division. It is even in the form of a circular chromosome, just like other bacteria nowadays. How did this occur, without some form of symbiotic evolution allowing a bacteria to enter the original vestiges of animal eukaryotic cells at some point long in the past? That to me is the only way this could occur, and also a piece of the puzzle of how single-celled organisms evolved into complex ones with trillions of cells.

As for sex, it has always been a part of life. Many bacterial organisms undergo conjugation, the transferal of plasmid DNA from one organism to another, which is then incorporated into the recipient's genome. The very roots of sex began with single-celled organisms, at least in its functional sense of providing genetic diversity to a population.

In terms of the egg, there weren't just eggs popping up everywhere. I imagine as organisms became more complex, they started laying them through the mechanism of natural selection to protect their more fragile and equally complex young.

 

[ThatDude30]

What I'm saying is, how can the single cell organism create two different sexes so that the species could continue to reproduce on their own? Sperm emerging with an egg transform into a zygote which is a eukaryotic cell which is a SINGLE CELL with a complex structure. So this single cell organism had to be a zygote or something very similar? Supposedly this single cell organism no longer exists?
So this single cell organism just slowly transformed into an egg in the wild? There was nothing to act as a womb?
How come this Single cell organism that created life no longer exist but life does?
Did every life form start as an egg? That could be believable but what nourished and regulated the egg? There were just eggs everywhere slowly forming out in the open, with yet again with nothing acting as a womb?
To me God created man from earth sounds no more impossible then evolving from a single cell.

The generally accepted theory about how eukaryotes (organisms, generally more complex than bacteria and the like, that have nuclei to protect their DNA) could have realistically evolved from prokaryotes (bacteria, simple single celled organisms without a nucleus to protect their DNA), is that it began with symbiosis. Small cells became a part of larger cells in exchange for protection, and in turn provided energy to that larger cell...which let it grow larger, divide more, etc.

Why do I think this is the case? If you look at cellular structure, you'll see that there are structures in most eukaryotes called Mitochondria. These structures are the so-called powerhouses of the cell, that provide energy to it by helping to formulate ATP. However, here's the interesting part: they have their own, diffferent set DNA, that is protected by the eukaryotic cell, and replicated during cell division. It is even in the form of a circular chromosome, just like other bacteria nowadays. How did this occur, without some form of symbiotic evolution allowing a bacteria to enter the original vestiges of animal eukaryotic cells at some point long in the past? That to me is the only way this could occur, and also a piece of the puzzle of how single-celled organisms evolved into complex ones with trillions of cells.

As for sex, it has always been a part of life. Many bacterial organisms undergo conjugation, the transferal of plasmid DNA from one organism to another, which is then incorporated into the recipient's genome. The very roots of sex began with single-celled organisms, at least in its functional sense of providing genetic diversity to a population.

In terms of the egg, there weren't just eggs popping up everywhere. I imagine as organisms became more complex, they started laying them through the mechanism of natural selection to protect their more fragile and equally complex young.

That's interesting! Well I understand that Mitochondria is the powerhouse, but how long can it provide by itself? Long enough to birth? Humans have a placenta that nourishes and maintains the fetus.
The more I think about it, The first humans body structure and brains probably weren't as complex as they are today, actually I'm pretty sure. I never said I didn't believe in evolution, I believe God influenced the process of evolving over time so organisms can adapt and survive the different environments.
I know that we evolved over time physically and mentally. I am even sure Adam, Gods first Human he created, wasn't perfectly structured.
It's just hard for me to believe that we evolved from a microscopic single cell organism. There was other life inhabiting Earth before we came about. I think if we did evolve from a cell, without any protection from infection, insects, animals, and other natural elements, that we would not have survived as a species and would of been wiped out along time ago. At that time, beginning of human life, we were not at the top of the food chain. Say we did evolve from a cell, what about when the human turned 1, 2, 3 years old? Barely walking having to survive, eat, drink, find shelter, and fend for themselves? I just cant picture a 1, 2, 3 year crawling around in the wilderness gathering food, building or finding safe shelter, or fending off predators.
If this theory was true, we would of had to also hatch from an egg, or what other way would we have been born? And sometime down the timeline women would start giving birth and hatching from an egg stopped out of nowhere?

My whole thing is, if we did evolve from a single cell organism, what was the process? We know the process of birthing today. Sperm merges with a womens egg and creates a zygote, which then turns into an embryo, which needs the placenta to nourish it and maintain it, then eventually turns into a fetus then finally its birthed as a new born baby human. So what was the process of evolving from a single cell? Did the single cell merge with something else? Did it just start evolving one day out of no where, and started to undergo a process? Did it evolve into human life out in the open? Or was it confined in something, something like a woman's stomach? I'm picturing, when they say we evolved from a single cell organism, on the ground. Little things transforming into a human over time. With no protection nothing. Then if surviving long enough to be birthed, as new born babies are today, need help taking care of its self, how did the new born survive even long enough to start crawling? Then even if they lived to be able to crawl, I imagine the wouldn't get to far. I picture some sort of creature seeing them as an easy meal, as to how can the baby fend off a hungry creature that hunts for meat?
You see what I'm saying? I think people are over thinking and not getting what I'm saying? To me, evolving fro a single cell organism sounds crazy, and its even hard to believe that God, or anyone else for that matter, could make a human out of soil. So to me neither sound more impossible then the other. I cant see us evolving from a single cell, and since there really is no other explanation, God creating human life from soil makes more sense to me. I don't believe we would of survived evolving from a single cell, and the process doesn't make sense. Yea ok we evolved from a single cell, ok, then what? Did the cell find a nice cozy place to evolve? Did it just start forming anywhere on the ground, in a tree, on the mountains, or what? Obviously there were no women to bare the child, so what was used, how did it get its nutrients, oxygen in blood, and what maintained it?
I just want to know the process, we can explain how life is made today, Man and women have sex, his sperm travels to her egg, they emerge, a zygote is formed, then embryo, then fetus, then new born. Explain to me the process of the single cell evolving to a new born. Did something have to trigger it to start evolving? Was that single cell the result of other cells merging, like the zygote? Did the single cell have to merge with something else?
Its easy to say we evolved from a single cell, but what happened when it started to transform into human life and the next several years?

 

[Freewill]

There's really no point of difference unless you believe Genesis is the almighty truth

If the Bible is the Word of God, then of course it is, you moron.

If it is a LIE (you say it's a lie), then God has abandoned us and left us NOTHING.

The edits and selective additions made to the Bible by the Council of Nicaea under the supervision of Emperor Constantine guarantees that Genesis is not the word of God, even in the religious context.

Also nice unwarranted ad hom.

Problem, the book of Genesis is in the Torah which is at least 3300 years old, which predates the council of Nicaea.

 

[Marxist_Trash]

My mistake, you're correct.

But it still doesn't change the fact that human beings handled the Torah as well as the Bible. It was written, continuously edited, translated, and re-translated by human beings. Not to mention that the God of the Torah is significantly different than the God Jesus preaches about. In fact, my personal belief on the situation is that Jesus was talking about a different God entirely than the God of Abraham, which originated from a deity of war and storms from an ancient Mesopotamian polytheistic pantheon (which makes the Commandment "you shall have no other Gods before me" make a lot more sense, imo). All of this and more brings into question whether in fact Genesis is the word of god for me...not to mention every ounce of scientific research conducted on the subject so far.

 

[Marxist_Trash]

What I'm saying is, how can the single cell organism create two different sexes so that the species could continue to reproduce on their own? Sperm emerging with an egg transform into a zygote which is a eukaryotic cell which is a SINGLE CELL with a complex structure. So this single cell organism had to be a zygote or something very similar? Supposedly this single cell organism no longer exists?
So this single cell organism just slowly transformed into an egg in the wild? There was nothing to act as a womb?
How come this Single cell organism that created life no longer exist but life does?
Did every life form start as an egg? That could be believable but what nourished and regulated the egg? There were just eggs everywhere slowly forming out in the open, with yet again with nothing acting as a womb?
To me God created man from earth sounds no more impossible then evolving from a single cell.

The generally accepted theory about how eukaryotes (organisms, generally more complex than bacteria and the like, that have nuclei to protect their DNA) could have realistically evolved from prokaryotes (bacteria, simple single celled organisms without a nucleus to protect their DNA), is that it began with symbiosis. Small cells became a part of larger cells in exchange for protection, and in turn provided energy to that larger cell...which let it grow larger, divide more, etc.

Why do I think this is the case? If you look at cellular structure, you'll see that there are structures in most eukaryotes called Mitochondria. These structures are the so-called powerhouses of the cell, that provide energy to it by helping to formulate ATP. However, here's the interesting part: they have their own, diffferent set DNA, that is protected by the eukaryotic cell, and replicated during cell division. It is even in the form of a circular chromosome, just like other bacteria nowadays. How did this occur, without some form of symbiotic evolution allowing a bacteria to enter the original vestiges of animal eukaryotic cells at some point long in the past? That to me is the only way this could occur, and also a piece of the puzzle of how single-celled organisms evolved into complex ones with trillions of cells.

As for sex, it has always been a part of life. Many bacterial organisms undergo conjugation, the transferal of plasmid DNA from one organism to another, which is then incorporated into the recipient's genome. The very roots of sex began with single-celled organisms, at least in its functional sense of providing genetic diversity to a population.

In terms of the egg, there weren't just eggs popping up everywhere. I imagine as organisms became more complex, they started laying them through the mechanism of natural selection to protect their more fragile and equally complex young.

That's interesting! Well I understand that Mitochondria is the powerhouse, but how long can it provide by itself? Long enough to birth? Humans have a placenta that nourishes and maintains the fetus.
The more I think about it, The first humans body structure and brains probably weren't as complex as they are today, actually I'm pretty sure. I never said I didn't believe in evolution, I believe God influenced the process of evolving over time so organisms can adapt and survive the different environments.
I know that we evolved over time physically and mentally. I am even sure Adam, Gods first Human he created, wasn't perfectly structured.
It's just hard for me to believe that we evolved from a microscopic single cell organism. There was other life inhabiting Earth before we came about. I think if we did evolve from a cell, without any protection from infection, insects, animals, and other natural elements, that we would not have survived as a species and would of been wiped out along time ago. At that time, beginning of human life, we were not at the top of the food chain. Say we did evolve from a cell, what about when the human turned 1, 2, 3 years old? Barely walking having to survive, eat, drink, find shelter, and fend for themselves? I just cant picture a 1, 2, 3 year crawling around in the wilderness gathering food, building or finding safe shelter, or fending off predators.
If this theory was true, we would of had to also hatch from an egg, or what other way would we have been born? And sometime down the timeline women would start giving birth and hatching from an egg stopped out of nowhere?

My whole thing is, if we did evolve from a single cell organism, what was the process? We know the process of birthing today. Sperm merges with a womens egg and creates a zygote, which then turns into an embryo, which needs the placenta to nourish it and maintain it, then eventually turns into a fetus then finally its birthed as a new born baby human. So what was the process of evolving from a single cell? Did the single cell merge with something else? Did it just start evolving one day out of no where, and started to undergo a process? Did it evolve into human life out in the open? Or was it confined in something, something like a woman's stomach? I'm picturing, when they say we evolved from a single cell organism, on the ground. Little things transforming into a human over time. With no protection nothing. Then if surviving long enough to be birthed, as new born babies are today, need help taking care of its self, how did the new born survive even long enough to start crawling? Then even if they lived to be able to crawl, I imagine the wouldn't get to far. I picture some sort of creature seeing them as an easy meal, as to how can the baby fend off a hungry creature that hunts for meat?
You see what I'm saying? I think people are over thinking and not getting what I'm saying? To me, evolving fro a single cell organism sounds crazy, and its even hard to believe that God, or anyone else for that matter, could make a human out of soil. So to me neither sound more impossible then the other. I cant see us evolving from a single cell, and since there really is no other explanation, God creating human life from soil makes more sense to me. I don't believe we would of survived evolving from a single cell, and the process doesn't make sense. Yea ok we evolved from a single cell, ok, then what? Did the cell find a nice cozy place to evolve? Did it just start forming anywhere on the ground, in a tree, on the mountains, or what? Obviously there were no women to bare the child, so what was used, how did it get its nutrients, oxygen in blood, and what maintained it?
I just want to know the process, we can explain how life is made today, Man and women have sex, his sperm travels to her egg, they emerge, a zygote is formed, then embryo, then fetus, then new born. Explain to me the process of the single cell evolving to a new born. Did something have to trigger it to start evolving? Was that single cell the result of other cells merging, like the zygote? Did the single cell have to merge with something else?
Its easy to say we evolved from a single cell, but what happened when it started to transform into human life and the next several years?

I think you may be thinking about evolution a little wrongly. Evolution is a divergent process, in that it starts at one position, and branches out, with evolution following the path of that branch. It doesn't just occur spontaneously out of nowhere wherever it wants to. Like, you're not going to get a whale out of a praying mantis, or a human right out of a single celled organism.

Hopefully that shows up correctly, but this is an example of an evolutionary tree, of mammals in this case. These animals were evolving alongside each other based on natural selection. Humanity didn't start from a single celled organism at the same time as insects and fish and dinosaurs were around; all life started as single celled organisms and evolved at more or less the same time into different species based on random mutation and natural selection. This also means that the ecosystem which these creatures existed in evolves along with them, providing proto-humans, monkeys, and our ancestors before that, a niche in which they can survive and thrive. Of course this doesn't happen for all animals; some become extinct for one reason or another. But for humans, our branch was never cut off by extinction, and thus our ancestors had the time to undergo the millions of years of evolution required to produce intelligent life.

 

[Freewill]

My mistake, you're correct.

But it still doesn't change the fact that human beings handled the Torah as well as the Bible. It was written, continuously edited, translated, and re-translated by human beings. Not to mention that the God of the Torah is significantly different than the God Jesus preaches about. In fact, my personal belief on the situation is that Jesus was talking about a different God entirely than the God of Abraham, which originated from a deity of war and storms from an ancient Mesopotamian polytheistic pantheon (which makes the Commandment "you shall have no other Gods before me" make a lot more sense, imo). All of this and more brings into question whether in fact Genesis is the word of god for me...not to mention every ounce of scientific research conducted on the subject so far.

Part of what you see with the edits is as new older manuscripts were found they were used to form the Bible and at time rewrite it. And there always is the problem with translations from one language to another, sometimes the translation is just subjective. That is why most will use various versions to study the Bible. Getting back to the original Hebrew or Greek (Aramaic) is a little much for most people. I also believe that God has placed His hand on maintaining the Word.

As for two Gods. First we know by the very words of the Bible there are not two Gods. The idea you pose exposes a fundamental misunderstand of what is revealed about God in the Old and New Testaments. What the Bible is, is God progressive revelation of Himself. To read the Old Testament and the New Testaments won't lead one to believe that the God of the old is the God of wrath and the God on the new is the God of love. What it will reveal, is God is both in both the Old Testament and the New Testaments, there is no difference.

 

[Freewill]

What I'm saying is, how can the single cell organism create two different sexes so that the species could continue to reproduce on their own? Sperm emerging with an egg transform into a zygote which is a eukaryotic cell which is a SINGLE CELL with a complex structure. So this single cell organism had to be a zygote or something very similar? Supposedly this single cell organism no longer exists?
So this single cell organism just slowly transformed into an egg in the wild? There was nothing to act as a womb?
How come this Single cell organism that created life no longer exist but life does?
Did every life form start as an egg? That could be believable but what nourished and regulated the egg? There were just eggs everywhere slowly forming out in the open, with yet again with nothing acting as a womb?
To me God created man from earth sounds no more impossible then evolving from a single cell.

The generally accepted theory about how eukaryotes (organisms, generally more complex than bacteria and the like, that have nuclei to protect their DNA) could have realistically evolved from prokaryotes (bacteria, simple single celled organisms without a nucleus to protect their DNA), is that it began with symbiosis. Small cells became a part of larger cells in exchange for protection, and in turn provided energy to that larger cell...which let it grow larger, divide more, etc.

Why do I think this is the case? If you look at cellular structure, you'll see that there are structures in most eukaryotes called Mitochondria. These structures are the so-called powerhouses of the cell, that provide energy to it by helping to formulate ATP. However, here's the interesting part: they have their own, diffferent set DNA, that is protected by the eukaryotic cell, and replicated during cell division. It is even in the form of a circular chromosome, just like other bacteria nowadays. How did this occur, without some form of symbiotic evolution allowing a bacteria to enter the original vestiges of animal eukaryotic cells at some point long in the past? That to me is the only way this could occur, and also a piece of the puzzle of how single-celled organisms evolved into complex ones with trillions of cells.

As for sex, it has always been a part of life. Many bacterial organisms undergo conjugation, the transferal of plasmid DNA from one organism to another, which is then incorporated into the recipient's genome. The very roots of sex began with single-celled organisms, at least in its functional sense of providing genetic diversity to a population.

In terms of the egg, there weren't just eggs popping up everywhere. I imagine as organisms became more complex, they started laying them through the mechanism of natural selection to protect their more fragile and equally complex young.

That's interesting! Well I understand that Mitochondria is the powerhouse, but how long can it provide by itself? Long enough to birth? Humans have a placenta that nourishes and maintains the fetus.
The more I think about it, The first humans body structure and brains probably weren't as complex as they are today, actually I'm pretty sure. I never said I didn't believe in evolution, I believe God influenced the process of evolving over time so organisms can adapt and survive the different environments.
I know that we evolved over time physically and mentally. I am even sure Adam, Gods first Human he created, wasn't perfectly structured.
It's just hard for me to believe that we evolved from a microscopic single cell organism. There was other life inhabiting Earth before we came about. I think if we did evolve from a cell, without any protection from infection, insects, animals, and other natural elements, that we would not have survived as a species and would of been wiped out along time ago. At that time, beginning of human life, we were not at the top of the food chain. Say we did evolve from a cell, what about when the human turned 1, 2, 3 years old? Barely walking having to survive, eat, drink, find shelter, and fend for themselves? I just cant picture a 1, 2, 3 year crawling around in the wilderness gathering food, building or finding safe shelter, or fending off predators.
If this theory was true, we would of had to also hatch from an egg, or what other way would we have been born? And sometime down the timeline women would start giving birth and hatching from an egg stopped out of nowhere?

My whole thing is, if we did evolve from a single cell organism, what was the process? We know the process of birthing today. Sperm merges with a womens egg and creates a zygote, which then turns into an embryo, which needs the placenta to nourish it and maintain it, then eventually turns into a fetus then finally its birthed as a new born baby human. So what was the process of evolving from a single cell? Did the single cell merge with something else? Did it just start evolving one day out of no where, and started to undergo a process? Did it evolve into human life out in the open? Or was it confined in something, something like a woman's stomach? I'm picturing, when they say we evolved from a single cell organism, on the ground. Little things transforming into a human over time. With no protection nothing. Then if surviving long enough to be birthed, as new born babies are today, need help taking care of its self, how did the new born survive even long enough to start crawling? Then even if they lived to be able to crawl, I imagine the wouldn't get to far. I picture some sort of creature seeing them as an easy meal, as to how can the baby fend off a hungry creature that hunts for meat?
You see what I'm saying? I think people are over thinking and not getting what I'm saying? To me, evolving fro a single cell organism sounds crazy, and its even hard to believe that God, or anyone else for that matter, could make a human out of soil. So to me neither sound more impossible then the other. I cant see us evolving from a single cell, and since there really is no other explanation, God creating human life from soil makes more sense to me. I don't believe we would of survived evolving from a single cell, and the process doesn't make sense. Yea ok we evolved from a single cell, ok, then what? Did the cell find a nice cozy place to evolve? Did it just start forming anywhere on the ground, in a tree, on the mountains, or what? Obviously there were no women to bare the child, so what was used, how did it get its nutrients, oxygen in blood, and what maintained it?
I just want to know the process, we can explain how life is made today, Man and women have sex, his sperm travels to her egg, they emerge, a zygote is formed, then embryo, then fetus, then new born. Explain to me the process of the single cell evolving to a new born. Did something have to trigger it to start evolving? Was that single cell the result of other cells merging, like the zygote? Did the single cell have to merge with something else?
Its easy to say we evolved from a single cell, but what happened when it started to transform into human life and the next several years?

One point, there are no evidence of 1/2 transitions. For example, 1/2 an eye. Or even 1/2 a brain. The fossil remains that have been found are of fully developed animals, including man.