Of course not,
Yes.
I do believe that man wrote down a bunch of crap, burned a bunch of other documents that may be useful for future generations, and forced people to practice crap that was written down by men who were just learning how the world worked- thus setting the human race back technologically and socially for centuries.
2006-11-22 06:26:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are so many creation theories. Which is most likely? There isn't anything to prove that Darwin is in any way more correct than the many different people who wrote the bible or the people who wrote the quran. I could sit here and come up with my own theory and I'd have as much right to say my theory is the correct one as anybody else on the planet.
Nevertheless, I personally think we're all wrong. Including the one with the garden of eden. But wouldn't it be cool if snakes really COULD talk?
2006-11-21 13:41:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by MoonCalf 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm not sure what it was. History is reliant on our predecessors, and I can no more rely on them than I can the voices in my head.
Neither am I sure what I believe. Those voices get pretty angry at each other.
One thing I can tell you is that the allegory of the Eden tale is sound. Mankind needs to acknowledge that it has gone beyond a simple coexistence with nature as a result of its development of conscience, and we need to be wary that it will not be possible to regress to such a state. Neither, however, do we have the right to abuse the natural world for our own gain. An external respect and engagement with nature, rather than dominance or submission to it, is where we should now stand, and many people have yet to learn this lesson.
2006-11-21 13:10:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The creation account may be allegorical, but it still reveals the relationship between God and humans, as Creator and created. Creation as an act of love, with the created being given the free will necessary to love their creator in return, if they choose. Who cares if it wasn't really a snake?
2006-11-21 12:20:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by madelaine_girard 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, I don't believe it. Do the christians think that Adam and Eve's descendants were on earth with the dinosaurs? Do they believe that humans were put on earth at the same time (or even within a few thousand years) as the earth came into existence? Are they crazy!!!???
2006-11-21 12:52:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Musicol 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I find it funny that the idea that we evolved from apes is somehow *more offensive* than the idea that we were formed from a clump of mud, a talking snake, and a fruit tree.
2006-11-21 12:26:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
To me this is a better option than evolutoin. Any explosion destroys never creates. God said it was dust not dirt, there is a huge difference.
However, when you see how depraived man can be sometimes I wonder why God doesnt just destroy again man whom He created. It happened before. Noah.
Seems to me to be a good explanation
Regards
2006-11-21 12:42:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I know the first two are correct, but there was no talking snake. Satan made it appear that the serpant spoke, much as a ventriloquist does.
2006-11-21 12:20:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Abdijah 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes but remember Satan posessed the snake which is why it could talk...this has been asked MANY TIMES..
2006-11-21 12:19:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Maybe not in the literal sense, but it could be completely true as anything is possible with God...Or it may be to help us understand that which cannot possibly be understood.
2006-11-21 12:19:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jennah 2
·
0⤊
0⤋