please explain how a warlike, nomadic tribe could have figured out, so long ago, the order of evolution/science that is taught today?
In the beginning the Earth was a void, and darkness ruled the Earth
Then there was light
The darkness was divided from the light
Divide the waters from the waters
there was land, and sea
the Earth brought forth plants, seed, etc.
then there were lights (visible) from the earth
the waters brought forth plants and fish and creatures
the Earth brought forth creatures
then humans arrived
how did these people know this, 10,000 years ago, in the correct order, when they were just an ignorant, warlike tribe?
how? there was no science, no Darwin, no big Bang? How did they get it right? Or, mostly right?
Help me with this---this is a question, not a dogmatic statement. I am not a fundy.
2007-05-22 10:03:10 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
DUDE, leave Atheists alone. How absurd are you really....?....Atheists are not very bright and miserable people...Remember what Jesus said, "Those who profess to be wise ended up being fools...You're being a fool yourself for trying to argue with atheists..Atheists are needy and need attention...
2007-05-22 10:33:29 · answer #1 · answered by 07clau 1 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Your question is flawed at no time did a warlike, nomadic tribe figure out evolution and science that is taught today. What you have written above is not evolution or science. Most war like nomadic tribes contribute such things to god or gods. Also the sequence of things can be figured out just by looking at how complex creatures are. No to hard to do. The sun was before the earth not after, Lights visible to the earth, were there long before earth.
2007-05-22 10:30:31 · answer #2 · answered by punch 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Completely false.
The creation of light before the creation of the Sun is ridiculous.
Waters from the waters and firmament? They didn't know anything more than the rain and the ocean were made from the same stuff.
Land and sea..........tough one there.
The Sun isn't created until the day AFTER the plants, which explains why these people never learned to grow anything.
No mention of planets, solar systems or galaxies, just 'lights' which any caveman could have seen.
Fish. They noticed fish. They must be scientists.
They noticed animals. Good for them. They're very observant.
The order is NOT CORRECT, except to someone as ignorant as the people who wrote it in the first place.
According to you, the first plants predate the stars and planets.
2007-05-22 10:33:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I am not certain what your driving out, people have had a basic intelligence since the beginning of civilization and there have been 1000 of creation stories that all sounded good to the different cultures. However, true science succcess and understanding we have now has only been going on in the last couple hundred years. And incidently most of the greatest contribitions in understanding of the universe has occurred in the last 200 hundred years thanks to science. What religion could not do for tens of thousands of years. I guess the question is do you want to believe in old mythology or updated understanding.
2007-05-22 10:19:10 · answer #4 · answered by rich m 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Arab04 lol you call yourself a Christian... You're so judgmental and ignorant, saying every atheist is miserable. That is a false statement. You are one who gives some Christians their stuck up name.
I myself am not on either side. I do believe there is a God as to what I have to do to prove myself to him, that is up to him, but if being a good person with an open mind and good values isn't enough, then I guess I don't need to be there.
People just try to get along and show a little bit of respect for each other.
2007-05-22 11:00:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There was science. Early religions were the first sciences, trying to understand natural forces and find ways to have some control over them. Look at the number of deities who are associated with weather, the number of rituals that are about fertility.
We have a record of some early results. It's actually about dichotomies, distinctions between categories, i.e. language. It tells us about how they made sense of the world.
Reading anything more into it is just that, reading our knowledge into their distinctions. That's always dangerous territory. Using it to try to prove divine intervention is wishful thinking.
2007-05-22 11:05:54 · answer #6 · answered by The angels have the phone box. 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is not an accurate account of the history of the universe by any means. It also has nothing to do with evolution.
You can only make this fit by incredible stretching.
2007-05-22 18:23:12 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What would you do if you knew nothing of science stared up it the pitch black night full of stars, and pondered your existence and the world around you. We were smart enough to ask the questions but to naive too find the answers
2007-05-22 10:26:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
Err.... they didn't. The biblical account of the beginning of life and of the geological history of our planet couldn't be more off. And to say it is in correct order makes me laugh. Please study some basic geology and astrophysics, then come back and try arguing this.
2007-05-22 19:12:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was a guess, and it was wrong.
The earth is not older than the sun.
Plants did not evolve before there was sunlight for them.
Light comes from the sun.
2007-05-22 10:21:18 · answer #10 · answered by eldad9 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Simple. It's not scientifically accurate and therefore is just made up junk.
2007-05-22 10:26:14 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋