Favourite Genesis

@divegeester said
No, evolution shows that in all practically we are NOT the same species we have always been.

That’s what “evolution” means, it means to evolve, to change from one state to another.

You do understand how evolution works right?

I do understand how evolution works, yes.

And we haven't even evolved enough to become separate species, so no, we haven't evolved enough yet to stop being "in the image of God".

Geeeez, you're thick-headed.

@suzianne said

Damn, how many times do I have to answer the same question?

Your responses are childlike nonsense.

@suzianne said

And we haven't even evolved enough to become separate species, so no, we haven't evolved enough yet to stop being "in the image of God".

We have already evolved to become a separate species as is classified by the genus Homo sapiens we evolved from several other classifications before that and we are still evolving.

@suzianne said.

Geeeez, you're thick-headed.

I see...

@divegeester said
“Devils advocate“ for what exactly...

There are references in the bible which talk of God’s revealed image (Jesus Christ) and the mystery of his non revealed aspects and plans.

I don’t see any incongruence in this either.

What I did see and in congruence in is Suzianne’s particular dogmatic splicing of the mechanics of continuous evolution with creation in God’s image. It is interesting to me that neither you nor GoaD don’t seem to.

And neither do I, of course.

Not exactly understanding why you're not grasping the concept unless it is your continued negativity concerning me. In short, you disagree merely because I'm the one describing the concept.

@divegeester said
We have already evolved to become a separate species as is classified by the genus Homo sapiens we evolved from several other classifications before that and we are still evolving.

This is simply incorrect.

Our species classification is actually Homo sapiens sapiens, classified not only by species, but classified further into sub-species. And we haven't yet evolved even out of this sub-species. But don't worry, we've only been at it for 100,000 years or so (I do not know the precise number, I'm admittedly spit-balling this number, so please don't garrote me yet.)

@suzianne said
This is simply incorrect.

Our species classification is actually Homo sapiens sapiens, classified not only by species, but classified further into sub-species. And we haven't yet evolved even out of this sub-species. But don't worry, we've only been at it for 100,000 years or so (I do not know the precise number, I'm admittedly spit-balling this number, so please don't garrote me yet.)

Our classification is irrelevant to the point in question, it merely serves as a reference.

The key questions remaining unanswered by your theology are:

- How do you know we are in God’s image now? Or not.
- As we are constantly evolving (as are all living things), at what point were we in God’s image?
- If we were once in God’s image is evolution improving us from that image?

There are of course others but these are the key ones I think.

@suzianne said
Not exactly understanding why you're not grasping the concept

I can grasp your “concept” quite easily, I just think it is poorly thought through as it doesn’t connect with Biblical scripture at a fundamental level and has more holes than a poorly made TV series.

@suzianne said

unless it is your continued negativity concerning me. In short, you disagree merely because I'm the one describing the concept.

You are the one firing out insults every few posts. As usual.

@divegeester said
Yes that’s the nature of the God described in the Bible as reflected by his interest in humankind and an interaction with them. I don’t find anything incongruent in this model.

God plans on unleashing disproportionate punishments and is persuaded by humans not to do so is not incongruent with him being omniscient and unchanging?!

@wolfgang59 said
Do you agree that Mankind in a million years will probably be different
enough from Man now to make inter-breeding impossible?

At that time Man will be a new species, and evolutionists will have to make
a fairly arbitrary decision as to when that happened, although it is actually
constantly happening; past, present and future.
!!! 😆

I don't know, I can't see past next Thursday....A million years isn't that long, sharks and crocodiles have been around for a lot longer than that. You can't say for sure that humankind will be a new species, it depends what evolutionary buttons are pushed in the meantime, assuming we are around at all, of course. Evolution into a new species isn't a given. Anatomically modern humans have been around for about 300,000 years, as far as we know, and have interbred with Neanderthals, so who knows who will be breeding with whom, certainly I won't be breeding with anyone, more's the pity.
And I would like to apologize for my last paragraph (the ! marks ) , I was at the end of the mother of all head colds when I wrote that and was feeling a bit growly, and regretted writing it afterwards. I trust and hope there are no hard feelings.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
God plans on unleashing disproportionate punishments and is persuaded by humans not to do so is not incongruent with him being omniscient and unchanging?!

No I don’t think so because God is portrayed throughout the Bible as seeking out a working relationship with mankind and one where man can intervene with God’s intentions, at least some of them. In fact I think that without this dynamic the biblical accounts would great lack in interest.

@divegeester said
No I don’t think so because God is portrayed throughout the Bible as seeking out a working relationship with mankind and one where man can intervene with God’s intentions, at least some of them. In fact I think that without this dynamic the biblical accounts would great lack in interest.

As humans, you and I change our minds when we see a better way of doing something (or if convinced by others). For God to do this however necessitates that His original intention was imperfect. - Which itself contradicts God's portrayal in the bible. For example, 2 Samuel 22:31 "This God—his way is perfect."

I don't find it credible that an omniscient God would lay aside His perfect plan to accommodate a working relationship with mankind. Indeed, we are expected to accommodate Him. After all, He knows all things, from the beginning to the end.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
As humans, you and I change our minds when we see a better way of doing something (or if convinced by others). For God to do this however necessitates that His original intention was imperfect. - Which itself contradicts God's portrayal in the bible. For example, 2 Samuel 22:31 "This God—his way is perfect."

I don't find it credible that an omniscient God would lay ...[text shortened]... , we are expected to accommodate Him. After all, He knows all things, from the beginning to the end.

You have used the word “better” presumptively. You would be better off using “differently” because you are making big assumptions about the choices this God would have to make.

You are also incorrectly using “way” in an attempt to reinforce and already flawed theological position whereby you are limiting a deity to how “you and I change our minds”.

You not being able to find credibility in the biblical description of God’s decision making processes is hardly a surprise seeing as you are a devoted atheist. Nevertheless you could try putting aside your atheism and perhaps what you’ve been taught about the Biblical God in order to accommodate a different perspective.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
As humans, you and I change our minds when we see a better way of doing something (or if convinced by others). For God to do this however necessitates that His original intention was imperfect. - Which itself contradicts God's portrayal in the bible. For example, 2 Samuel 22:31 "This God—his way is perfect."

I don't find it credible that an omniscient God would lay ...[text shortened]... , we are expected to accommodate Him. After all, He knows all things, from the beginning to the end.

Maybe God is strategic? Perhaps God nurtures mankind's moral development by putting things out there for us to challenge? A parent does not nurture development without interaction. How do you know these weren't tests in which God hoped to be overruled?