The Mud-Man & His Rib-Woman

[StuartJ]

Yahweh Elohim (Kurios Theos/Lord God) in contradiction of Genesis 1, created a human male from mud, as the first living creature (not the last).

After failing to find a suitable good helper for the mud-man by creating animals from mud, the not-so-omniscient mythological Jewish deity then created the planet's first human female from one of the mud-man's ribs.

Can this be put up against evolutionary science?

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 1 by StuartJ]

Can this be put up against evolutionary science?

Not legitimately, but a great number of people try and most religious creation myths include a description of human creation within the story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths

There is no end to these kinds of stories, but the one thing they all have in common is the lack of any evidence of any kind to support them (unlike evolutionary science).

[Clownboat]

Yahweh Elohim (Kurios Theos/Lord God) in contradiction of Genesis 1, created a human male from mud, as the first living creature (not the last).

After failing to find a suitable good helper for the mud-man by creating animals from mud, the not-so-omniscient mythological Jewish deity then created the planet's first human female from one of the mud-man's ribs.

Can this be put up against evolutionary science?

No. Not since evolution is a fact that has a pretty good theory describing the mechanism behind it.

None of the creation stories (mud man and rib women included) seem to be anything more than ancient humans and their musings.

Consider how in Christianity, the god is claimed to have created the universe with words, but when it comes to Adam and Eve, he uses mud and a rib.
Then later, this same god that is claimed to have created the universe with words, cannot deal with the concept of 'sin' without a human being sacrificed to the said god.

If there is something as illogical in evolution, I am all ears.

[StuartJ]

70 people have viewed this topic.

Not 1 Christian has leapt to the defence of their Lord.

I suspect they know fine well they are passing mythology and fantasy off as reality ...

And I question their honesty.

[Divine Insight]

70 people have viewed this topic.

Not 1 Christian has leapt to the defence of their Lord.

I suspect they know fine well they are passing mythology and fantasy off as reality ...

And I question their honesty.

They have apologies that they have accepted. Even though you and I know that those apologies don't hold water.

Here are some of them,...

1. The whole story is just a "metaphor". It's not meant to be taken literally.

In other words, even they literally reject the Bible.

2. How do you know that's not the way things happened, "Were you there?"

This is what they are taught to believe by dishonest evangelists. It's hard to blame the "sheep" for accepting what their teachers are teaching them.


And finally,...

3. Evolution is "just a theory". It's the work of Satan intended to fool people like you into thinking that "God's Word" is false.

And now a question for you. Can you honestly say that these people are being dishonest? Or could it just be that they truly are this gullible?

You shouldn't jump to the conclusion that ignorance = dishonesty.

Although, I would tend to agree with you in the case of popular clergy and evangelists who clearly should know better. But it's hard to blame the masses when they have such ignorant (or dishonest) teachers.

Look at William Lane Craig, he has created an entire organization that constantly argues that Christianity is "reasonable".

Reasonable Faith

When you have massive organizations supporting this nonsense it's really hard to blame the public for buying into it. Same thing with things like the Catholic Church, etc. The very existence of such powerful and "respected" organizations makes it look like it should be reasonable to believe in these things.

You can hardly blame Joe Schmoe on the street for buying into these things when churches populate the landscape by the millions.

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 5 by Divine Insight]

Hey DI - thanks for the reply.

Mostly agree ...

But I'll politely point you towards my topic "When Delusion Becomes Downright Deception" in the Right or Wrong section here.

Cheers

[bluethread]

Yahweh Elohim (Kurios Theos/Lord God) in contradiction of Genesis 1, created a human male from mud, as the first living creature (not the last).

After failing to find a suitable good helper for the mud-man by creating animals from mud, the not-so-omniscient mythological Jewish deity then created the planet's first human female from one of the mud-man's ribs.

Can this be put up against evolutionary science?

In what way, scientifically? Seems like a circular argument to me. Can it be put up against evolutionary science as an explanation of human interaction and psychological development, sure. By the way, Genesis 1 does not say that a human male was the first living creature.

Welcome to the site. The simplistic way in which a characterize the Scriptures is not uncommon of a newbie. Hopefully, your interactions on this site will reassure you that theism is not without reasonable justification, even if you never choose to agree with those justifications.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 5 by Divine Insight]

Hey DI - thanks for the reply.

Mostly agree ...

But I'll politely point you towards my topic "When Delusion Becomes Downright Deception" in the Right or Wrong section here.

Cheers

I read that thread already. I think the same thing applies there, especially the first apology I pointed to:

1. The whole story is just a "metaphor". It's not meant to be taken literally.

This seems to be the most popular modern day apology. They simply literally reject the Bible and pretend that it's about something entirely different from what it actually says.

I'll grant you that this is utterly absurd and doesn't hold water. None the less, this is the most often apology given for the absurdities in the Bible.

In fact, I have come to state my position as the following:

I hold that the Bible cannot be true "as it is literally written"

Christians who use the "metaphor" apology to literally reject the Bible are necessarily agreeing with my position.

They are agreeing that the Bible cannot be true "as it is written". That's their defense for this theology. Just literally reject the Bible. That's what they do.

I will be the first to agree with you that this defense is utterly absurd. I will even argue that the Christian non-literal metaphorical interpretations of the Bible can't even be held up as making any intelligent, rational, or logical sense. But those kinds of arguments become nothing more than an endless string of apologies placed on top of apologies without end. Christians have no problem making up endless apologies for why their apologies don't even make any sense.

They simply refuse to concede at any point that no matter what they do they can't make it work. But in truth they can't.

The fact that they can't make it work is obvious.

For even if they could come up with a sound "metaphorical" picture of this religion, I would at least grant them some creative ingenuity. But they haven't been able to do even that. And this is why Christianity is nothing more than a very large collection of extremely small "Christian sects and demoninations" that can't even convince each other of their utterly absurd metaphorical (non-Biblical) non-literal interpretations of this ridiculous religion.

And it is ridiculous. The very idea that some God who supposedly knew what he was doing created a world that became filled with sin (that God supposedly doesn't want) is itself an extremely self-contradictory theology right there.

The Bible has God proclaiming that he was sorry that he had ever created man when he had to drown out all the sinners in the Great Flood. And even Noah and his family were not without sin, yet he spared them which makes no sense.

But there he was repenting that he had ever created mankind. How could that be if this God is the Master Planner, who has everything planned out? If he had everything planned out then when he had to drown out humans in a Great Flood he should have been thrilled that everything was going just as he had planned.

As if that self-contradiction isn't enough, Christianity has this God later loving humans so much that he's going to sacrifice himself (or his demigod Son) so that he can offer them undeserved amnesty for being sinners.

What every happened to his old habit of drowning sinners?

Christianity is the most absurd religious mythology ever thought up by mankind. Even Judaism and Islam aren't quite as bad because at least they don't have their God drowning sinners one moment and then offering them undeserved amnesty the next.

Of course, both of those religions are absurd and self-contradictory as well. But when it comes to absolute absurdity Christianity take's the cake for sure.

Ironically there are even evangelists who argue that Christianity must be true simply because it's far too absurd for humans to have even thought it up. That's a seriously sick reason to believe in a theology if you ask me.

I have no problem at all seeing how humans could create such an absurd and self-contradictory religion. They simply weren't even thinking about how silly their religion was becoming. That's all. It's just an example of the epitome of human ignorance.

But at least many famous Christian apologists have indeed openly confessed that Christianity is the most absurd religion around. They have actually argued that this is why they take it seriously.

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 7 by bluethread]

The door is wide open for you to demonstrate that Yahweh and the Mud-Man and the Rib-Woman were real.

If you could, that is what you would have done.

[Divine Insight]

Hopefully, your interactions on this site will reassure you that theism is not without reasonable justification, even if you never choose to agree with those justifications.

I've been on this site since 2012 and I haven't seen a reasonable justification for Christianity yet.

Not only this but I've been studying the entire Abrahamic picture of God since at lest the mid 60's. That's over a half-a-century of hearing every apology for this religion you can imagine. And none of them have been anywhere near a "reasonable justification" for this religion.

Also, how many times do I need to point out that if this religion has a reasonable justification there would be no reason why all Christians couldn't jump on that same boat.

The mere fact that Christians can't even agree with each other's so-called "Justifications" only demonstrates that they aren't even convincing each other.

Where is this supposedly reasonable justification for this religion?

I havne't seen it yet.

In fact, I haven't met a theist who could reasonably justify the first 3 chapters of Genesis. Never mind the entire rest of the Bible.