Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-05-2015, 12:39 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
All of you people and your damned liberal interpretations of that which the Triune Lagamorpha-head meant for us to take literally!

(27-05-2015 06:48 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  I posit the three headed pink bunny

[Image: 3_Headed_Cyclops_Bunny_by_fezzonfffire.jpg]

Learn to read, people! Angry Or count! Angry OR BOTH! Angry
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 05:15 AM
Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
Hey, if they can have lily white Jebus, then we can a rabbit that changes genders and heads.

[Image: f9d76ca326022b59279d4d136688b137.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 07:45 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(27-05-2015 10:08 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(27-05-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  God made sex and sexual pleasure, bless Him! He married Adam to Eve. They were naked and unashamed. I bet they figured stuff out right quick! You're here, aren't you? Smile

How do you judge they were married? I see no passage of anything close to that type of justification. Sounds like the biblical literalist adding things to the bible that aren't there again.

Marriage ceremonies were different and were later codified, but since I define marriage as a covenant between three persons, a man, a woman and God, I'd say God telling Adam and Eve they were about to do something that others would later do "For this reason, a man WILL leave his father and mother and be joined to his WIFE, and the two shall become one flesh," I'd also say God was definitely involved.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 07:47 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(27-05-2015 10:56 AM)jennybee Wrote:  
(27-05-2015 10:50 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Ok, lets turn this around. Let's say that they didn't eat the magic apple. By your statement, there would be no death but reproduction. So what was the plan? Furthermore, why dod god later forbid sex during menstration and call women "unclean" during this process? Or are you suggesting that the magic apple caused all of this as well?

If they didn't eat the magic fruit--there would be no reproduction either since they would not have been attracted to each other in a sexual way. After eating the fruit, they noticed each other in a sexual way, before that---no sexual interest.

Interesting assumption, but sexual arousal is not evil, rather the pursuit of it in fornication, masturbation, etc. and so there could have been sexual arousal without disobedience. The fall involves disobedience.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 07:48 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(27-05-2015 11:01 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  
(27-05-2015 10:02 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  The reply would include:

Obviously the person you were first responding to isn't a careful thinker. Stupid and smart people can be saved both, sorry you pulled one and not the other.

Obviously modern evolutionary science accounts for aberrations and difficulties. Yet I was not pointing to merely the genetic pooling of two in producing offspring or the challenges of mating, but the exceptionally lengthy periods of gestation and child rearing, etc. The Bible has an answer for everything important, including this issue (and the one I'm about to answer below). That's all.

Actually, human gestation period is on the low side for mammals of our size. Humans need to be born earlier in the developmental process so that our relatively large craniums can fit through the birth canal, especially after the pelvic changes forced by upright walking, and it is partially because of this early birth that our first few months are periods of such extreme dependency relative to, say, a lamb who is a toddler within a few hours of birth. It's one of the huge evolutionary disadvantages forced upon us by our large brains (along with increased calorie requirements and a proclivity for inventing new ways to kill each other).

But more than that, lengthy periods of child rearing are typical for k-selected species such as ourselves. If you're not familiar with the term, k-selection refers to a reproductive "strategy" of quality over quantity. Some species, such as salmon, produce a very large number of offspring per mating pair, each with very low odds of surviving to a reproductive age themselves. These are known as r-selected species. When the parents can provide any nurturing or care for their offspring at all, it must of necessity be short-term and spread wide over the large brood, and so the offspring must quickly fend for themselves. At the other extreme, k-selected species have very few offspring, but those offspring have a much higher chance of surviving to reproduce. Because each individual offspring is much more important to the parent's genetic survival, it is necessary for the parents to lavish a large degree of care upon the offspring, and their instincts will reflect that. Both strategies have advantages and disadvantages, and both are perfectly viable for certain evolutionary niches but not others. Any species that evolved with the capacity to learn the way humans do would likely need considerable rearing to take advantage of that capacity, and so they would need to be k-selected. In short, humans are not a deviation from this pattern. They are part of it, and the k-selection traits you cited are perfectly well explained under evolutionary theory. There's no gap here for your god to explain, even if claiming a god could explain a gap in the first place.

Of course there's a gap. Human pain in childbirth. Anyone growing up on a farm or doing fieldwork as a veterinarian knows "the curse of Eve".

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 07:51 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(27-05-2015 01:43 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(27-05-2015 10:03 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  God made sex and sexual pleasure, bless Him! He married Adam to Eve. They were naked and unashamed. I bet they figured stuff out right quick! You're here, aren't you? Smile

Was this after Adam fucked all the animals, birds, and fish in sea and found them inadequate?

Please site the exact verse that describes their wedding.

It seemed to me, it's written more like here she is...now fuck this.

"For this cause, a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his WIFE". Gen 2:24 - commonly shared at marriage benedictions.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 07:52 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(28-05-2015 07:47 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(27-05-2015 10:56 AM)jennybee Wrote:  If they didn't eat the magic fruit--there would be no reproduction either since they would not have been attracted to each other in a sexual way. After eating the fruit, they noticed each other in a sexual way, before that---no sexual interest.

Interesting assumption, but sexual arousal is not evil, rather the pursuit of it in fornication, masturbation, etc. and so there could have been sexual arousal without disobedience. The fall involves disobedience.

But they didn't need loincloths until after they ate the fruit. Before ingesting fruit, they were unaware of each others nakedness. Not aware ='s not aroused.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 07:59 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(28-05-2015 07:52 AM)jennybee Wrote:  
(28-05-2015 07:47 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Interesting assumption, but sexual arousal is not evil, rather the pursuit of it in fornication, masturbation, etc. and so there could have been sexual arousal without disobedience. The fall involves disobedience.

But they didn't need loincloths until after they ate the fruit. Before ingesting fruit, they were unaware of each others nakedness. Not aware ='s not aroused.

They were aware of their nakedness, but not ashamed of it. There was a lot of posturing and sexual comments on this thread since yesterday, but a married couple that keeps sex amongst themselves only can do whatever they want as long as both people consent and are unharmed doing so. Eve was made from Adam and for Adam and he was for her as well--"it's not good for man to be alone".

They were together in Gen 2, and God spoke of their marriage. They didn't sew fig leaves until the Fall, Genesis 3. They were making love and having sex before they were ashamed to be nude. The Bible... makes sense... always... of our many questions, musings and concerns... unless one's mind is clouded. Jesus can add clarity, simply for the asking!

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 08:13 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(28-05-2015 07:59 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(28-05-2015 07:52 AM)jennybee Wrote:  But they didn't need loincloths until after they ate the fruit. Before ingesting fruit, they were unaware of each others nakedness. Not aware ='s not aroused.

They were aware of their nakedness, but not ashamed of it. There was a lot of posturing and sexual comments on this thread since yesterday, but a married couple that keeps sex amongst themselves only can do whatever they want as long as both people consent and are unharmed doing so. Eve was made from Adam and for Adam and he was for her as well--"it's not good for man to be alone".

They were together in Gen 2, and God spoke of their marriage. They didn't sew fig leaves until the Fall, Genesis 3. They were making love and having sex before they were ashamed to be nude. The Bible... makes sense... always... of our many questions, musings and concerns... unless one's mind is clouded. Jesus can add clarity, simply for the asking!

I will give you the marriage part because some translations refer to Eve as Adam's wife (even though there was no actual ceremony in the garden of Eden). Where does it say they were having sex before the Fall?

Gen.3:8-12

When they heard the sound of the Lord God walking about in the garden at the breezy time of the day,[c] the man and his wife hid themselves from the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 The Lord God then called to the man and asked him: Where are you? 10 He answered, “I heard you in the garden; but I was afraid, because I was naked, so I hid.” 11 Then God asked: Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I had forbidden you to eat? 12 The man replied, “The woman whom you put here with me—she gave me fruit from the tree, so I ate it.”
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-05-2015, 08:40 AM
RE: Can't say how sex evolved, therefore Adam and Eve
(28-05-2015 07:45 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(27-05-2015 10:08 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  How do you judge they were married? I see no passage of anything close to that type of justification. Sounds like the biblical literalist adding things to the bible that aren't there again.

Marriage ceremonies were different and were later codified, but since I define marriage as a covenant between three persons, a man, a woman and God, I'd say God telling Adam and Eve they were about to do something that others would later do "For this reason, a man WILL leave his father and mother and be joined to his WIFE, and the two shall become one flesh," I'd also say God was definitely involved.

Why 3 people? What about when a king is married to hundreds of people or What about when you have a concubine like Abraham? Is that still between 3 persons?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: