Poll: Would you prefer being out of nothing, or being made out of clay?
[Show Results]
Question for creationists
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-06-2012, 12:19 AM
RE: Question for creationists
(19-06-2012 10:34 PM)Darkhouse Wrote:  
(11-06-2012 07:52 PM)Starcrash Wrote:  I've actually heard an answer to this. Allow me to provide it and refute it (efficiency at its best).

Some YECs say that we were made out of "the dust of the ground" because God wanted to make us naturally. You see, they claim that all of the elements that make up humans can be found in dust, and that's absolutely true... because a significant portion of dust is made up of dead skin cells.

The original dust of the ground would not have contained these skin cells because there was no one to shed them, and without those cells the raw materials for humans would disappear, too.
That might hold true if there weren't two completely different accounts of the creation of mankind.

In one Adam and Eve are created at the same time. In the second one Eve is created after the fact and from a rib.
The Bible starts contradicting itself pretty much immediately.
This isn't relevant. We're obviously discussing the account that mentions Adam being created from dust of the ground. The other story doesn't discuss "how" Adam was created, so it adds no clarification.

The fact that the bible contradicts itself has nothing to do with whether or not Adam was created from dust or not. As an atheist, I've already accepted that this story is probably untrue. I'm merely arguing against the story, as told, being a scientific tale.

It sounds to me like you want to discuss the fact that there are two creation stories, and you can do that -- just make a thread.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: