Spoooooooky stuff...

[Banjo]

Because the Bible doesn't mention aliens from other planets or Lilith.

Well, there's a lot of things the Bible doesn't mention.

 

[Jiro]

As long as I don't look like a round one!

lol you must be referring to The Laughing Buddha. He's actually not Buddha. He's Budai. But then... in Buddhism - everybody including me is Buddha

 

[Jiro]

Why are people opposed to the thought that God created everything, including aliens?


Genesis creation narrative - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Story Of Lilith

correct me if I'm wrong but you believe more in aliens than God, right?

 

[Steinhauer]

Because the Bible doesn't mention aliens from other planets or Lilith.

Not the English version. A lot was left out.

Original scriptures mentioned a creation before man. Perhaps they were wiped out as was intended for man during the Great Deluge?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Adamite

I have dug a lot and came to my own conclusions. I questioned very bright theologians only to have my questions unanswered.

 

[Steinhauer]

correct me if I'm wrong but you believe more in aliens than God, right?

No.

 

[Reba]

Not the English version. A lot was left out.

Nothing authentic was "left out."

Original scriptures mentioned a creation before man. Perhaps they were wiped out as was intended for man during the Great Deluge?

No. As you can see from the Bible, God never wipes out everyone but always leaves a way of escape thru salvation. He provided that way of escape right from the beginning. Even when there was massive destruction of people during the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Exodus, the remnant of the faithful few survived. That will also be the way in the future.

Pre-Adamite - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have dug a lot and came to my own conclusions. I questioned very bright theologians only to have my questions unanswered.

I hope wikipedia wasn't your source.

The link you posted is troubling.

Some passages from that link:

Age of enlightenment

During the Age of Enlightenment pre-Adamism was adopted widely as a challenge to the biblical account of human origins, whereas in the nineteenth century the idea was welcomed by advocates of white superiority. A number of racist interpretive frameworks involving the early chapters of Genesis have arisen from pre-Adamism. Some Pre-Adamite theorists held that Cain left his family for an inferior tribe described variously as "white Mongols". Pre-Adamites also claimed that Cain took a wife from one of the inferior pre-Adamite peoples. The idea that Cain’s mark was blackness arose in 18th century Europe and was also popular in 19th century America.[7]
[edit] ca. 1800 - present

In 19th Century Europe polygenism and Pre-Adamism were attractive to those intent on demonstrating the inferiority of non-Western peoples, while in the United States they appealed to those attuned to racial theories who found it unattractive to contemplate a common history with non-Whites. Writers such as Charles Caldwell, Josiah C. Nott and Samuel G. Morton, rejected the view that non-whites were the descendants of Adam. Morton combined pre-Adamism with cranial measurements to construct a theory of racial difference that justified slavery.

...Following the American Civil War Southerners were increasingly receptive to arguments supportive of black inferiority. In 1867 Buckner H Payne wrote a pamphlet under the pen name Ariel entitled The Negro: What is His Ethnological Status?, in which he argued that the Negro is a pre-Adamic beast of the field (specifically, a higher order of monkey) which was preserved on the Ark.

...Campbell viewed the great flood as a consequence of intermarriage between the white (Adamic) and nonwhite (pre-Adamic) peoples "the only union we can think of that is reasonable and sufficient to account for the corruption of the world and the consequent judgement".[9]

In an unusual blend of contemporary evolutionary thinking and pre-Adamism the Vanderbilt University theistic evolutionist and geologist Alexander Winchell argued in his 1878 tract Adamites and Preadamites for the pre-Adamic origins of the human race on the basis that the Negroes were too racially inferior to have developed from the Biblical Adam.

...The ideologies of British Israelism, which developed in England in the 19th century, also sometimes involved a pre-Adamic worldview, though this was a minority position. According to this model the pre-Adamites were viewed as a race of inferior bestial creatures apart from Adam, who was the first white man and son of God. In this narrative Satan seduces Eve and the resulting offspring is a hybrid creature called Cain. Later Cain flees to East Turkestan to establish a colony of followers intent on realizing the Devil’s plan for domination of the earth. Further elaboration of this myth involved the identification of the Jews with Canaanites, the putative descendants of Cain (although the eponymous ancestor of Canaanites is not Cain but Canaan). It followed that, if the tribes of Judah were supposed to have intermarried with Cain’s descendants, then the Jews were the offspring of Satan as well as sundry nonwhite pre-Adamic races.[citation needed]

In the United States, British Israelism developed into the aggressively anti-Semitic Christian Identity movement in which the Jews were increasingly seen as outside the domain of humanity.

Not good.

 

[Steinhauer]

Nothing authentic was "left out."


No. As you can see from the Bible, God never wipes out everyone but always leaves a way of escape thru salvation. He provided that way of escape right from the beginning. Even when there was massive destruction of people during the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Exodus, the remnant of the faithful few survived. That will also be the way in the future.



I hope wikipedia wasn't your source.

The link you posted is troubling.

Some passages from that link:



Not good.

pre-adamites were around since Abraham.

The troubling notion you have brought up in regards to preadamites using this to support a racist ideology wasn't used until thousands of years later.

There are scriptures in the Bible that are being used for such ideologies now (however incorrect their ideologies are).

But, as mentioned by another ADer, a lot of things are not mentioned in the Bible. Computers, automobiles, firearms, nuclear warheads, cell phones, etc.

Since those are not mentioned in the Bible, can you really use the Bible to support any argument that since something is not mentioned in the Bible it must mean it does not exist?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrado_Balducci

In relation to the teachings of the Catholic Church, he has stressed that extraterrestrial encounters "are not demonic, they are not due to psychological impairment, and they are not a case of entity attachment, but these encounters deserve to be studied carefully."[3] He denies the rumor that the Vatican follows reported incidents of extraterrestrial encounters from its Nunciatures in different countries.

Balducci's opinions received a wider context in 2008 when the Vatican's chief astronomer José Gabriel Funes also discussed the possibility of extraterrestrial life.

 

[Steinhauer]

Eerie Image Captured in Woods

 

[Reba]

pre-adamites were around since Abraham.

So was Satan and other deceivers. What does that prove?

The troubling notion you have brought up in regards to preadamites using this to support a racist ideology wasn't used until thousands of years later.

There are scriptures in the Bible that are being used for such ideologies now (however incorrect their ideologies are).

So why did you choose that particular Wikipedia link to support your argument for pre-Adam creatures?

Do you believe that if there were such beings that their descendants are the non-white populations of today?

But, as mentioned by another ADer, a lot of things are not mentioned in the Bible. Computers, automobiles, firearms, nuclear warheads, cell phones, etc.

Man, talk about a red herring! None of those things had anything to do with the Creation of the world by God.

Since those are not mentioned in the Bible, can you really use the Bible to support any argument that since something is not mentioned in the Bible it must mean it does not exist?

Yes, I can because the context was about Creation. The things that Banjo listed had nothing to do with that context. We weren't discussing events that happened in the last couple centuries.

Corrado Balducci - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have no idea what that's about. I'm not talking about the Catholic church, and what they do or believe or say has no bearing on anything I do, believe, or say.

 

[Jiro]

I have dug a lot and came to my own conclusions. I questioned very bright theologians only to have my questions unanswered.

I'm not surprised. apparently - your questions weren't bright enough for them to intelligently answer your question

I know what a conversation with a theologian is like and let me tell you this - it's way outta your field

 

[Steinhauer]

I'm not surprised. apparently - your questions weren't bright enough for them to intelligently answer your question

I know what a conversation with a theologian is like and let me tell you this - it's way outta your field

Hey Jiro .... nothing personal but your talking out of your ass yet again.

 

[Jiro]

Hey Jiro .... nothing personal but your talking out of your ass yet again.

gettin' defensive there, I see.

 

[Steinhauer]

So was Satan and other deceivers. What does that prove?


Prove satan exists.


So why did you choose that particular Wikipedia link to support your argument for pre-Adam creatures?

The wikipedia article clearly explains that preadamites existed since Abraham and thousands of years later the concept was used by white supremacists. You chose the latter, I pointed out the former - its in the link provided by wikipedia.


Do you believe that if there were such beings that their descendants are the non-white populations of today?

I believe that human beings are not the only intelligent creation. Why would a creator who can make the heavens and earth from nothing, need the rib of Adam to create Eve? To me, that sounds like a very simplistic explanation of cloning.

Man, talk about a red herring! None of those things had anything to do with the Creation of the world by God.

no, but the red herring was your statement that aliens could not possibly exist because they are not mentioned in the Bible

Yes, I can because the context was about Creation. The things that Banjo listed had nothing to do with that context. We weren't discussing events that happened in the last couple centuries.

Your comment about preadamites was about creation. Your comments about aliens existing had nothing to do with the story of creation.

I have no idea what that's about. I'm not talking about the Catholic church, and what they do or believe or say has no bearing on anything I do, believe, or say.
It was to simply point out that the Vatican believes in intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.

Read the first chapter of Ezekiel. The four living creatures, where did they come from? Why did they have a "terrible crystal" covering their faces?

 

[Jiro]

what clearly explains in here is that this is way outta your head lol! just by referring to wikipedia simply points out that you believe that Bogeyman still exists in your closet.

 

[Steinhauer]

gettin' defensive there, I see.

No. Just stating the facts.

 

[Steinhauer]

what clearly explains in here is that this is way outta your head lol! just by referring to wikipedia simply points out that you believe that Bogeyman still exists in your closet.

The correct expression would be "way over your head".

 

[Jiro]

The correct expression would be "way over your head".

that's not the expression I'm aiming for. and you might want to start learning how to use "your" and "you're" and "it" and "it's" first before you lecture

 

[Steinhauer]

that's not the expression I'm aiming for. and you might want to start learning how to use "your" and "you're" and "it" and "it's" first before you lecture

Wehn I am wirintng an adecadmeic ppaer I use the crreoct froamt.

 

[mizwytch]

Well, there's a lot of things the Bible doesn't mention.

Well said Banjo!

The bible is incomplete. There are so many versions and ALL of them were written by humans. If one takes a Catholic version and a Protestant version then one will see that there are books included in the Catholic version that have been removed from the Protestant version....which I was given to understand is a big ol' no-no. (Yes, I am VERY familiar with the bible..I had it ground into me as a child...one of the contributing factors to my utter loathing of all man-made religions...and they are ALL man-made.) It is at best a some what accurate historical document.While I am aware that this is considered by some here to be only my opinion...it is an opinion shared by hundreds of thousands of people. Frankly, there is more evidence for the existence of alien beings than there is for the existence of Jesus. A few stories are not proof or evidence. I have always found it to be a source of amazement that people find it easier to believe that an amorphous, invisible god-being basically made a mud doll, also known as a golem, and turned it into a human being; (which is pretty fanciful and fantastical by most anyone's standards), than in the existence of advanced intelligent life out in the cosmos that had a hand in the genetic manipulation and creation of our species. Hells bells, even the Christian bible makes the reference to several "gods"...in the very first chapter of Genesis...and nothing is said about it being that "holy trinity" thing either. Do we not have the knowledge and capability of genetic manipulation? Can we not manipulate the DNA of any living thing, including humans, now? Does not even the Old Testament book of Ecclesiastes say there is nothing new under the sun? The bible is full of stories that sound remarkably like modern alien abduction scenarios and encounters with beings that look like us only bigger. (Made in their image perhaps?)

Blind faith is just blind gullibility. Faith without something to base it on has no merit. Real faith, or belief in something or someone, has to be based on something real and tangible. For example, many people have faith in the government, although there is plenty of proof that people should NOT put their faith and trust in anything the government or the media says. However, putting you faith in the abilities of someone who has proven themselves worthy of such trust is done because there is tangible evidence that they have given you reason to do so.

The term "god" merely means "ruler" or "over lord or over seer"....(which makes it a job title and description...NOT a name.:roll Millions of people have seen UFOs. Many more have reported having experiences involving humanoid beings that can not be so easily dismissed. Fact is, people who refuse to accept that anything is possible outside of their narrow point of view and fanatical ideology does so out of fear. Fear that they would find out that everything they cling so staunchly is just a lot of lies and that they have been made fools of. That anyone would be so egotistical to think that there is only "one true religion" is appalling. There is no such thing. The arrogant notion that humans are the only intelligent life in this vast universe is absurd. The idea that we are the pinnacle of creation is nothing more than human arrogance as well. We are not that special in the big scheme of things. Every living thing has a spirit and soul. If one had the eyes to see the life force that surrounds every living creature, including the planet we live on, then perhaps the way humanity thinks about our place in the universe would change and we start viewing even the universe as the living entity it is, and just perhaps, give all living things the respect that humanity seems to think that only it is entitled to.

This is NOT a religious thread. I would ask that such discussions be kept to threads in which they are relevant and stick to the subject of the thread. Thanks.

 

[Steinhauer]

Protestants removed the Apocrypha and the Deuterocanonical books which the catholics still reference.

They both use the KJV. However, the KJV was not the first English translation of Hebrew text; The Coverdale Bible was.

In the Hebrew Genesis, there was a creation before man.