Comments on De Novo Creation

It establishes an invisible and completely undetectable discontinuity between a tiny fraction of humanity and the rest of humanity. Signifying an unfair and divisive act by a supposed compassionate and loving God.

Signifying a total disregard of the “not-in-the-image of God” people.

Another act of divisiveness perpetrated on the vast majority of humanity living at the time.

And her subservience to her forced marriage to her clone Adam. And perpetrates the myth of female subservience to males and females being more deceitful than males and the weaker sex.

The creation of Adam does nothing to establish righteousness for humanity. The concept of human rights evolves slowly over the millennium by secular humanistic thought and actions.

All red herrings @patrick. You arguing against something other than what I put forward. They are off topic here though.

A post was merged into an existing topic: Why is the de novo creation of Adam and Eve important?

Not red herrings. All are legitimate criticisms of the hubris of Christian thought and theology.

Not directly relevant to this thread, however.

1 Like

It is very relevant to the thread “Why is the de novo creation of Adam and Eve important?” It is important to expose the hypocrisy, divisiveness, and hubris of Christians who contemplate such unsupportable thoughts and theology.

We live in divisive times. We should be working on things that brings humanity together not further divide them along ancient unsupportable and divisive theology.

The context of that question is “important to Christians”, not atheists.

Great, do it in a thread with the title “Why the de novo creation of Adam and Eve is unimportant to atheists” or whatever.

1 Like

I thought it was suppose to be important to humanity?

That’s changing the context of what I wrote. My context is what this question originally meant. Regardless, last time I looked, no one here was arguing that the de novo creation of Adam and Eve is important to humanity. Only to Christians.

1 Like

only to a tiny fraction of Christians. And less and less everyday.

There is a difference between coming together and uniformity.
Why should people abandon their theology/beliefs because you feel they are unsupportable and that your beliefs are more rational.
How is this kind of attitude any less divisive?

1 Like

I am not advocating people abandon their theology/beliefs. I am advocating people adjust their theology/beliefs so that there is less divisiveness, more empathy, and more tolerance to all humanity. Christianity especially in the United States with the rise of Christian Nationalism is all about inserting one particular religion into a secular government. And being intolerant to LGTBQ, woman, and secular humanistic ideals and human rights.

Why should they? Why not advocate that people remain free to believe whatever they feel is appropriate as long as they respect other people’s rights to do the same?
Anything more than that is just one group oppressing another.

What do you mean by intolerance? Do you mean disagreement?
When did you become the caretakers of all women,or people of homosexual orientation for that matter?
There are Christian women (around half the population) and they are adults who can choose whether to remain Christian or not… and also what kind of Christian.
There are people who identify as Christians with homosexual orientation. Some of them feel the sexual intercourse within the same sex is a sin , some of them don’t think so… both came to their conclusions as adults and are free to do so.

Anyway all this out of topic. You are behaving like most humanists who think that they know what is best for all categories of people, whether women, LGBTQ or anything else.
Faith/beliefs are matter of individual choice and should remain so. Not a matter for you to adjust according to your judgement.

Off topic again @Patrick.