Adam and Eve first people on earth?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
Why is the earth so big?

Why are more than two people saved?
You were a teacher. If I have one parameter. I can achieve and optimum solution. With 2 or more, there can only be an optimal solution. My conjecture as a logical guy is my God wanted a optimum solution, but had a back up plan for a another solution. The difference between definitive and most like;y

In other words, God knew it was improbable, but on principle reinforcing duty, chose to do this way. Success was guaranteed with minimal casualty.

Why 2 ? Why 1? Why 7 billion? It is moot, until one obeys the mind of God. God has a higher purpose by which we can conjecture the purpose.

Consider 1 parameter - optimum. 2 or more parameters - optimal. God corporately benefits us to the desired endline. If we will respond to one or the other, we will remain strong in thn the presence of God

If you had all the maxwell demons at your command, how many mechanisms are required to make a adequate energy sources, the appropriate timing, etc.., The likelihoods are hugely small. The just right mass, the just right energy at the just right time, are so out of the world that I must say someone is responsible r=that fiddled with the dials of the universe. "paraphrased hubble"

Why so big - simplest.
Why just 2? 1 parameter is optimum.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,726
13,522
113
You were a teacher. If I have one parameter. I can achieve and optimum solution. With 2 or more, there can only be an optimal solution. My conjecture as a logical guy is my God wanted a optimum solution, but had a back up plan for a another solution. The difference between definitive and most like;y

In other words, God knew it was improbable, but on principle reinforcing duty, chose to do this way. Success was guaranteed with minimal casualty.

Why 2 ? Why 1? Why 7 billion? It is moot, until one obeys the mind of God. God has a higher purpose by which we can conjecture the purpose.

Consider 1 parameter - optimum. 2 or more parameters - optimal. God corporately benefits us to the desired endline. If we will respond to one or the other, we will remain strong in thn the presence of God

If you had all the maxwell demons at your command, how many mechanisms are required to make a adequate energy sources, the appropriate timing, etc.., The likelihoods are hugely small. The just right mass, the just right energy at the just right time, are so out of the world that I must say someone is responsible r=that fiddled with the dials of the universe. "paraphrased hubble"

Why so big - simplest.
Why just 2? 1 parameter is optimum.
that happens to be an area i concentrated in in graduate school.
you have a math problem; an integer or non-integer optimization.

in either case, integer or non-integer:

you can certainly have an optimal solution with an infinite number of variables/constraints.
you can equally have multiple solutions equally optimal
and you can have no optimal solution ((nothing satisfies all constraints)) - that is called a 'degenerate problem'

in a degenerate situation, what you do to 'solve' it is relax constraints.
i.e. delete some requirements ((atone for them)), and solve the 'relaxed problem'
optimal solutions to the relaxed problem will be a family of optimality for the initial problem.

now you know ;)
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
That makes no sense. What does make sense is to accept what the Bible plainly states: the world was created to be inhabited.

This blows your theory that man was not created as a procreational being.

It also blows your theory that man was created immortal.

For you tie immortality in to being asexual also.
Whether God says 1 or 2 or 7 billion is up to God. You your self admit this.

God is a person not some fantasy that you can stake your salvation. What does God want? What kind of respect does God expect. You know the verses. I am witness. Use them in the Glory of God or not.

The asexuality is with the 7 brothers with the wife. We are resurrected as per the angels. Love for God only. The only verse after the removal of Enoch 1 because heresy is the Genesis 1 and 2 discrepancy

Consider Luke 20:28-33
Luke 35But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
59,813
29,193
113
Whether God says 1 or 2 or 7 billion is up to God.
One or two people cannot fill the earth without adding to it through intercourse.

Your theories are blown.

Consider Luke 20:28-33
Luke 35But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
Do your obfuscations never end?

That verse has zero to do with whether Adam was created as an asexual being, or immortal.

In fact there are zero verses to support your position and your theory actually contradicts Scripture.
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
that happens to be an area i concentrated in in graduate school.
you have a math problem; an integer or non-integer optimization.

in either case, integer or non-integer:

you can certainly have an optimal solution with an infinite number of variables/constraints.
you can equally have multiple solutions equally optimal
and you can have no optimal solution ((nothing satisfies all constraints)) - that is called a 'degenerate problem'

in a degenerate situation, what you do to 'solve' it is relax constraints.
i.e. delete some requirements ((atone for them)), and solve the 'relaxed problem'
optimal solutions to the relaxed problem will be a family of optimality for the initial problem.

now you know ;)
Are you talking about eigenvalues. Then we should paint the picture with other unparameterized solutions and fit them. I know it sounds weird, but all parameter are coupled. My parameter is only the Glory of God. If any solution is not optimal in this Functional, it is rejected. This comes from Book of Revelation.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,726
13,522
113
Are you talking about eigenvalues. Then we should paint the picture with other unparameterized solutions and fit them. I know it sounds weird, but all parameter are coupled. My parameter is only the Glory of God. If any solution is not optimal in this Functional, it is rejected. This comes from Book of Revelation.
I'm not talking about eigenvalues. You don't need those to go through the Gramm Schmidt process.

This branch of math has little to do with linear algebra. Essentially i am talking about solutions to homogeneous differential equations for a potentially infinite series of inequality constraints
Those turn out to be for np problems, intrinsically related to prisms in infinite dimensional vector space.
To solve such a problem if it is degenerate, we relax constraints.

We are not under law, but grace
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,296
3,123
113
I am not troubled at all by this, I just believe that it is important to understand how everything started. Just like I thank it is important to understand how things will end. I learned something by doing this, It is amazing how you can overlook one word or phrase that opens up a whole new thing.
Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Be FRUITFUL, and multiply, and REPLENISH the earth. Why does the earth have to be replenished if God had just made it?
This is one of the many problems with King James English. Replenish is a poor translation. The better versions use "fill" instead of "replenish". I liked the word "replenish" as it supports my pre-Adamic creation view. But I am far more interested accuracy.
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
I'm not talking about eigenvalues. You don't need those to go through the Gramm Schmidt process.

This branch of math has little to do with linear algebra. Essentially i am talking about solutions to homogeneous differential equations for a potentially infinite series of inequality constraints
Those turn out to be for np problems, intrinsically related to prisms in infinite dimensional vector space.
To solve such a problem if it is degenerate, we relax constraints.

We are not under law, but grace
If I get what you are saying, your solution is not at the corners but within the constraints? If so, sounds good if your parameters are solely arguments of the functional?

As Grace is not a known definite quantity, that is the providence of God, it is independent of the parameter space. Scripture is known. Therefore a tree of life at the end of Revelation and there is a tree at the beginning at Genesis. Both are associated with life (eternal). Then all solutions must satisfy/include the tree of life as an Functional aspect. In other words, tree of life must somehow explain immortality.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,726
13,522
113
If I get what you are saying, your solution is not at the corners but within the constraints? If so, sounds good if your parameters are solely arguments of the functional?

As Grace is not a known definite quantity, that is the providence of God, it is independent of the parameter space. Scripture is known. Therefore a tree of life at the end of Revelation and there is a tree at the beginning at Genesis. Both are associated with life (eternal). Then all solutions must satisfy/include the tree of life as an Functional aspect. In other words, tree of life must somehow explain immortality.

the scripture provides a set of constraints ((we could call them parameters)) - optimal solutions are on the surface, the facets or corners of the N-dimensional prism defined by those constraints ((where N is the dimension of the scripture)).
things inside the prism are sub-optimal, but valid. things outside the prism are invalid. if we're looking for minima/maxima, they are found on the surface in N-space, because the surface defines the extreme values that meet the criteria defined by parameters.

for example if you want maximum X, and you know X must be less than or equal to 5, then {1, 3, 4} are solutions, but the optimal solution(s) all lie on the line X = 5
but imagine you have 10,000 inequalities like X ≤ 5, in 3,000 different variables. those all define a 3,000-dimensional geometry, like a diamond. the optimal solutions are on that diamond's edges, faces, or corners. if they turn out to be on a corner there is only one solution. but they could be on an edge or plane, in which case there is a whole family of solutions - potentially infinitely many, if the variables are real numbers instead of integers.

are people integer?
is truth integer?

:unsure:

scripture, IMO, is infinite-dimensional. it has to be, because it is the Word of God testifying about God, and God is infinite. so the scripture defines an infinite-dimensional prism embedded in infinite-plus-one space. there is a problem: maximize mercy subject to justice. there is an optimal solution: Jesus Christ -- He is the embodiment of God's infinite mercy, and He is just, and the Justifier of all who are just.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,726
13,522
113
If you had all the maxwell demons at your command, how many mechanisms are required to make a adequate energy sources, the appropriate timing, etc.., The likelihoods are hugely small. The just right mass, the just right energy at the just right time, are so out of the world that I must say someone is responsible r=that fiddled with the dials of the universe. "paraphrased hubble"
you only need one - one who separates the 'hot' from the 'cold'
but that one has to have infinite knowledge and infinite power, in order to identify what should be separated, and to carry out the actual separation

God is great! :)
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,366
13,728
113
the scripture provides a set of constraints ((we could call them parameters)) - optimal solutions are on the surface, the facets or corners of the N-dimensional prism defined by those constraints ((where N is the dimension of the scripture)).
things inside the prism are sub-optimal, but valid. things outside the prism are invalid. if we're looking for minima/maxima, they are found on the surface in N-space, because the surface defines the extreme values that meet the criteria defined by parameters.


for example if you want maximum X, and you know X must be less than or equal to 5, then {1, 3, 4} are solutions, but the optimal solution(s) all lie on the line X = 5
but imagine you have 10,000 inequalities like X ≤ 5, in 3,000 different variables. those all define a 3,000-dimensional geometry, like a diamond. the optimal solutions are on that diamond's edges, faces, or corners. if they turn out to be on a corner there is only one solution. but they could be on an edge or plane, in which case there is a whole family of solutions - potentially infinitely many, if the variables are real numbers instead of integers.


are people integer?
is truth integer?


:unsure:

scripture, IMO, is infinite-dimensional. it has to be, because it is the Word of God testifying about God, and God is infinite. so the scripture defines an infinite-dimensional prism embedded in infinite-plus-one space. there is a problem: maximize mercy subject to justice. there is an optimal solution: Jesus Christ -- He is the embodiment of God's infinite mercy, and He is just, and the Justifier of all who are just.
I actually understood most of that. 😱
 

kenallen

Active member
Apr 8, 2022
437
92
28
This is one of the many problems with King James English. Replenish is a poor translation. The better versions use "fill" instead of "replenish". I liked the word "replenish" as it supports my pre-Adamic creation view. But I am far more interested accuracy.
You and I are on the same page about the pre-Adamic creation. The reason the King James uses replenish is because there was an earth age before this one. Genises 1:1 In the beginning God created the earth. (period) Then something happened and the earth became void and without form. That is a study for a different time Read 2nd Peter 3,
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,366
13,728
113
You and I are on the same page about the pre-Adamic creation. The reason the King James uses replenish is because there was an earth age before this one.
You really can't accept that the KJV is wrong on this, can you?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
59,813
29,193
113
Genises 1:1 In the beginning God created the earth. (period) Then something happened and the earth became void and without form. That is a study for a different time Read 2nd Peter 3,
However, that is not what Genesis 1:1 says! Gosh. Also, saying "then something happened" as if that something happening caused the earth to be formless and void from some previous state of being formed and filled with ... what? Again, not what Scripture says. The heavens and the earth were created. The earth was formless and void. That is what Scripture says. Why must you add to it, and take away from it?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
59,813
29,193
113
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and void, and
darkness was over the surface of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters.


Adding to Scripture as you do only confuses you and leads you into error.

In Genesis 1:1-2, we see God beginning His work of creation.

It does not say version one of creation was scrapped and He began again with a second version.
It does not say anything at all about Adam being anything other than the first man He formed.


You make God out to be inept, and/or clueless about what He is doing.


Isaiah 46:10
:)
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
you only need one - one who separates the 'hot' from the 'cold'
but that one has to have infinite knowledge and infinite power, in order to identify what should be separated, and to carry out the actual separation


God is great! :)
Sorry posthuman fell took a nap and didn't wake up.
Yes, God is Great.
To see an invisible God, we can only witness the "teleology" of the situation. The impossibility of what was essentially made for humans. One of the criticism of religion from the atheists is that it is magic (inferred from debate of William Lane Craig vs Sean Carroll) But imagine how many engines and mechanisms are need to be produced what is an anthropic universe.

So to the question of the populated earth. One being produced for one Adam is in fact more special than an earth for 7 billion. When one says, that the 7 billion is obviously the creation of a greater glory, they do not consider the supernatural machines necessary for just one specimen.
 
Jul 24, 2021
494
78
28
the scripture provides a set of constraints ((we could call them parameters)) - optimal solutions are on the surface, the facets or corners of the N-dimensional prism defined by those constraints ((where N is the dimension of the scripture)).
things inside the prism are sub-optimal, but valid. things outside the prism are invalid. if we're looking for minima/maxima, they are found on the surface in N-space, because the surface defines the extreme values that meet the criteria defined by parameters.


for example if you want maximum X, and you know X must be less than or equal to 5, then {1, 3, 4} are solutions, but the optimal solution(s) all lie on the line X = 5
but imagine you have 10,000 inequalities like X ≤ 5, in 3,000 different variables. those all define a 3,000-dimensional geometry, like a diamond. the optimal solutions are on that diamond's edges, faces, or corners. if they turn out to be on a corner there is only one solution. but they could be on an edge or plane, in which case there is a whole family of solutions - potentially infinitely many, if the variables are real numbers instead of integers.


are people integer?
is truth integer?


:unsure:

scripture, IMO, is infinite-dimensional. it has to be, because it is the Word of God testifying about God, and God is infinite. so the scripture defines an infinite-dimensional prism embedded in infinite-plus-one space. there is a problem: maximize mercy subject to justice. there is an optimal solution: Jesus Christ -- He is the embodiment of God's infinite mercy, and He is just, and the Justifier of all who are just.
Yes exacly. The Functional - Glory of God may have many peaks. At first, I thought the "systematics" were line paths analogies, but to think it further, they are branes - acreage within the Scriptural constraints that satisfy the systematic (concepts that explain the interpretations). To be berean, the acreage must include the peaks - of all Functionals (Glory, Omnipotence, Omniscience, Omnibenevolence, etc...)
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,726
13,522
113
Sorry posthuman fell took a nap and didn't wake up.
Yes, God is Great.
To see an invisible God, we can only witness the "teleology" of the situation. The impossibility of what was essentially made for humans. One of the criticism of religion from the atheists is that it is magic (inferred from debate of William Lane Craig vs Sean Carroll) But imagine how many engines and mechanisms are need to be produced what is an anthropic universe.

So to the question of the populated earth. One being produced for one Adam is in fact more special than an earth for 7 billion. When one says, that the 7 billion is obviously the creation of a greater glory, they do not consider the supernatural machines necessary for just one specimen.
well the lesson of quantum mechanics is that existence is a function of a conscious observer. wave functions do not collapse by physical mechanisms but by non-physical observation by consciousness. this is demonstrated scientifically. the universe exists, therefore there is a universal observer: omniscient God.
His invisible qualities are clearly seen by that which is made - so that no one has any excuse. give that to the atheists :)

yes even one living soul is amazing! beyond comprehension. but God didn't only make the earth, but the stars, and the distant galaxies - incomprehensibly stretched out universe enormous in scope. why? they declare His glory & handiwork, and humble us.

so one man, many men -- He saves a multitude too great for anyone to number. every living animal soul, and a remnant of man.
this is for the angels to behold - those who saw Satan fall, and heard his lies: they are perplexed and amazed at the work God does. we are a witness to them.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,726
13,522
113
Yes exacly. The Functional - Glory of God may have many peaks. At first, I thought the "systematics" were line paths analogies, but to think it further, they are branes - acreage within the Scriptural constraints that satisfy the systematic (concepts that explain the interpretations). To be berean, the acreage must include the peaks - of all Functionals (Glory, Omnipotence, Omniscience, Omnibenevolence, etc...)
yes :)

infinite-dimensional membranes that are defined through the truth of scripture -- the real truth that is a crazily complex picture of Messiah in types and shadows and symbols and revelation, that we will never fully comprehend until we are resurrected and brough together with Him in all knowledge and wisdom and glory.
the peaks are our 'vertices' in the infinite prism; yes, amen


our current state, in this physical universe, with its ubiquitous, mysterious laws, is a picture of that, teaching us of Him just like all the scripture does - it has to be rightly divided ((literally, "to cut straight" as the construction of a road or the skillful handling of a sword, not actually meaning separate one thing from another and ignore half!)) - and rightly dividing ((cutting straight)) means recognizing that all of this is meant to teach us about who He is

((IMO))


so -- that original question, why so many human beings?
the answer has to be something about Him & His glory.
i agree it seems trivial to say, more saved = greater glory.
maybe that really is the case or maybe not. i didn't ask that question as some kind of test or anything; i really don't know - and i wonder at it!