>26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
What did he mean by this?
He means you're a good goyim and you should give more money to the offering
?
>let us make
>us
He means there are many of them.
Did you not get the answer you wanted last time?
Go ask your fucking priest instead of shit posting such low quality "contributions."
Here: learn to fucking read, biblehub.com
I think the first part is less important that the 'rule over' (stewardship/dominion) part.
I'm not religious, it just seems that many people who claim this book is the word of God seem to ignore such a fundamental part.
Most of the people who believe or claim Genesis 1 to be the word of God have never read it. Even the Jews who are required to sit through it in a yearly cycle do not attend, in general, to the text.
If you want sociology of religion then the explanation is that while the book is used to authorise conducts, it is not the font of conducts or beliefs—rather the social system of authorisation is the basis for the claim and the ignorance of the claim.
No, it just confirms He's British.
I'm much more interested in why the old testament has two seperate creation myths.
In the first chapter of Genesis God creates everything, and all is fine and dandy. But then immediately in the second chapter the creation of man is described and everything is just all mixed up and the order is completely different and nothing makes any sense.
It means that we are the masters of this planet with nobody but God above us and dumbshit concepts like animal rights belong to the trash.
Who's talking about animal rights, a smart ruler doesn't drive what he's ruling to extinction.
I'm all for pest control of harmful introduced species.
>Who's talking about animal rights
Animals rights groups. There are legitimately people who believe that human rights should extend to chimps and dolphins and the likes, Genesis blows these people the fuck out.
You've verged off into politics, mate.
>I'm all for pest control of harmful introduced species.
There's unforeseen consequences even for that, sometimes.
Be perfect and omniscient - and put flawed mortals with limited mental capacity in charge of ruling a biosphere with so many interwoven system that the most powerful computers of today can't sort through them, yet rig it up so these new rulers may all die along with their kingdom if they do a shit job. ...for shiggles? (Oh, and don't tell them about microbes and plankton, let them work that out for themselves.)
Besides, arguably, the PETA idiots, if they were actually sticking to their mission statement, rather than just making money, would be doing exactly as proscribed in the verse - ruling over the fish and birds etc. only with more shield than sword. ...and as stupidly shortsighted as one would expect.
>There's unforeseen consequences even for that, sometimes.
Of course, but in Australia it's a bit more straight forward compared to most places.
>Of course, but in Australia it's a bit more straight forward compared to most places.
Wha?
This is a land where you've a species that is so inbred they are literally capable of passing cancers to one another.
Where so many species have been so isolated for so long the introduction of new species and the method to eliminate them have entirely unimaginable results.
Where the army was defeated by Emus...
^ ...and where the types of weather include: "sunny", "rainy", "stormy", "firey", and "spiders".
Seriously, no one has any idea what's going to happen next out there.
I meant mostly in terms of native and introduced species, some such as cats, foxes, cane toads, camels, can easily be seen to have more negative impacts, and even then there's interactions between dingo, fox and cats keeping each others populations in check. The tasmanian devil cancer isn't due to inbreeding, but the cancer itself originally arose from one individual and is genetically the same iirc, and is the only known infectious cancer.
>Mentioning emu's around an Australia with no trigger warming
what kind of bastard are you.
>Australian animal extinctions from 1788 to the present. There are 24 birds, 78 frogs, and 27 mammal species or subspecies strongly believed to have become extinct since European settlement of Australia.
>that background extinction rate
theconversation.com
Did they ever teach you the song of "The Lady who Swallowed a Fly..." as a child?
Getting rid of an invasive species, is often kinda similar, in that the solution is often worse than the problem.
checked
Yea I know the song, perfect example being the cane toad for cane beetles, but the prickly pear cactus and the moth introduced to deal with it worked well.
>Prickly pears (mostly Opuntia stricta) were imported into Australia in the 19th century for use as a natural agricultural fence and in an attempt to establish a cochineal dye industry. Many of these, especially the Tiger Pear[citation needed], quickly became widespread invasive species, rendering 40,000 km2 (15,000 sq mi) of farming land unproductive. The moth Cactoblastis cactorum from South America, whose larvae eat prickly pear, was introduced in 1925 and almost wiped out the population. This case is often cited[1] as an example of successful biological pest control.
/pol/ack detected
Jew detected
Plebs detected
entnemdept.ufl.edu
With a system this interconnected, and made so much more so by global transportation, you can't hardly fix one thing without breaking another.
I think what he meant by that is to give the already living homo sapiens a soul, contiousness and a free will, just like him and the angels, that's why he says "us" and "our"
Think about it, when did civilization begin, and how old is the world approximately according to the Bible, and how long did homo sapiens exist as nothing more than hyperplebs living like monkeys. He gave them Dominion over the world, that's how civilization sprung up
Opuntia in the US seems like possums in Aus compared to NZ, protected species here, pest species there. Eucalyptus are a bit of a problem in the US too aren't they?