A prophecy is one person's vision of what may come to pass. No prophecy is set in stone.
Which came first the chicken or the egg. Did god prophesize the chicken and then it manifested inside the egg? If we see the end product do we then hatch the chicken? Or was the egg always a chicken?
I think the reason that some of the prophecies of the bible have come to pass is because thought can manifest into form.
The bible is a book of fables, a fable is a myth or legend. All myths and legends have a bit of truth because the stories came from somewhere.
Was there a garden of Eden, probably maybe it was on earth may be it wasn't. Adam is a generic term for man in hebrew and eve means life. Was there a great flood? Well several ancient texts contain a flood story. The first dates from the 2nd millennium BC and is called the "Epic of Gilgamesh". The "bible" on the other hand is less than 4,000 years old. As for the countless other stories they may or may not hold a bit of history, that is why it is call faith.
Oh you meant eggs as in ANY egg..
I was assuming CHICKEN eggs..
But for the chicken egg vs the chicken, it's obviously the chicken, because there would be nothing to manufacture the egg's shell from cells, because cells... don't grow up in such a shape.
Obviously if its Any Egg vs Chicken then obviously the eggs, as we can see in cell reproduction, and in humans, that eggs were obviously from some form cellular reproduction..
Actually kts, I've read it.. but then why does it still have a Vote thingy of which one came first?
=|!?
"He said: "Eggs were around long before the first chicken arrived. Of course, they may not have been chicken eggs as we see them today, but they were eggs."
["He told PA people were mistaken if they argued that the mutant egg belonged to the "non-chicken" bird parents.
"I would argue it is a chicken egg if it has a chicken in it," he said.
"If a kangaroo laid an egg from which an ostrich hatched, that would surely be an ostrich egg, not a kangaroo egg."] - That I don't get his logic, how a KANGAROO would lay a winged + mutant kangaroo BIRD called an OSTRICH..
They're two frigging different animals, doesn't the article writer know their genetics? And don't say I don't know mine, I've spent 4 days in a Scientific Research Org for Work Experience.
Having studies genetics years ago while I was in college. I can understand how confusing it can be. People dropped like fruit flies from the class due to the difficult nature of the beast. Here is a simple version of what science has to say about genetics; The genetics of a being do not change during the course of that beings lifetime. All the genetic info is "set in stone" when a new being is created. This means that the first chicken had to be inside an egg, because this is where the genetic makeup was created. Please read the following link. I found another one that may be a bit easier to read and understand.
As always science has theories that include evidence, not proof. That is why you can debate the theory but to do so in an educated, nonreligious manner you must include evidence to your theory. Not just your opinion.
I am a strict Catholic. I totally believe it. I think that we also need to realize that nowhere in the Bible does it prohibit witchcraft. King Solomon was a sorceror for goodness sake! I totally believe it, and I believe that it can coexist with witchcraft and sorcery.
