Humans are made in the image of God according to Genesis. Adam ("À'thome" is how one might transliterate Adam in Hebrew, meaning Man, Mankind) was made by God from the very dirt of the Earth itself into His likeness.
Wikipedia lists the origin of the human race as regards "science" but leaves out the origin of the word, "human." Wikipedia, says nothing of God, nor would I really expect it to, but gives in a very detailed manner "where we came from." I want to know how is it they know the details of our ancestry but can't seem to define human.
The site, along with any secular and "scientific" source of "information" speak of "Evolution of Man" or "Evolution of Homo Sapien" - but do not often use the word, "human." Why? Well, I think for one, because scientists are not too keen to point out the source of the Latin for human, humanus. In fact, I never saw it school listed, and find it rarely alluded to in any works written in the last 250 years. Most modern listings say it is probably related to homo (meaning Man) - and they usually leave it at that.
The word comes from around 1250AD, from the French, humain, (of or belonging to man) from the Latin, humanus (gen. hominis) from homo (Man) and humus (meaning earth, soil, dirt) Man of Earth. (That doesn't mean earthman like space stories or such) Those who made the word remembered the "from ashes to ashes and from dust to dust" line and understood well that the life we have been given is by the Breath of God.
So, yes, of dirt we were made, and yet remain and will one day return. If there is any good in us, it is with the Breath that our Lord put into us. Let us put to death that which decays and build up that which is spiritual through Him. Nothing that isn't put to death will be resurrected.
I heard a joke that made my point fairly well:
"One day mankind's science had become so vast that humans decided they didn't need God anymore. So they sent a delegate up to meet Him.
The scientist said, 'Well, as you may know, we have advanced far beyond what religions can do for us. We can create life now ourselves, and we have decided that we don't need you any more.'
'Oh,' says God, 'I understand. I know that you can do much, but I didn't know that you could make life without Me. That is interesting. Shall we have look?'
At this the scientist jumped, 'Yes! And if we can do so, will you agree that you are not needed anymore?'
'Sure, I'm always glad to oblige. If you can do it with out Me, then I will be very impressed indeed. Shall we each make a Man on our own, from scratch?'
'That sounds fair,' said the scientist as he bent down to get a handful of dirt to start.
'No, no,' said God, 'go get your own dirt.'
3 comments:
Just to be fair, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. So the reason Wikipedia's article is the way it is is because it's an encyclopedia more than because it is secular. Take a look at Wiktionary, and you'll get what was you claimed was missing in Wikipedia due to its secular nature. Though for etymologies I always prefer Etymonline.
Besides, it's not fair to call Wikipedia a particularly "secular" or "Christian" source of information. The only thing Wikipedia tries to be is an encyclopedia, nothing else.
Ah, but in that it is a publicly open encyclopedia, one giving a "description" of humans, how can one describe something without at the very least defining it?
Inclusively, a viable description must include the "history" of said creature. Secular or religious (of any kind), a "mythology" should at least be taken into account - if for nothing other than a socio-anthropological footnote.
Well you can go ahead and add that section then =). Anybody can become a Wikipedian
Post a Comment