amorphous_constellation
Well-Known Member
In the NIV bible for example, one notices that god is credited with the creation of 'livestock.' God provides the plant matter we eat. There are instances of dogs and horses in the bible. At present and in the past, all of these are standout organisms because they seem to serve us more than others..
But god did not create corn, or pug dogs, or obedient hunting dogs, or tame the cattle and horses for us, argues general history. Nor are these organisms really to be considered as 'subdued' organisms that god originally created, for they would no longer be originals, if domestication is not a myth. For it is not merely subduing an organism, to go from a strand of grass to a stalk of corn, or from a wolf to basset hound. This is instead the transformation of original work. Did god say to transform his work to subdue it then?
If we were the domesticators, and god was not, then I can't see a biblical argument against transhumanism, as the way toward that end is well paved. Where one can claim that domestication is not a sin, then neither is changing, or 'subduing,' the body for human benefit. This works well with dualism preached by Paul, and spartan attitude toward the body as expressed by Jesus.
For where Jesus said to modify the body if causes you to sin, then humans are free to enhance the body. If you had plant genes, and could get carbon by opening your mouth to the sun, and this would combine with water in your body, then you would never starve, and never feel the need to steal to sate your belly. This also works well with Paul, whose version of the religion held that soul was indestructible, but the flawed body needed taming
But god did not create corn, or pug dogs, or obedient hunting dogs, or tame the cattle and horses for us, argues general history. Nor are these organisms really to be considered as 'subdued' organisms that god originally created, for they would no longer be originals, if domestication is not a myth. For it is not merely subduing an organism, to go from a strand of grass to a stalk of corn, or from a wolf to basset hound. This is instead the transformation of original work. Did god say to transform his work to subdue it then?
If we were the domesticators, and god was not, then I can't see a biblical argument against transhumanism, as the way toward that end is well paved. Where one can claim that domestication is not a sin, then neither is changing, or 'subduing,' the body for human benefit. This works well with dualism preached by Paul, and spartan attitude toward the body as expressed by Jesus.
For where Jesus said to modify the body if causes you to sin, then humans are free to enhance the body. If you had plant genes, and could get carbon by opening your mouth to the sun, and this would combine with water in your body, then you would never starve, and never feel the need to steal to sate your belly. This also works well with Paul, whose version of the religion held that soul was indestructible, but the flawed body needed taming
Last edited:
