Status
Not open for further replies.

joinfree

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2016
1,009
191
87
EU
✟36,708.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Darwin and the Bible. If there were no people before the very first person in history, then Darwinism is not right in front of the Church. And if Adam's dad was a monkey, then Adam must be a monkey. And he is the first person. We have come to a contradiction, therefore Darwin is not right.

 
  • Haha
Reactions: Lost4words

FatalFantasy

Active Member
Jan 30, 2019
121
71
50
Brisbane
✟2,057.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Darwin and the Bible. If there were no people before the very first person in history, then Darwinism is not right in front of the Church. And if Adam's dad was a monkey, then Adam must be a monkey. And he is the first person. We have come to a contradiction, therefore Darwin is not right.

Darwin doesn't have to be right, or wrong or anything. Darwins theories don't disprove a creator, you know what I mean?
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I'm going to be charitable and assume that the OP is rooted in ignorance of evolution and not a crude and poorly executed attempt to mock it.

Darwin and the Bible.

False dichotomy.

If there were no people before the very first person in history,

There was no "very first person". No offspring is ever born so different from it's parents that it would be considered a different species. What actually happens is mutations occur in individuals and if they confer an advantage the spread through the population over time. When enough mutations have happened over enough time that the population no longer interbreeds with related populations, speciation has occurred. Think in terms of language. There never was a first Spanish speaker. That is no Latin speaking family one day gave birth to a child that spoke Spanish. What actually happened is over time Latin "mutated" and broke into individual languages of Italian, Spanish and French.

And if Adam's dad was a monkey, then Adam must be a monkey. And he is the first person. We have come to a contradiction, therefore Darwin is not right.

The biggest problem here is your assumption that Adam existed. There's zero evidence that Adam was a literal first and only human. That said, you are on the cusp of understanding monophyly. Simply put, descendant populations never stop being what their ancestors were. As an example, whales are still terrestrial tetrapods despite no longer living on land or having four legs. Mammals are still amniotes despite no longer laying eggs (at least Therians don't). In that way, despite the changes to the Homo lineage and to sapiens in particular, humans are still simians.

Bullet point version.
  • Y Adam lived in a population of other humans that evolved from earlier Homo species.
  • He just happened to be the last male from which every other male on earth is descended.
  • No offspring is so different from the population that it would be a different species.
  • You never stop being what your ancestors were so humans are, taxonomically, monkeys.
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,200
3,821
45
✟917,256.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Darwin and the Bible. If there were no people before the very first person in history, then Darwinism is not right in front of the Church. And if Adam's dad was a monkey, then Adam must be a monkey. And he is the first person. We have come to a contradiction, therefore Darwin is not right.

Everything born is the same species as it's parents.

Y Chromosome Adam is the most recent male line common ancestor of humanity, not the first human.

There were many other humans alive at the same time as him.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

joinfree

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2016
1,009
191
87
EU
✟36,708.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Everything born is the same species as it's parents.

Y Chromosome Adam is the most recent male line common ancestor of humanity, not the first human.

There were many other humans alive at the same time as him.
Tell me about the very first human. Suppose, his name was also Adam. Was this human a monkey?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Cement

Active Member
Mar 24, 2018
320
257
37
Austin
✟55,782.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Darwin doesn't have to be right, or wrong or anything. Darwins theories don't disprove a creator, you know what I mean?

But Darwin's theories do disprove Genesis and if you cant take the Bible as fact you might as say the God of Abraham is not true.
 
Upvote 0

FatalFantasy

Active Member
Jan 30, 2019
121
71
50
Brisbane
✟2,057.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
But Darwin's theories do disprove Genesis and if you cant take the Bible as fact you might as say the God of Abraham is not true.
Okay I'm back! Fact you say? Literal or fact, because you can get truth from non literal sources.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Jimmy D
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

joinfree

Well-Known Member
Nov 3, 2016
1,009
191
87
EU
✟36,708.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Last edited:
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I am sorry! Jesus Loves you! But facts are simple:
1. There are humans on the planet, who are not apes. I am talking about 2019AC. Do you follow?

Humans are apes. I can explain to you why, but I want to make sure and clear up your abject confusion about Y Adam first. What in post #4 did you not understand that I can explain further for you?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: joinfree
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.