What human species was Adam and Eve?

[Brightmoon]

What happened was two middle ear bones were created to move the jaw up and close the space between the ears and jaw. In the process, an extra jaw bone was lost. This created a tradeoff: reduced mobiilty of the jaw to gain better hearing. Synapsid just means the animal has two holes on each side of the skull so I don't think they are necessarily related developments.

mammals ARE synapsids. we never evolved out of that lineage . The ancestral synapsid jaw, just like a modern reptile jaw ,had more than one bone . The jaw didn’t become less mobile in mammals, some of which can chew . ancestral synapsids, like the classic reptiles, can’t

 

[dcalling]

Sins have nothing to do with a perosn's colors, height, nose shape, etc. Those are natural genetic traits. I know short people are at a disadvantage, but why would you believe that about having brown hair or not having a widow's peak on your head?

Where in my original post did I say anything about person's colors/height etc with sins? You either misread my post or trying to put words in my mouth.

By gene corruption, I mean things like recessive traits that got gradually introduced into our genes by errors in copy pasting.

 

[dcalling]

. Lol , you think blue eyes are a corruption ! Ok , humans have blue eyes because the gene for melanin production is turned off in the iris. It’s not a “ corruption” . I’m still giggling over that one. you made my day!

where did I ever say that? You are just putting words into my mouth.

eye color/skin color are all just parameters in the software world, i.e. those are styles people can put on (maybe adam can change his skin color or his kids). God allows certain changes in our software to put styles, like branding on websites.

The real corruptions are simple, i.e. none-style changes that are outside of God's design parameters, i.e. when certain functionality God put in the gene got lost or corrupted. Have you heard that human Y chromsome are getting shorter?

 

[dcalling]

this is the problem with the literalist view, it forces all sorts of stuff that the text simply cannot support or even hints at. Your perspective even contradicts itself because who do you think Cain and Seth had children with? a literalist has to say their own sister as the only option (or else their mother).

I wonder why is this a problem? Where is my contradiction?

I am almost certain that Cain and Seth had children with their sisters, because those are the only humans exists at the time! Did you read my text about how human genes are perfect at the time, and you can marry your sister with no issues? It is only later (after our genes corrupted to certain degree) that God give the commandments not to marry close kins.

 

[Kate30]

this is the problem with the literalist view, it forces all sorts of stuff that the text simply cannot support or even hints at. Your perspective even contradicts itself because who do you think Cain and Seth had children with? a literalist has to say their own sister as the only option (or else their mother).

Damian I don’t see any problem. Adam and Eve lived for hundreds of years. So no doubt they had daughters too. Yes there was marriage between sisters and brothers. And this is well documented throughout many ancient cultures across the world. So where is the contradiction you think. The creation of Adam and Eve is a literal account.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Where in my original post did I say anything about person's colors/height etc with sins? You either misread my post or trying to put words in my mouth.

By gene corruption, I mean things like recessive traits that got gradually introduced into our genes by errors in copy pasting.

When you say recessive traits are corruption as a blanket statement, you imply all of them are caused by the fall, not just happening after it by coincidence. I was explaining genetic corruption is not the reason a recessive gene would be expressed; that is just nature.

 

[Brightmoon]

Where in my original post did I say anything about person's colors/height etc with sins? You either misread my post or trying to put words in my mouth.

By gene corruption, I mean things like recessive traits that got gradually introduced into our genes by errors in copy pasting.

Human skin color is a response to UV radiation levels and the ability to use folate and vitamin D . Melanin is also found in the iris of the eye and in the ear where it assists with hearing( btw this is why white, blue eyed cats are deaf)

The trait for darker skin has been lost and re- evolved at times . It was not due to genetic front loading in the cells of Adam and Eve

 

[DamianWarS]

It is only later (after our genes corrupted to certain degree) that God give the commandments not to marry close kins.

source?

this runs again into the problem of inventing too much stuff to reconcile the accounts. The text doesn't support this or hints at it.

 

[DamianWarS]

Damian I don’t see any problem. Adam and Eve lived for hundreds of years. So no doubt they had daughters too. Yes there was marriage between sisters and brothers. And this is well documented throughout many ancient cultures across the world. So where is the contradiction you think. The creation of Adam and Eve is a literal account.

it's a problem when you are linking specific physical traits with some sort of digressing sin gene as the result of incest. Where does the Bible teach this? incest was since the beginning, you can even argue that Eve had the same DNA as Adam since she was made out of Adam's rib. are we trying to say that 2500 years of incest was the magic time when it no longer became sustainable and the body became too corrupted? When do we start saying these theories are too irresponsible and can not be supported by the text regardless if they are designed to reconcile a literal view or not.

 

[dcalling]

source?

this runs again into the problem of inventing too much stuff to reconcile the accounts. The text doesn't support this or hints at it.

The source is from the Bible itself. Abraham and Job all married close relatives. God give the marriage commandments (i.e. sister, father/mother's daughter) in leviticus 18 etc, at time of Moses.

I am not inventing stuff to reconcile the accounts, I am simply stating the fact that if your genes are good, close kin marriage is not an issue.

 

[dcalling]

Human skin color is a response to UV radiation levels and the ability to use folate and vitamin D . Melanin is also found in the iris of the eye and in the ear where it assists with hearing( btw this is why white, blue eyed cats are deaf)
View attachment 257935
The trait for darker skin has been lost and re- evolved at times . It was not due to genetic front loading in the cells of Adam and Eve

More like God designed the ability for human skin to adopt (i.e. change of designed configurable parameter) instead of lost/re-evolved.

Below are my answer to your old question that you didn't acknowledge.

Yes it’s possible to make up just so stories . But scientists don’t do that. They have verifiable physical evidence for their claims , you only have a bunch of short paragraphs from a very old book and you’re making up your genetic information

You are confusing the topics. I am refuting you claim that 2 people can't populate the entire earth, my claim is if their genes are perfect they can. What part of making up story is there? Do you deny the scientific possibly of it? Do you realize that?

 

[dcalling]

When you say recessive traits are corruption as a blanket statement, you imply all of them are caused by the fall, not just happening after it by coincidence. I was explaining genetic corruption is not the reason a recessive gene would be expressed; that is just nature.

The fall is the start of it, i.e. when we are with God, there is no corruption. When we are without God and with sin, those copy paste errors can occur.

The genes are like software code, errors can occur during replication (or by other factors such as radiation etc). When you see a beautiful palace in a desert, you know someone build it, and when you see software code as complex as human DNA, you know someone designed it.

 

[Kate30]

it's a problem when you are linking specific physical traits with some sort of digressing sin gene as the result of incest. Where does the Bible teach this? incest was since the beginning, you can even argue that Eve had the same DNA as Adam since she was made out of Adam's rib. are we trying to say that 2500 years of incest was the magic time when it no longer became sustainable and the body became too corrupted? When do we start saying these theories are too irresponsible and can not be supported by the text regardless if they are designed to reconcile a literal view or not.

Damian that is how God chose to populate the earth from one family Adam and Eve. And yes your right Eve did come from Adams gene makeup as well. But as the gene pool deteriorated over time, biblical laws were implemented as Decalling did explain in post 130. The bible no longer teaches family unions in marriage for that very reason. Though it is still practiced as seen amongst many of the royal families and others . But you do so at your own risk with a much higher chance of birth defects. I try not to dabble in theories. But you can go with the ever shifting opinions and theories of science if you like. I’d much rather have my beliefs rooted in the word of God and my faith in Jesus Christ which leads to eternal life.

 

[rjs330]

Of course we did not evolve from fish. That idea was pure fantasy. I do not believe we came from reptiles either. But I hate it when people insist just because Adam and Eve were not related to chimpanzees like a majority of paleontologists claim means it is impossible to have any sort of biological evolution.

Exactly. There is absolutely some evolutionary processes in nature. Just like the bird (don't remember what the name is off the top of my head) that had wings that evolved to become stronger so it could fly to England. That kind of stuff is part of nature. But the evolution from a common ancestor is not.

So the human race has evolved in some fashion. That's why I said I don't know what Adam and Eve looked like. Were they really tall? What color was their skin? How well could they see? Etc.

 

[DamianWarS]

The source is from the Bible itself. Abraham and Job all married close relatives. God give the marriage commandments (i.e. sister, father/mother's daughter) in leviticus 18 etc, at time of Moses.

I am not inventing stuff to reconcile the accounts, I am simply stating the fact that if your genes are good, close kin marriage is not an issue.

Your inventing the rule based on assumption.

 

[rjs330]

Thumps Bible and says he or she doesn’t believe scientists . But you never check it out either to see who is giving accurate information . That’s called an argument from ignorance and it’s an easy way to get conned. Unlike you, I have checked out both sides . Creationists have outright lied ;obfuscated ; use inaccurate newspeak definitions of scientific terminology and simply refuse to admit that they’re wrong even though some of the refuting evidence for creationist ideas is over 250 years old

How many evolutionists have lied and come up with hoaxes?

One thing I do agree with is that you can't prove creation by any scientific method. How do you show God created man out of dust with his power and breath? Not possible.

So most creationists try to show how evolution is not possible. Cause that's all the any scientific thought can do. It cannot do the impossible.

 

[DamianWarS]

Damian that is how God chose to populate the earth from one family Adam and Eve. And yes your right Eve did come from Adams gene makeup as well. But as the gene pool deteriorated over time, biblical laws were implemented as Decalling did explain in post 130. The bible no longer teaches family unions in marriage for that very reason. Though it is still practiced as seen amongst many of the royal families and others . But you do so at your own risk with a much higher chance of birth defects. I try not to dabble in theories. But you can go with the ever shifting opinions and theories of science if you like. I’d much rather have my beliefs rooted in the word of God and my faith in Jesus Christ which leads to eternal life.

This idea that there was some pure gene break down over sinful generations is an invention that the bible does not support. This is the "theory" and it is being used to reconcile literal accounts. I am agnostic to what happened so I don't depend on theories to maintain my position.

 

[Kate30]

This idea that there was some pure gene break down over sinful generations is an invention that the bible does not support. This is the "theory" and it is being used to reconcile literal accounts. I am agnostic to what happened so I don't depend on theories to maintain my position.

Before the flood people such as Methuselah were living up to a thousand yrs. After the flood there are accounts of a few people living to over 200yrs. But for most people today the century mark does see most of us deceased. Our gene pool is not what it used to be. And I think that is good thing for our bodies are in a most ghastly state of affairs come the three score and ten. So Damian how does a agnostic view the possibility of a Supreme power or supreme Being.

 

[DamianWarS]

Before the flood people such as Methuselah were living up to a thousand yrs. After the flood there are accounts of a few people living to over 200yrs. But for most people today the century mark does see most of us deceased. Our gene pool is not what it used to be. And I think that is good thing for our bodies are in a most ghastly state of affairs come the three score and ten. So Damian how does a agnostic view the possibility of a Supreme power or supreme Being.

I'm not agnostic about God, I'm agnostic about what happened in the early Genesis accounts, meaning I don't know what happened except that God was the force behind it (which admittingly isn't completely agnostic) but it does mean I'm not forcing a scientific view. Also, Gen 6 tells us why men's lives are shorter, what it doesn't tell us is it's from a corrupted gene pool. When we focus too much on the in between the lines information we end up warping the meaning of the text to fit a perspective it is not meant to support. leave the text alone and see how it points to God and gives him glory, not how it can be plausible in a literal vacuum (because it can't so just stop trying).

 

[dcalling]

Your inventing the rule based on assumption.

Which part did I invent? God told us what happened in the Bible, I am simply trusting in Him.
And What's your idea that does not need invention? So you are saying that you don't believe in the genesis account is not invention? Do you believe that God can't keep his message straight?