Adam, Eve, and Evolution

[Mercy Shown]

That matters not under my models. Science does not claim absolute truths. It is always open to revision with new evidence.

Maybe science does, but humans are highly affected by confirmation bias, and scientists are human. Remember, the Piltdown man was presented to the world as fact. By the time "science" is exhibited to the public, particularly biology, it is always stated as fact.

Even in astronomy, we can see this happen. Is the Oort cloud real, or is it an invention to explain why there should be no loose comets roaming the galaxy after 4.5 billion years?

"Widely accepted" and "Consensus" has increasingly crept in to replace the scientific method. Currently, "science" has replaced apocalyptic religions in predicting the end of the world. Just review its predictions from the 1960s until today.

 

[Mercy Shown]

It is not an illusion. Both frameworks of time are physically real.



That matters not under my models. Science does not claim absolute truths. It is always open to revision with new evidence.


Right.

I speculate out of curiosity to reconcile (vertical) biblical creation and (horizontal) science. They are two different perspectives.

Both require faith.

 

[tonychanyt]

Maybe science does, but humans are highly affected by confirmation bias, and scientists are human. Remember, the Piltdown man was presented to the world as fact. By the time "science" is exhibited to the public, particularly biology, it is always stated as fact.

By science, I mean the scientific approach. I do not mean any particular scientist or groups of scientists.

Scientists have been arguing about the age of the universe for decades and still arguing.

 

[tonychanyt]

I think that scripture probably leaves some of these topics open ended. We just do not get much information on humanity prior to Adam.

Was Lucy a descendant of Eve?

 

[Job 33:6]

Was Lucy a descendant of Eve?

Were talking about a hypothetical ancestor of Adam. His grandma for example.

 

[tonychanyt]

Were talking about a hypothetical ancestor of Adam. His grandma for example.

Genesis 3:20
Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

How do you understand the above verse?

 

[Mercy Shown]

Was Lucy a descendant of Eve?

Do you mean like there was none according to scripture?

 

[tonychanyt]

Do you mean like there was none according to scripture?

Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

I understand the above literally.

 

[Jipsah]

what I believe and the biologists believe are all faith-based.

Nope. Biology, like any actual science, must be based on empoirical evidence if it's to be considered science at all,

Can someone believe in evolution and still be Christian? That is a question only God can answer.

No, I'll answer it right now, and the answer is "yes". If you don't believe that God could use evolution aif it suits His evend, then that's simply your opinion, held in opposition to observed fact.

From a theological perspective, believing in macroevolution reduces God to being only a super being because he loses his omnipotence.

Baloney. What you're saying is that you can't believe that God used evolution for His purposes, and therefore no one else should. Your opinion in the matter is worth the price charged.

It also throws a monkey wrench into His being a logical entity

Really? If He created the lifeforms He created to evolve then that's illigocal? Sez who?

since He used predation, violence, self-centeredness, and death to create a being; He then commands to love even its enemies. So Christianity becomes somewhat of a haphazard, illogical religion at best.

Trying to figure out where you're going with that. Are you denying the existence of predation, violence, self-centeredness, and death, or that God created the beings, or that He told His beings to love their enemies.

And yeah, Christianity does teach us to behave in contrdiction to our own natural tendencies. Surely you've noticed that.

It also turns Christ into somewhat of a rube who just fell off the turn-up truck because He believed in all of the major events of the Old Testament

I take it that you assume that our Lord has the same limited view of His creation that you do. New Flash: It is, after all, His Creation. created to His specs. If you can't fathom what He's up to, maybe it's due to you not knowing as much as He does. Radical concept, innit?

, even saying that From the beginning God created male and female. You would think that the person who through all things were created would have been aware of evolution.

Or that He intentionally set things up to work that way. Maybe He should asked your opinion on th subject first...

It also makes one wonder where in the bible did God stop lying to us

About what?

, if He even had anything to do with the formation of the bible.

Agan, without have evn asked for your opinion. Unacceptable!

So as you can see theologically, evolution does a pretty mean broadside to the bible

Better take that up with the Creator, then.

Since the bible claims that through one man (Adam), sin entered the world, and through one man (Jesus), sin was defeated. But if men have been clubbing each other since Luci walked the earth, that becomes fiction, which renders the cross meaningless.

I'm sorry, what? Are you denying the existence of sin, our Lord's triumph over it, or both?

Biblically based Christian theology and macroevolution are binary choices under boolean logic rules.

I'm sorry, but that's simple gibberish.

 

[Diamond72]

God isn't bound by time

God is bound by His word. He declares the end from the beginning, and he watches over His word to perform what He said He would do.

• Isaiah 46:10: "I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, ‘My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.’"
• Jeremiah 1:12: "The Lord said to me, 'You have seen correctly, for I am watching to see that my word is fulfilled.'"

These verses emphasize the belief that God has a sovereign plan and ensures the fulfillment of His promises.

Psalm 139 16
"Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be."

This verse is often interpreted to mean that God has a plan and purpose for each individual's life, knowing them completely even from the very beginning.

God gives us gifts, talents and abilities that we need to use to bring Him Praise, Honor and Glory.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Nope. Biology, like any actual science, must be based on empoirical evidence if it's to be considered science at all,

You make a true statement, that science is based on evidence, but fail to note that evolution is not based on evidence, it is based on inference and rather poor inference at that
Much of what is proposed to be scientific today is not scientific at all. The scientific method starts with an hypothesis, then looks for evidence to discredit it, that is called falsification.

Evolution makes an hypothesis then searches for evidence to prove it, and then discards all evidence to the contrary as “statistical anomalies”. That is narrative not science.
We see that throughout all experiments that try to prove evolution. There is no evidence for it, so it is forced, then ridicule and peer pressure are used to keep the narrative going.

I would be happy to look at any evidence that you have, but so far none is produced. We have a simple example of the proposition that chimps and humans evolved from a common ancestor

We hear about all kinds of so called evidence that it is true yet do not examine the contrary evidence or even believe the contrary can be true. Skeptics are written off as religious nuts

We have all heard that DNA has been analyzed and it is found that chimps and humans are about 99.2% identical. Sounds convincing until you realize that due to the size of the genome, that leaves 35,000,000 base pair differences.
Also what do we get for our 99.2%? We know genes code for protein. That 99% only gives us 20% of identical proteins. What is going on here?

Looks like the experiments that show 99% of the same base pair do not take into account a completely different genetic structure that could not have developed by natural selection

The more we look into cell structure, we see some of the most sophisticated nanotechnology ever conceived, all governed by the greatest computer language ever written. Instead of 1s and 0s, we have A,T, C, and G arranged in code that produces all life from a tiny virus to a human being. We are then told to believe this all happened by chance, or we have a “god of the gaps” that stated the natural selection process

Evolutionists never stop to think that the differences are so vast that natural selection could never produce evolution even if we had a quadrillion years, let alone the 4 billion we are told. Then there is the problem of solar radiation that produces genetic drift. Mutations produce cancer and devolution not evolution. We all worry about extinction going on around us. If evolution were true, we should see new life forms adapting not becoming extinct


The more we study, the more evolution is seen as a pseudoscience, because it is just a narrative enforced by politics, not scientific inquiry. And guess what? The emperor has no clothes

 

[tonychanyt]

evolution is not based on evidence

reference?

 

[boughtwithaprice]

reference?

If it were based on evidence, you could easily produce it. You would not have to ask me

 

[tonychanyt]

If it were based on evidence, you could easily produce it. You would not have to ask me

You made a claim, but you want me to produce the references to support your claim that I disagree with. Is this how your mind works?

 

[boughtwithaprice]

You made a claim, but you want me to produce the references to support your claim that I disagree with. Is this how your mind works?

It is difficult to prove a negative, and you should know this. If you really want to go through the tedious process of explanation, I will do it
However it is much easier to prove a positive. Your question to me without letting me know what you already believe, causes me to be suspect. If you had evidence, we could examine it, and save ourselves time

My references would be the scientific journals in which the claims are published. To unravel the narrative and analyze the data takes time.

Do you wish to spend that time?

Let’s see. Here is an article from the journal Gene in 2005

Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees​

Galina Glazko et al. Gene. 2005

They have the data point that the proteins are different, but they won’t give up the narrative that it came from evolution. They have to take a perspective that evolution is true a priori and then write their paper. In the article, we learn much more about what they don’t know rather than the story they are trying to push

The scientific mind deals with facts. The narrative mind is conjecture. This article uses both. The critical mind questions, especially when another is using inference instead of reality
An honest mind realizes its limitations, the tyrannical mind ignores inconsistencies and demands compliance. How would you like to proceed ?

That is how my mind works

 

[tonychanyt]

My references would be the scientific journals in which the claims are published.

Please provide the full bibliographic data of the reference. This is the last time I have asked.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Please provide the full bibliographic data of the reference. This is the last time I have asked.

You should be able to do a simple google search but here you go

Gene​

Volume 346, 14 February 2005, Pages 215-219

Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees​

Galina Glazko, Vamsi Veeramachaneni, Masatoshi Nei, Wojciech Makałowski

 

[tonychanyt]

You should be able to do a simple google search but here you go

Gene​

Volume 346, 14 February 2005, Pages 215-219

Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees​

Galina Glazko, Vamsi Veeramachaneni, Masatoshi Nei, Wojciech Makałowski

This is how to do referencing and quotation:

1. Display and indent the relevant text.
2. Selectively bold the particular keywords that are important to your point. There is no need to bold the entire sentence. Have a laser-sharp focus.

I do this for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. However, no one is required to do it; I prefer to interact with people who do.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

This is how to do referencing and quotation:

1. Display and indent the relevant text.
2. Selectively bold the particular keywords that are important to your point. There is no need to bold the entire sentence. Have a laser-sharp focus.

I do this for others who read my posts. It is a standard high-school scholarship. However, no one is required to do it; I prefer to interact with people who do.

We are not in high school and I offered to speak with you, you gave some indication that you would, yet continue excuses why you won’t

If you do not wish to speak then say so. We need not play your game

You originally stated that you took offense that I would ask you to do my work for me, yet you do not return the same courtesy. Rules for thee not for me? That will not lead to any kind of conversation, but is just a power dynamic

Change your mind? We will talk