Humans

[lucaspa]

John, why don't you answer the points raised and stop picking a quote at random while ignoring everything else? I severely doubt this is the way your god would have wanted you to discuss - it simply sets a bad example.

It's possibly how John's god wants him to discuss. But not how God wants him to discuss. The more John writes, the more I am convinced that his god isn't God.

 

[lucaspa]

But I also agree with JohnR7 that Man is not an evolved creature, but a created one that has gone down in stature, not up.

Evidence for that? Remember that evolution is NOT a ladder leading to perfection. It is simply descent with modification. No "direction" implied, because that involves a value judgement of what is "up".

I personally do not doubt that the animals evolved, probably with direct intervention from God during certain periods. But I do believe that Man is a created being in the midst of that. So along that line of reasoning, it is possible that Mans genes have intermingled with some of the evolved creatures, for whatever reasons, and we may see some evidence of that in things like
"The problem is that some of our features, such as the intervertebral discs, are NOT optimally adapted for how we live today. They are still adapted to being a quadruped like our remote ancestors."
or they could have been designed that way from the beginning, for whatever reason.

What you are saying is that Adam and Eve had intercourse with, and produced children by, other species? Wow!! You are WAY off the Christian reservation now. Just threw all Chrisitianity out the window.

IF we are created beings, then why do we have so much similarity with chimps in our DNA and why are the sequences of our genes related via historical connections to all the other species on the planet? IF you are correct, THEN there should be some brick wall in our genome such that there is no connection to any other species.

Also, what do you do with all those transitional fossils linking us with H. erectus?

 

[lucaspa]

Between day three when Adam was first formed and day six when reformed into Adam and Eve could very well have been millions or billions of years as we measure time.

I can't wait to see the Biblical justification for this change of chronology.

And in the 2000 years between Adam and Eve and the flood many things could have occured, including selective breeding experiments between Man and some of the evolved life forms, maybe in the attempt to raise them to the level of Man.

Let's see, God is supposed to interfere with people created in HIS image and breed them to other species like prize cattle or dogs? This is why creationists are so dangerous to Christianity. In an attempt to avoid falsification of your hypothesis, you end up destroying God as a being worthy of respect and worship.

I do know it is a lot of speculation, but that is what you all are doing when trying to figure things out like unused (seemingly) or unnecessary (seemingly) genes.

There are sequences in our DNA known as pseudogenes. They used to be genes but have had the initiation sequence turned off and are now no longer expressed. The similarity between chimps and humans was calculated using these pseudogenes. If we were directly created, why have these non-coding genes to begin with? And then why make them so similar to chimp genes and less similar to genes of other species?

[QUOTE} Like we know all there is to know about our own genes, what they do, how they are dependant on each other from conception to death.{/QUOTE]

No, we don't. We know the base sequences but not the function of all the genes. For instance, we don't know the genes that commit embryonic stem cells to mesodermal, endodermal, or ectodermal tissues.

And tell me a logical reason why it can not be both ways, Man created and animals evolving?

Because, if it is true, then there is evidence that simply can't be there, such as those transitional fossils. So it is false.

We are the only ones mentioned as being in the image of God, so we are unique. And our history proves us to be unique on this planet. For whatever reason.

And this gets us back to your breeding experiments where God takes creatures in His image and forces them to breed with other species.

EVERY species is unique, and all history proves that. No other group of species than bees make honey. No other species besides the Komodo dragon kills its prey by waiting for the bacteria in its mouth to kill its prey by infection.

The reasons humans are unique seem to be two small adaptations:
1. The ability to make tools to make tools.
2. The ability to handle very abstract concepts.

If we are in the image of God, why do we have such an awful design for our intervertebral discs for the way we live?

 

[sfs]

And tell me a logical reason why it can not be both ways, Man created and animals evolving? We are the only ones mentioned as being in the image of God, so we are unique. And our history proves us to be unique on this planet. For whatever reason.

There are a number of reasons for thinking that humans evolved. One is the fossil record: as you look back in time, you see skeletons that look progressively less and less like modern humans, with smaller and smaller brains, with no sign of an abrupt change that would be a sign of a creation event. A more important one is genetics -- not just the genetic similarity between humans and other apes, but the detailed patterns you see recorded in our DNA. Our genes show every sign of having been accumulating mutations in a sizable population (at least in the thousands) for a long time (hundreds of thousands of years, at least). If we were descended from only a single couple a few thousand years ago, we would have much lower genetic diversity than we do, the frequencies of the different variants would show a very different pattern than they do, and DNA would be inherited in larger chunks than it is. Instead, what we see is exactly what we would expect if we had been evolving for millions of years. Also, the differences between humans and chimps, which have been looked at in some detail, look exactly like differences caused by mutations, e.g. sites that mutate rapidily are more likely to be different than sites that mutate slowly.

 

[Freodin]

The answer is "self-image".

You look, you see - you conclude.

So man concludes that humans must have always been the way they are now (or better), earth must have always been the way it is now (or better) - and of course that projects into the future as well.

But did anyone consider the possibility that Adam and Eve were quadrupeds, and our bipedal movement is an effect of the "Fall"? No, of course not - that would be blasphemy against the holy image of humans.

 

[Duane Morse]

I did not say that Adam and Eve had intercourse with other species, I said that maybe there were experiments conducted. And I did not say that God interbreeded Man with others, either. Man is the only agent necessary for any interference in the natural order of things.

Similarities in DNA does not exclude the possibility of Man being a created being, does it? Would a created being necessarily have a much different DNA than those that evolved?

Adam was first formed before the plants, as you can see in Genesis chapter 2. That is on day three of the overall seven day creation in Genesis 1. Genesis 2:5 picks up in day three, and the accounts of chapters 1 and 2 are interleaved.
Adam was around from day three, not six. It was in day 6 that Adam was put to sleep for the purpose of removing Eve.

And as for genetic diversity, read the account of Babel, when language and speech were changed. All the different "races" could have been differentiated at that point.

 

[JohnR7]

It's possibly how John's god wants him to discuss. But not how God wants him to discuss. The more John writes, the more I am convinced that his god isn't God.

Is this another personal attack on me?

Do you want to discuss science, creation & evolution, or do you just want to discuss me?

 

[JohnR7]

Evidence for that? Remember that evolution is NOT a ladder leading to perfection. It is simply descent with modification. No "direction" implied, because that involves a value judgement of what is "up".

Clearly the Bible teaches there is a direction:

2 Tim. 3:13
But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.

We see here that people who are deceived are going in a direction that just gets worse and worse.

Proverbs 4:18
But the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.

Those who are just are indeed heading toward perfection. So that apart from God, everything gets worse and worse. But when God is a apart of it, everything just keeps getting better and better.

 

[Jet Black]

Clearly the Bible teaches there is a direction:

but EVOLUTION does not have a direction.

 

[wblastyn]

Those who are just are indeed heading toward perfection. So that apart from God, everything gets worse and worse. But when God is a apart of it, everything just keeps getting better and better.

It's obviously talking about spiritual perfection not physical. Although when Jesus returns we supposedly get perfect bodies, but that is not evolution.

 

[sfs]

Similarities in DNA does not exclude the possibility of Man being a created being, does it? Would a created being necessarily have a much different DNA than those that evolved?

Genetics cannot exclude the possibility that humans were created (i.e. created by a special miracle), provided they were created to look exactly like they'd evolved, and provided they were created in large numbers.

Adam was first formed before the plants, as you can see in Genesis chapter 2. That is on day three of the overall seven day creation in Genesis 1. Genesis 2:5 picks up in day three, and the accounts of chapters 1 and 2 are interleaved.
Adam was around from day three, not six. It was in day 6 that Adam was put to sleep for the purpose of removing Eve.

Genesis 1 places the creation of man (male and female) squarely in day 3.

And as for genetic diversity, read the account of Babel, when language and speech were changed. All the different "races" could have been differentiated at that point.

That doesn't help much. The great bulk of the genetic diversity exists within ethnic groups, not between them.

 

[nyj]

[rules]Avoid making personal attacks folks. Thanks.[/rules]

 

[Duane Morse]

"Genesis 1 places the creation of man (male and female) squarely in day 3."

Genesis 1 places the creation of Man in day six. It is in Genesis 2 that shows that Man was first formed on day three.

Genesis 1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them....And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

This clearly picks up in the third day in Genesis 1. Then it catches up to day 6 here

Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

On day three Man becomes a living soul, and on day six Man is separated into its respective male and female components.

The day six account in Genesis 1...
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them....

...also shows first a singular "him". then a plural "them.

And since Adam had named all the animals before being put to sleep, Adam had to be around prior to day six in the account of Genesis 1 to do the naming.

 

[JohnR7]

It's obviously talking about spiritual perfection not physical. Although when Jesus returns we supposedly get perfect bodies, but that is not evolution.

We will be glorifed as He is glorified. When Jesus walked this earth there was no record of Him ever being sick. I believe we can be just as healthy as He was, in His physical body. I don't suppose that would mean much to an evolutionists that does not see Jesus as being any different than anyone else.

 

[wblastyn]

We will be glorifed as He is glorified. When Jesus walked this earth there was no record of Him ever being sick. I believe we can be just as healthy as He was, in His physical body. I don't suppose that would mean much to an evolutionists that does not see Jesus as being any different than anyone else.

By "evolutionists" do you mean atheists?

 

[JohnR7]

"Genesis 1 places the creation of man (male and female) squarely in day 3."

I never heard that man was created on the third day of creation. That is sort of interesting. I believe Adam and Eve of the Garden of Eden were created on the 8 th day. They were a man and a women or a husband and a wife. The male and female that God created on the 5 th day were given dominion over the whole earth.

Most people believe that modern man showed up around 9.000 years ago at the end of the last major ice age. Then written history begins about 6000 years ago.

 

[JohnR7]

By "evolutionists" do you mean atheists?

I guess I was meaning anyone that does not see Jesus as being divinity. That just see Him as another man. They usually believe He was a great teacher. But they do not accept His divinity.

 

[Duane Morse]

"I never heard that man was created on the third day of creation. That is sort of interesting. I believe Adam and Eve of the Garden of Eden were created on the 8 th day."

And I do not see an 8th day. Everything seems to happen in the seven day period. I think that we are still in day 6 of the Genesis 1 account, or just beginning the 7th day.

To me it appears that Genesis 2:5 until the end of Revelation is a more detailed account of the 7 days of creation in Genesis 1 through Genesis 2:4, from day 3 through the end of day 7, and dealing specifically with Man and the Plan of Salvation.

 

[lucaspa]

I did not say that Adam and Eve had intercourse with other species, I said that maybe there were experiments conducted. And I did not say that God interbreeded Man with others, either. Man is the only agent necessary for any interference in the natural order of things.

Duane, you said "And in the 2000 years between Adam and Eve and the flood many things could have occured, including selective breeding experiments between Man and some of the evolved life forms, maybe in the attempt to raise them to the level of Man."

Strange that those experiments got left out of the Bible, isn't it? Not much of an historical record if it leaves out such important events like that.

Who else but God is going to conduct the breeding experiments? What you are proposing is not "interference in the natural order of things" but what is actually the natural order! After all, you are trying to explain why our genes are so similar to other species. That's ALL of us. Not a select subpopulation. We are supposed to have remained the same as we were created. That's the whole idea of having God create us directly. Besides, if we were the truly separate creation creationism claims, then such interbreeding would be impossible. Right?

Similarities in DNA does not exclude the possibility of Man being a created being, does it? Would a created being necessarily have a much different DNA than those that evolved?

For the same reason that Macintosh computers are not PCs. Each is a manufactured artifact, and therefore different. A distinct barrier between them. So humans are a manufactured artifact of God with such a barrier between them and all other creatures. That's what you are claiming.

It's not just that the DNA sequences are similar, but that they are RELATED THRU THEIR HISTORICAL CONNECTIONS. By creationism, there are no historical connections.

Adam was first formed before the plants, as you can see in Genesis chapter 2. That is on day three of the overall seven day creation in Genesis 1. Genesis 2:5 picks up in day three, and the accounts of chapters 1 and 2 are interleaved.
Adam was around from day three, not six. It was in day 6 that Adam was put to sleep for the purpose of removing Eve.

LOL! I love the machinations people come up with trying to reconcile Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Remember Genesis 1:27? Male and female created TOGETHER on day 6. No way around that if you are reading literally. Also, in Genesis 2, there are plants before Adam; they just aren't growing.

And as for genetic diversity, read the account of Babel, when language and speech were changed. All the different "races" could have been differentiated at that point.

Languages change without corresponding genetic changes. Look at the development of English out of French and Saxon. No major genetic changes involved.

I hate to tell you, but all the genetic diversity in humans -- all 6 billion of us across 7 continents -- is LESS THAN A SMALL POPULATION OF CHIMPS in Africa. What we are talking about is not genetic diversity, but GENETIC SIMULARITY with other species.

9. A Gibbons, Studying humans -- and their cousins and parasites. Science 292:627-629, April 27, 2001. Low genetic diversity among humans, less than all other primates. Bottleneck about 200,000 years ago.

 

[Nathan Poe]

We will be glorifed as He is glorified. When Jesus walked this earth there was no record of Him ever being sick.

There is also no record of him ever smiling, laughing, trimming his toenails, or going to the bathroom. Yet we assume he did these things.

If Christ did catch a cold, do you think his biographers would record every last sneeze?