All your points were adressed, but you never answered the following:
- Where is the evidence Christianity is a universal religion?
While I'm interested in addressing the issues you raised I have no idea what you mean by 'universal religion'.
- Where are the eskimos, polynesians, japanese etc in scripture?
Thus also it is written, The first man Adam became a living soul; the last Adam a quickening spirit. (1 Corinthians 15:45)
Barnes has an interesting insight into Paul's paraphrase from the LXX:
The first man Adam was made a living soul - This is quoted exactly from the translation by the Septuagint, except that the apostle has added the words "first" and "Adam." This is done to designate whom he meant. The meaning of the phrase "was made a living soul" (ἐγένετο εις ψυκὴν ζωσαν egeneto eis psuchēn zōsan - in Hebrew, נפשׁ חיה nephesh chayaah is, became a living, animated being; a being endowed with life. The use of the word "soul" in our translation, for ψυχὴ psuchē, and נפשׁ nephesh, does not quite convey the idea. We apply the word "soul," usually, to the intelligent and the immortal part of man; that which reasons, thinks, remembers, is conscious, is responsible, etc.
From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. (Acts 17:26)
Genetic alleles are related to geographic location. While science has not defined race as independent lineages they seem to be able to trace it back to geographic regions. Never the less, we are all one blood because we all descended from one man, the Scriptures are explicit on this point.
- Why are the Libyans fair skinned, despite the fact living in a hot environment for thousands of years?
They are olive skinned like others from the Middle East, northern Africa and the Mediterranean basin of Europe. The traits expressed exist in all of us, the genes of other 'races' (more accurately described as dems) are external traits. You seem uninterested in how this works on a molecular level but Mendelian dominant/recessive genetics and gene expression are more then adequate to explain these differences within the human family.
You also failed to provide evidence for your beliefs that:
-Climate mutates people, or changes their permanance.
If you want better answers I suggest you ask better questions. While I don't care much for philosophical Darwinism many of the evolutionists are well versed in the genetic basis for developmental adaptation. Mutations is a term that can include but is not limited to alterations in the amino acid sequence of protein coding genes. There is gene expression, recessive and dominant traits, mechanisms that turn genes on and off and other molecular mechanisms characterized and continually being updated and expanded in modern genetics.
-Natural selection/evolution created the races.
Natural selection explains the survival of the fittest not the arrival of the fittest. For that you need a molecular mechanism.
-Individuals somehow suddenly morph or can change their appearance by nature.
It's not sudden but may well happen within a couple of generations. In order for traits to become fixed is a complicated but fascinating process. If you get tired of swimming on the surface I suggest you learn more about the functional aspects of molecular mechanisms designed for that purpose.
- Many others, i can't be bothered to list.
So be it.
You also have claimed the 'essentialist concept' has been rejected by scientists (despite the fact thousands of forensic scientists still use it), so you need to back up your wild cranky claims in this thread with sources.
Essentialist thinking is epistemology, not functional genomics:
Genetic essentialism is dependent upon one particular belief fundamental to western culture. This is the belief that understanding can be gained by reducing an object of knowledge to its ‘essence’. A belief in the existence of a true essence, a core of Truth, permeates all of our intellectual traditions, including our search for self-knowledge. We build our construction of identity, our ‘true selves’ on an essentialist premise. Thus, an essentialist conception of the self is the central organizing principle of psychology and moral philosophy.
Genetic Essentialism and the Discursive Subject
Humans are essentially a product of their genes but they are more then the sum of their molecular parts. Man is a living spirit, born in sin and full of flaws and potential. Genes can never determine a persons spiritual well being, I know this because the Great Commission is to take the Gospel to all creatures, making disciples of all nations. This term for nations is the closest Biblical equivalent to what you are calling race and the Scriptures are clear that all nations (races) will bear fruit from the Gospel for the glory of God.
Which brings us to an important point. There is no concept of race in the Scriptures, at least not how you are describing it. The idea expressed would be people, nations, tongues, tribes...etc. While there are various considerations the Biblical concept of mankind, diverse in all it's vast array, is diametrically opposed to the concept of the independent creation of races.
I still stand on my statement that there is no such thing as race. If for some reason you want to define it as divergent traits within the human family I would reconsider that statement. If on the other hand you want to insist on the independent creation of races your on your own. I don't know of a single Christian scholar and certainly no secular scientist who would even entertain such an obviously flawed theory.
