I have some specific questions about the Adam & Eve story (America, myth)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have some interesting questions if you believe the Adam & Eve story literally. I have heard many say that this is a a story that you should not take literally but if you argue like that then you can ask yourself if you should take any part of the bible literally meaning the entire book is made up horse****. That's not my question but for people who believe it literally (if there are any still out there).
1. There are different ethnicities of humans on this earth (Asian, African, Native people, aborigines etc).
2. Some people believe that all Humans started with Adam & Eve
3. Adam & Eve must have belonged to one of these ethnicities Let's just to make it an example say that they were white.
4 Adam & Eve must have lived somewhere on this earth and the place should be in present day "middle east" but that is not the point.
5. If Adam & Eve were white they must have had white children
6. In Asia we have people with Asian ethnicity, In Europe we have people of white ethnicity, In Africa we have people of African ethnicity and so on. They look a little different from each other.
Questions
1. If Adam & Eve were white and all people started with Adam & Eve how can there be people of different ethnicity. Did Adam & Eve or their descendants have children of other ethnicity than their own.
2. How did people of different ethnicity end up where they are today
-Did Adam & Eve or their descendants have children of different ethnicity in the original place where they were born in present day Middle east and after that the children who were of Asian ethnicity moved to Asia, the children of African ethnicity moved to Africa, children of Native ethnicity moved to North America from the Middle east where they were born.
-or, Did Adam & Eve or their decadents who were of white ethnicity, travel to Asia for example and when they got there and had a child it would be of Asian ethnicity even though the parents were white.
The answer to the different ethnicity question is of course thru evolution but I would love to hear the answer from someone who believes in the Adam & Eve story literally.
I have some interesting questions if you believe the Adam & Eve story literally. I have heard many say that this is a a story that you should not take literally but if you argue like that then you can ask yourself if you should take any part of the bible literally meaning the entire book is made up horse****. That's not my question but for people who believe it literally (if there are any still out there).
Jesus referred to Adam as if he was a real person. So did the apostle Paul.
Quote:
1. There are different ethnicities of humans on this earth (Asian, African, Native people, aborigines etc).
2. Some people believe that all Humans started with Adam & Eve
3. Adam & Eve must have belonged to one of these ethnicities Let's just to make it an example say that they were white.
4 Adam & Eve must have lived somewhere on this earth and the place should be in present day "middle east" but that is not the point.
5. If Adam & Eve were white they must have had white children
6. In Asia we have people with Asian ethnicity, In Europe we have people of white ethnicity, In Africa we have people of African ethnicity and so on. They look a little different from each other.
Questions
1. If Adam & Eve were white and all people started with Adam & Eve how can there be people of different ethnicity. Did Adam & Eve or their descendants have children of other ethnicity than their own.
We're all 1 race--the human race. Adam and Eve had the genetic information for all the different ethnicities. Environment did allow for different physical traits to be more prevalent among certain people...like skin color, shape of the eye, etc. That's natural selection.
Quote:
2. How did people of different ethnicity end up where they are today
-Did Adam & Eve or their descendants have children of different ethnicity in the original place where they were born in present day Middle east and after that the children who were of Asian ethnicity moved to Asia, the children of African ethnicity moved to Africa, children of Native ethnicity moved to North America from the Middle east where they were born.
-or, Did Adam & Eve or their decadents who were of white ethnicity, travel to Asia for example and when they got there and had a child it would be of Asian ethnicity even though the parents were white.
The answer to the different ethnicity question is of course thru evolution but I would love to hear the answer from someone who believes in the Adam & Eve story literally.
People migrated to certain parts of the world, and the ones that were better suited to survive there flourished. The ones that weren't suited to it din't.
[quote=Vizio;26889473]Jesus referred to Adam as if he was a real person. So did the apostle Paul.
Quote:
We're all 1 race--the human race. Adam and Eve had the genetic information for all the different ethnicities.
I would like to see that picture in front of me..Adam & Eve as white people holding up their new born child who is Chinese even though they are white. Are you serious about this ????????
Quote:
Environment did allow for different physical traits to be more prevalent among certain people...like skin color, shape of the eye, etc. That's natural selection.
People migrated to certain parts of the world, and the ones that were better suited to survive there flourished. The ones that weren't suited to it didn't.
Now I'm really confused. The things you are stating here is the evolution explanation. Are you saying that you believe in the Adam & Eve story literally but you also believe in evolution...
The Qur'an concept of Adam and Eve is similar to the bible. From a literal point They could not have been white as they would have had the genetic traits of all people. therefore they had to have been as dark as the darkest person ever.
The various races would have developed as the result of pigment loss.
We are all one race, but each of us has our own individual traits. One Race, available in a multitude of colors, shapes and sizes. But still all Fruits (or nuts) fallen from branches of the same tree.
I would like to see that picture in front of me..Adam & Eve as white people holding up their new born child who is Chinese even though they are white. Are you serious about this ????????
I didn't say that. I said Adam and Eve had all the genetic information in them of all the different ethnicities. I believe they were probably fairly dark...they probably were not white. A white couple didn't just have an Asian appearing baby. Over generations, some babies were born with slightly different shaped eyes allowing them to survive better in different climates. I know the Inuit are said to benefit from slanted eyes---it works as a sort of natural type of sunglasses. In time, as people were born with more slanted eyes, they survived better and reproduced more.
Quote:
Now I'm really confused. The things you are stating here is the evolution explanation. Are you saying that you believe in the Adam & Eve story literally but you also believe in evolution...
It's natural selection. Not evolution. No information is added to the gene pool here. Each "race" is actually a subset of Adam and Eve's "race". With Evolution, a mutation occurs that adds a trait or information to the species...eventually resulting in a new species. That's not the case here. A Chinese person is human. A Western European is Human. A Native American is Human. We're all of the same race---the same as Adam and Eve. We just don't have all of their characteristics. The same way one of my kids has some of my traits, but not others.
I didn't say that. I said Adam and Eve had all the genetic information in them of all the different ethnicities. I believe they were probably fairly dark...they probably were not white. A white couple didn't just have an Asian appearing baby. Over generations, some babies were born with slightly different shaped eyes allowing them to survive better in different climates. I know the Inuit are said to benefit from slanted eyes---it works as a sort of natural type of sunglasses. In time, as people were born with more slanted eyes, they survived better and reproduced more.
It's natural selection. Not evolution. No information is added to the gene pool here. Each "race" is actually a subset of Adam and Eve's "race". With Evolution, a mutation occurs that adds a trait or information to the species...eventually resulting in a new species. That's not the case here. A Chinese person is human. A Western European is Human. A Native American is Human. We're all of the same race---the same as Adam and Eve. We just don't have all of their characteristics. The same way one of my kids has some of my traits, but not others.
I'm now even more confused than I have ever been...You say it's Natrual selection not evolution ????
Natural selection is the gradual, non-random process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of differential reproduction of their bearers. It is a key mechanism of evolution. The term "natural selection" was popularized by Charles Darwin who intended it to be compared with artificial selection, what we now call selective breeding.
I'm a non-believer and believe in what thousands of scientist have common up with extensive testing. Even the majority of religious people think that you are nuts believing in the Adam & Eve story literally.
Last edited by johnsweeting; 11-10-2012 at 01:37 AM..
I'm now even more confused than I have ever been...You say it's Natrual selection not evolution ????
Natural selection is the gradual, non-random process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of differential reproduction of their bearers. It is a key mechanism of evolution. The term "natural selection" was popularized by Charles Darwin who intended it to be compared with artificial selection, what we now call selective breeding.
Darwin wasn't a total dolt...but I believe he had an incorrect understanding. I believe Darwin observed that when food was abundant, finches had long and short beaks. When the food was scarce, only the long-beaked finches survived because they could reach into cracks in rocks to get food. When the food was abundant at a later time, short-beaked finches made a comeback. That is an example of natural selection. The finches didn't suddenly grow arms to reach into the cracks.
Now...you can believe that evolution uses natural selection, but it doesn't. Evolution requires beneficial mutations to occur which give advantages to the animal. Oddly enough, most people won't believe in a single couple (Adam and Eve) populating the earth....but the first animal to be born with wings was able to spawn a whole new species?
They clearly went this-a-way. No wait... they went that-a-way. Or was it...
I thought we already have a thread about determined technical ignorance! But just to clarify:
Natural Selection means that when one set of alternate genetic information provides a better "fit" for a given ecological niche, Evolution as we've carefully defined it, has occurred. PS: no single organism or species, like Adam and Eve, for instance, carries ALL possible global genetics, with some wooden God turning whichever version of a local hominid off or on in accordance with what He wants to thrive there.
By comparison, and far less ignorance-based, our inarguable and easily reproducible ≈2008 DNA genome mapping projects, when coupled with the documented locations of each DNA snapshot, and with linked & associated tools and linguistics, has thoroughly and accurately mapped the lengthy migration of the human species with it's slowly Evolving races.
Btw, johnsweeting, you are on the right track here, and I'll add some very volatile fuel for your argument: that its also mathematically impossible for only two mating individuals to have procreated the necessary populations. But let's also not forget the great biblical Noah's Fludd interruption and myth, in which all humans except Noah & his very old family, were totally wiped out, along with all possible organic food resources plus all other living species including sea life and plants, except the few he could have crammed onto an unpowered and leaky old barge for 8 months without water or food... () thus requiring an estimated 100 billion human individuals, but of demonstrably far-different genetics, to have been born, died off or who are still here. Impossible. And yet, this simple mathematically demonstrable and logical fact is routinely ignorantly and actively dismissed, the whole credibility issue simply avoided.
This study traced the progress of an evolving but consistent female mDNA lineage across the African continent, then across the modern Middle East, the modern Asiatic coninent, into India and down to Australia, up into and onto the Chinese mainland and the Japanese and Pacific islands. The genetics of those involved for literally millions of years (starting with the Lucy primate, btw... and following her reliably dominant mitochondrial DNA) is enhanced through that improved "fit", where it's therefore reproduced through the cellular division process that Vizio here either believes or does not believe in.
I'm always confused by his Texas Two-Stepping.. So... which is it, Viz? Which Transient Belief of Convenience medication are you taking this early morning? Please... do let us know so we can follow along on your song sheet...
Darwin wasn't a total dolt...but I believe he had an incorrect understanding. I believe Darwin observed that when food was abundant, finches had long and short beaks. When the food was scarce, only the long-beaked finches survived because they could reach into cracks in rocks to get food. When the food was abundant at a later time, short-beaked finches made a comeback. That is an example of natural selection. The finches didn't suddenly grow arms to reach into the cracks.
Now...you can believe that evolution uses natural selection, but it doesn't. Evolution requires beneficial mutations to occur which give advantages to the animal. Oddly enough, most people won't believe in a single couple (Adam and Eve) populating the earth....but the first animal to be born with wings was able to spawn a whole new species?
You are far out there trust me....You say that the most fundamental part of evolution which is "natural selection" is not evolution even though you say that "natural selection" is the answer.
Darwin started everything..then thousands upon thousands have continued the studies and have come up with facts by testing it. I rest my case on this...
John, if you want to have a discussion, we can. You've been respectful. I am sick of the haters though and won't discuss any more with them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsweeting
You are far out there trust me....You say that the most fundamental part of evolution which is "natural selection" is not evolution even though you say that "natural selection" is the answer.
Darwin started everything..then thousands upon thousands have continued the studies and have come up with facts by testing it. I rest my case on this...
Darwin recognized natural selection. He jumped to some wrong conclusions from there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They clearly went this-a-way. No wait... they went that-a-way. Or was it...
) thus requiring an estimated 100 billion human individuals, but of demonstrably far-different genetics, to have been born, died off or who are still here. Impossible. And yet, this simple mathematically demonstrable and logical fact is routinely ignorantly and actively dismissed, the whole credibility issue simply avoided.
