Wouldn't this explain why humans are totally whacked out? I mean there was some SERIOUS inbreeding going on.
Genesis
- Thread starter GuitarToadster
- Start date
martinhd28v01
Registered Member
You have hit upon a very good point, I am unfortunate enough to go to a private baptist university, they force us to take 1 semester of old testament and 1 semester of new testament to graduate. During my semester of old test. I also was taking Genetics. You should have seen how pissed off my professor got when I told him that the whole adam & eve thing was genetically impossible and asked how he could explain how thousands of so called educated christians could have over looked this fact. My question was never addresses. If you ever want to piss some bible beater off, just ask them if they can explain it, and let me know if they can b/c I'm still without an answer.
:m:
:m:
Considering, at this time, this post has been looked at 40 times and only two have replied, I guess no one else has the answer either.
Not everyone treats genesis literally. Anyways God has absolute power over genetics and evolution. Adam and Eve also lived longer than most humans. Their cells were not under the same power of death and destruction as ours. In other words, diseases caused by inbreeding may not have existed.
Interesting theory but it sounds like horse manure....
Not everyone treats genesis literally.
So you are saying that you should select which parts of the Bible YOU wish to believe or not? If not everything in this "Holy Scripture" is Sacred then why are we even reading in the first place, rather than for amusement?
Anyways God has absolute power over genetics and evolution.
So you think God did some googly moogly voodoo magic to keep the children from having deformities and intelligence blunders?
Adam and Eve also lived longer than most humans. Their cells were not under the same power of death and destruction as ours.
If you read the Bible it would seem that most everyone of importance in the story lived an incredibly long time. But, I guess God decided it was too long and they could screw up too much stuff in that amount of time so cut it back down to the "normal" 15 to 30 years old of life span. And, why is not God "speaking" to chosen ones and allowing people on earth to live for hundreds of years anymore? Did he give up and go away? Maybe he's working on another project that is taking most of his time?
In other words, diseases caused by inbreeding may not have existed.
I don't believe that they are diseases as so much as genetic abnormalities. Too many of the same genes being passed back and forth.
I don't mean to be rude but your ideas seem kinda like an easily made excuse as to what may have REALLY happened.
I think the truth is out there, just you don't have it.
Not everyone treats genesis literally.
So you are saying that you should select which parts of the Bible YOU wish to believe or not? If not everything in this "Holy Scripture" is Sacred then why are we even reading in the first place, rather than for amusement?
Anyways God has absolute power over genetics and evolution.
So you think God did some googly moogly voodoo magic to keep the children from having deformities and intelligence blunders?
Adam and Eve also lived longer than most humans. Their cells were not under the same power of death and destruction as ours.
If you read the Bible it would seem that most everyone of importance in the story lived an incredibly long time. But, I guess God decided it was too long and they could screw up too much stuff in that amount of time so cut it back down to the "normal" 15 to 30 years old of life span. And, why is not God "speaking" to chosen ones and allowing people on earth to live for hundreds of years anymore? Did he give up and go away? Maybe he's working on another project that is taking most of his time?
In other words, diseases caused by inbreeding may not have existed.
I don't believe that they are diseases as so much as genetic abnormalities. Too many of the same genes being passed back and forth.
I don't mean to be rude but your ideas seem kinda like an easily made excuse as to what may have REALLY happened.
I think the truth is out there, just you don't have it.
The bible is a collection of books that were inspired by God, but not written directly by God. Their prime message is a moral story not a physical creation account. However that it is not to say that their are not inaccuracies in it. Either from scribes or human authors using common idioms to praise God. The stories in the beginning of Genesis are very old and draw from four oral traditions that were combined into one.
Yes, but not magic. Jesus has the power to heal and deform. If you accept it literally, you have people living 500 years or more.
All sin causes death. God is speaking to his prophets, usually through Mary. The miracles of Fatima and at egpyt are credible. This is the time written by Joel, "And say, 'Spare, O LORD, your people, and make not your heritage a reproach with the nations ruling over them! Why should they say among the peoples, 'Where is their God?'" .
Why? God is all-powerful and control our physical makeup. There are other parts such as the world wide flood that are harder to explain but I simply don't see any contradiction here.
Tenson Prime
Registered Member
All of our genes had to come from somewhere. If a new "species" is created it has to interbreed for a while no matter what.
About genesis, I'm not sure about the rib Eve thing, but I've heard it explained that the dust of the earth part is a way of saying that he was born of God physical and grew up off food of the Earth.
What part of Adam and Eve is "genetically impossible" anyway?
About genesis, I'm not sure about the rib Eve thing, but I've heard it explained that the dust of the earth part is a way of saying that he was born of God physical and grew up off food of the Earth.
What part of Adam and Eve is "genetically impossible" anyway?
Not true. Speciation is commonly caused by geographic isolation of any given species. From there, changes in reproductive patterns and ecology cause the differences between a species and it's new relatives. This does not mean that the new species whom are mating are related.
Think of it this way: Mammals, most animals, and higher plants all have evolved mechanisms in them to avoid inbreeding. e.g. Most pack animals kick out young males to prevent him from mating with his sister or mother, and Humans have very, very strong taboos against inbreeding (Incest).
The reasoning behind this is that inbreeding causes genetic defects, and at a high rate. Much higher than by random mating. The problem is something called inbreeding depression .
Random mating can hide, correct, or select against the mutated versions of genes--called "Alleles"--, but inbreeding eliminates the chances of that. The deleterious genes within the individual now are not corrected/hidden/chosen against now, because there is no other options to choose from. While few of the deleterious genes are fatal, they are ALL detrimental to the final product (Offspring).
Some of the defects caused by inbreeding (And remember, ANY GIVEN INBRED ANIMAL HAS SOME OF THESE DEFECTS): Elevated incidence of recessive genetic diseases, reduced fertility in both litter size and sperm viability, increased congenital defects like heart defects and cleft palates, lower birthweight, higher neonatal mortality, slower growth rate, smaller adult size, loss of immune functions, and the kicker, fluctuating assymetry (Crooked faces, uneven eye placement and size)!
THAT is why Adam and Eve is impossible.
Says who? Where, in the Bible, does it say that?
Why would I not accept it literally? Where does it say "This isn't really 500 years."
Are YOU talking literally or figuratively? None of my sins have killed me.
So what are you saying? That he made it so inbreeding was OK, but then went back on it? So God changed his mind? So God isn't perfect?!??! OH MY GOD WHAT A REVELATION!! But seriously, if he IS in control of our genetic makeup, how can you say we weren't created in his physical image?
You dont' see a contradiction? In the same way that you don't see how science is beneficial to the human race? Or how science has never helped you? (Things you have said in other threads) You, just like the authors of the scriptures, explain away things you are ignorant to with tales of God. The reason science throws away religious dogmas is because they don't need to use God as an explanation. Today, they KNOW how and why it rains, so there is no need to say "The Heavens opened, and God let his wrath down."
The fact that there isn't enough water on the planet to do such a thing isn't a contradiction? The fact that there is no evidence of such a flood isn't a contradiction? The fact that the way the flood was described in the scriptures points to a lack of knowledge of the ecosystem isn't a contradiction? The contradictions are all over the place, you just choose to ignore them, or hide them with "We're not supposed to read that literally." That's a brain-dead way of going about life, Okinrus, and until you escape it, you'll always be ignorant.
JD
No, we are assuming that Adam and Eve's genetic code had no defects whatsoever. In any case, an all powerful God has final control over the genetic process.
Isn't it obvious? Even God uses Eden figuatively later on in the bible.
No, all sin causes death. When Adam sinned, he caused death to enter the world. When we sin, we cause spirtual death.
What is sinful always depends on circumstance. For example, murder is sinful but killing in war is not.
I'm not sure what you mean by physical image. The bible only says image. There are many interpretations of this.
I sitll don't. God is charge of nature and science is the study of nature whose laws were created by God. I said in other threads that atomic research never helped me, not science. The point I was trying to make there was that science is just as controled by the whims of money as religion if not more so. We don't find billions being spent to research dog care. So science is not just knowledge because the body of knowledge is biased. Some people later found some obscure point about fire alarms, but the argument still stands.
Well you'd have to find what oral tradition that story in genesis is from. Many oral legends and that sort may have had a character name God(or the many names for God) and this was passed down from history and ended up in the bible. Are the stories wrong? No, they were inspired by knowledge given to the Abraham about God to teach moral lessons.
martinhd28v01
Registered Member
I think that man created god in his image, some people need to believe in a father figure to look over them. I also think that if whales could draw pictures they would draw their god to look like a whale. I am shocked to still see disbelief in what science has proven(evolution, genetics, the big bang). We are perhaps the most intelligent country in the world and still people turn there back on proof that you can see. Science has given us observable evidence and if I can see something, it kind of helps the crediblility along.
Tenson Prime
Registered Member
Not to bash what you are saying, but evolution and the big bang are still only theories. They are not scientific law and probally not completly the big picture. I'm not as shure about genetics, I guess it falls under the same catagory.
Here is a question, when does evolutional change take place, is is during life or during the creation of a new being? Also what chages, how does the gene structure change if it is adaptation to life, but not during mating? Does that make sense?
martinhd28v01
Registered Member
I strongly suggest that you give this page a look
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2
you should find all your answers.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2
you should find all your answers.
What is sinful always depends on circumstance. For example, murder is sinful but killing in war is not.
Could you please explain this to me? I think you need to think about that statement a little.
Well you'd have to find what oral tradition that story in genesis is from. Many oral legends and that sort may have had a character name God(or the many names for God) and this was passed down from history and ended up in the bible. Are the stories wrong? No, they were inspired by knowledge given to the Abraham about God to teach moral lessons.
It is a proven fact that a story passed on orally changes completely as time goes on. People forget parts of the story, some puposefully change parts to suit their own needs. My teacher in sixth grade proved it to us by saying a sentence (was a fairly long one) to a student (whispered in their ear) and had that person turn to the next student and tell them... so on and so forth. By the time it had passed to a dozen or so students what was left of the original sentence was practically gone.
Since this is much of what the Bible is based on then it is safe to say that what is left is not an accurate discription of the past but a simple fable passed on for generations. A bunch of stories that were tailored by humans to fit the times, nothing more than a book of morales (at times) and nothing less than amusement.
And so this being what you basically have said yourself, "not to be taken literally" then why is it that you who follow religion so closely actually consider this book "Holy Scripture?" Aesops Fables or Norse Mythology, more like it.
This is why religion is so rediculed (by those of us who are objective in our studies), there are so many different versions of the same book it is ludicrous.
Could you please explain this to me? I think you need to think about that statement a little.
Well you'd have to find what oral tradition that story in genesis is from. Many oral legends and that sort may have had a character name God(or the many names for God) and this was passed down from history and ended up in the bible. Are the stories wrong? No, they were inspired by knowledge given to the Abraham about God to teach moral lessons.
It is a proven fact that a story passed on orally changes completely as time goes on. People forget parts of the story, some puposefully change parts to suit their own needs. My teacher in sixth grade proved it to us by saying a sentence (was a fairly long one) to a student (whispered in their ear) and had that person turn to the next student and tell them... so on and so forth. By the time it had passed to a dozen or so students what was left of the original sentence was practically gone.
Since this is much of what the Bible is based on then it is safe to say that what is left is not an accurate discription of the past but a simple fable passed on for generations. A bunch of stories that were tailored by humans to fit the times, nothing more than a book of morales (at times) and nothing less than amusement.
And so this being what you basically have said yourself, "not to be taken literally" then why is it that you who follow religion so closely actually consider this book "Holy Scripture?" Aesops Fables or Norse Mythology, more like it.
This is why religion is so rediculed (by those of us who are objective in our studies), there are so many different versions of the same book it is ludicrous.
Please cite your source. You would be amazed at the power of oral traditions - part of why the stories contain elements such as gematria (remembering by numerical value) and structure (cf. the two Genesis accounts, even the gospels) is so that it could be remembered with the meaning intact.
Didn't you even read my example? A perfect example. Haven't you ever noticed this in REAL life?
Its called chinese whispers, everyone knows this.
Well everyone except for jenyar of course
Well everyone except for jenyar of course
Only if you base "real life" on children's games. The difference is 1)ability 2)qualification 3)relative importance 4)oral culture 5)responsibility 6)function and 7)control.
(The game of Chinese whispers fall at the very bottom of the scale in all of these criteria - please explain to me why the lowest denominator should set the precedent?)
Memory has suffered since literacy became the norm. People who could tell and remember stories were important (Oral culture) - Prophets were a specific, trained, responsible kind of poet/storyteller. I suggest you do some research on the accuracy of different oral traditions in oral cultures and come back to me.
(The game of Chinese whispers fall at the very bottom of the scale in all of these criteria - please explain to me why the lowest denominator should set the precedent?)
Memory has suffered since literacy became the norm. People who could tell and remember stories were important (Oral culture) - Prophets were a specific, trained, responsible kind of poet/storyteller. I suggest you do some research on the accuracy of different oral traditions in oral cultures and come back to me.
Last edited: