by donkey 85 Replies latest jw friends
Donkey
Thanks for mentioning that study on the CD4 sequences. And I agree that chromosal DNA is a preferable for these studies. When you have historical incidences like the Black Plague or who knows what else, bringing genetic bottlenecks into the mix, its nicer to have a larger selection of markers to work with. It allows for plausible outlining of human migration patterns out of Africa which is also interesting.
So this is what you've been busy doing Donkey!
Well I really enjoyed your presentation and the ensuing discussion. And it's great to see you here!
What about the bush people in New Guinea? What about the native Indians of the Americas? What about the eskimos? the aborigines? What about all the people who due to transportation and communication limitations were never affected by the Bible? What about their history? Why should the story of Adam & Eve be THE story, when there are many different versions of history, passed down in many different cultures?
Just playing devils advocate here on this point, but a JW would say, these people only dispersed at the Tower Of Babel incident, when the lanuages were confused. Maybe Jehovah confused their languages by race & genetics and so they dispersed, therefore the history of the people you mention is explainable, it just began after Babel.
Donkey, You wrote: You choose to disbelieve a lot of stuff in the Bible then. For instance, the bible says God mad Eve from Adam's rib. Following your arguments this would not be true - so the bible must then be inaccurate. When I said, "Adam and Eve were created by God and placed in Eden," I should have said, "Adam was created by God and placed in Eden." For as you point out Eve was created in Eden. I agree with the Bible in it's entirety.
You wrote: The Bible clearly says that through ONE man, Adam, sin entered the world and thus we are all born with sin.
I believe you are referring to Romans 5:12 which tells us that "sin entered into the world through one man, and death through sin." But as we read further we find that the kind of "sin" that first entered into the world through Adam, the "sin", which was responsible for bringing about his "death", was the "sin" of "breaking a command." Because Adam was the first man to sin by "breaking a command" from God, it follows that the "death" that "entered into the world" as a result of Adam's new kind of sin would have been Adam's new kind of death, death as a penalty imposed by God for "breaking a command" from God.
However, Romans 5:15,17 and 18 do tell us that "many died by the trespass of one man", "death reigned through that one man" and "as a result of one trespass was condemnation for all men." And 1 Corinthians 15:21,22 repeats this same thought by saying that "death came through a man" and "in Adam all die."
Advocates of "The Fall" doctrine insist that Adam must have literally been the first man. Because if he was not, then we are not all Adam's descendants. And if we are not, then we could not all have inherited Adam's "fallen", "sinful" nature. And if we did not, then they say, we do not all need God's forgiveness through Jesus Christ, as the Bible tells us we all do.(Romans 3:23,24; 1 John 2:2)
But I disagree. For the Bible says that we all need the forgiveness God offers us through Jesus Christ, because we have all personally "sinned" and have all personally "fallen short of the glory of God."(Romans 3:23) And the Bible clearly tells us that God will hold each one of us responsible for his or her own unrighteousness, not for anything Adam did. (Romans 14:10-12, 2 Corinthians 5:10)
Again, the key to understanding this matter is found in Paul's words in Romans 5:19. There he wrote, "By one man's disobedience many were constituted sinners." To "constitute" means "to establish formally." Adam's disobedience clearly demonstrated that the entire human race was not only capable of doing wrong but incapable of not doing wrong. If Adam in paradise without a care in the world could not manage to live a perfectly righteous life, what chance do any of the rest of us have in doing so? So, after Adam failed a simple God given test of his righteousness, God had good reason to retroactively condemn the entire human race as being deserving of the deaths they had been suffering, and undeserving of eternal life, a gift God had not yet given to any human being.
Another point on your logic: Is sin inherited? Yes, it is. David wrote: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." (Ps. 51:5) We all inherit a sinful nature from our parents. The word "sin" means "missing the mark." What mark? The mark of God's righteousness. In order to create us as free people God created us all with the potential to do what is wrong. Since God can do no wrong, that means God created us all less righteous than Himself. And since "all unrighteosness is sin" (1 John 5:17), that means we are all, as David said, "sinful at birth." You wrote: If on the other hand they are born sinless and mortal, its a silly arrangement because God then stacked the deck. I assume you mean that God stacked the deck against us. But I don't see that is what happened. We are all created with the same opportunity to gain eternal life that God gave Adam and Eve. Just as God was going to give Adam and Eve eternal life only if they obeyed Him in a very simple way, God says He will also give us eternal life if we obey Him in a very simple way. All He asks of us is to believe in our hearts that Jesus Christ's death bought us His full forgiveness for both our sinful nature and our sinful acts. Why does God require this of us? Because when a person really believes this they begin living a more godly life. Do you really think that, just because God created us free to choose to live our lives in a way that constantly hurts other people, God should feel obliged to fully accept those behaving in such a way, to totally overlook all of their wrong behavior and to give them all eternal life, without requiring anything of them? Would you really want to live in heaven or on earth for all eternity if heaven and earth were full of billions of immortal people who treated everyone else there like dirt? I wouldn't. For this reason I'm glad God requires something of us before He fully accepts us and fully overlooks all of our sins, even though He created us with the ability to sin.
We have ground breaking scientific research which produces statistical results, which can be logically interpreted to produce a probable picture of human history. The results then the hypothesis.
Not the other way round. Apologists start off with a unprovable, simplistic story of Judiastic origin (that these are copies of much older Babylonian and Caananite legends is ignored) and try to shoehorn modern thinking and wisdom to fit their belief. They forget that they are endowed with copious amounts of faith, which can make you believe anything, no matter how unlikely, regardless of facts to the contrary.
A Christian, I respect your right to believe but your "leap of faith" gives you an unfair advantage over us non-believers.
Give me a modern scientific journal any day, rather than one scripture from your Holy books.
IMHO of course
God made Adam on the 6th day, but it says nowhere in the bible how long such a day might have been. For all whe know a biblical "day" comprised of thousands, maybe millions of years. In that context (which is the right one imo) it is very likely that Adam and Eve existed longer then 6k years.
But besides that. The last comment I read was "We have ground breaking scientific research which produces statistical results, which can be logically interpreted to produce a probable picture of human history." Statistical research is always based on a chance, and chances are dynamic things. statistical results might be "accurate" but they are never "true", nor can they be logically interpreted in the absolute sense of logic. Wallflower, I think you believe in this science. And what you are saying about faith, which can make you believe in anything, also stands for faith in science (or metaphysical naturalism as i like to call the common theory atm)
Wallflower,
You wrote: Give me a modern scientific journal any day, rather than one scripture from your Holy books.
I too enjoy learning all that science has to teach us. But someday you and I are going to die. If we then have to render an account for our lives to God, as the Bible tells us we will, there is nothing we will then be able to quote from a science book that will convince God that we deserve to be given eternal life.
I agree with Christian there,
Something else interesting about DNA, not too long ago they found a gene in human DNA which scientist believe are the cause of our religious feelings, and that every human has this gene. Doesn't it say somewhere in the bible that God layed a sort of religious feeling in all men? This sounds pretty accurate. In my opinion DNA doesnt destroy my believe, on the contrary, it encourages it!
Wallflower, You wrote: Give me a modern scientific journal any day, rather than one scripture from your Holy books.
\Which one Chemistry In Britain?
This verse does not say, in any Greek manuscript, that mankind's common origin was one man.
But as for his wife Eve, Genesis 3:20 does say that she is "the mother of everyone living".
