Science isn’t always the answer.

[Newtonian]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

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.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

And Yahweh, etc. Different spellings. Bible names with the Divine Name in the prefix long form begin with Jeho (e.g. Jehoshua) and short form Jo (e.g. Joshua and John) and Je (e.g. Jeshua and Jesus). Though original Hebrew had no written vowels, the evidence supports the vowels e-o-a in that order. Greek has vowels and confirms this.

Prove all things - 1 Thessalonians 5:21 - KJV. In Hebrews 11:1 faith is described (from the Greek word) as due to "convincing evidence."

So, I would say non-convincing evidence is not proof.

 

[Hollie]

I am off to play a game I check this board different times of the day in between playing games so don't declare victory cause I did not post right away.

Take all the time you need. You are grappling with 150 years of theory and evidence, so you will need it.

It is your job not mine to support your claim. You must define what supports your claim then provide evidence to back it up. And no just cause some mammal has some vestigial parts does not support the claim though it does help it I will admit. Take the Horse for example we have thousands of years of evidence to support the claim that the horse evolved, there are actually verifiable bones and fossils to show the evolution. Yet in all that history no evidence it ever evolved into 2 or more DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT species. And you can not provide any such evidence for the claim man came from apes or apes and man came from the same species thousands of year ago.

I accept that science and God both work together, Dinosaurs and such came before man I accept the fact that we all descend from some common things our DNA provides that evidence to many similarities to ignore. I even accept that God didn't just make Adam and Eve, he either allowed other humans to evolve or he made them as Cain had to marry someone as did all of Adam and Eves children. NONE of that means God allowed man and ape to evolve from a single species. And Science can not provide compelling evidence they did.

Human evolution - The fossil evidence These describe fossils that are neither human nor ape but have characteristics of both.
Genetics This describes the genetic similarities between the species. Something by the way that helps in determining as to where fossils can be found. So they are supportive of one another.

Do you accept this as supporting evidence and if no why not?

Gotta check it out, the fact is even though I firmly believe in God I could accept evolution since Adam and Eve were not the only humans would just mean that is how God made them.

Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiplied, and people lived hundreds of years in the beginning, which explains how the multiplying resulted in many offspring.

There is no reason to accept that people lived to be hundreds of years old "in the beginning". Human biology has not seen that kind of change in just a few thousand years.

 

[Newtonian]

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

There is evidence all around you. The heavens declare the glory of God. There is also the evidence you have inside you. Your conscience declaring there is a God. Man, himself, is evidence. He has been made in God's image. A rational, thinking, creative, loving being with a free will.

I understand what you're saying, though, I can remember when I felt the same. I always think of the blind man that Jesus healed when He walked this earth. When the people asked this man (who had been blind from birth) how it was that he could see. His reply was the same as mine and other believers, "I don't know, but once I was blind and now I can see."

Barn Sour - I agree totally with you. Astronomy is one of those fields of science that constitute a study of "the things made" as per Romans 1:20.

One of the things that really amazes me is how much energy was put into the creation of our universe. Its not just the energy in our universe but also the mass/matter (c. 10^79 atomic mass units) when you consider E=Mc^2!

 

[Hollie]

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Actually, humans are arrogant to believe they are special and this world was made for us.

We even believe we are gods ourselves. Who else but gods live in paradise for the rest of eternity after they die? Talk about arrogant.

Science believes we will never know our true origins. It’s unknowable. Religious people claim they know our true origins not science. Get that right.

yes, some of the universes secrets we will never know. And no we are not in charge. But none of that leads to your conclusion that god exists let alone determines all. Nice try though.

I am religious and I claim our true origins are revealed both from science and from the Bible. For example, Acts 17:26 says all nations come from one man. Science has proven that to be true - note our literature points to the scientific evidence here:

An Ancient Creation Record—Can You Trust It? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"In recent years, scientists have researched human genes extensively. By comparing human genetic patterns around the earth, they found clear evidence that all humans have a common ancestor, a source of the DNA of all people who have ever lived, including each of us. In 1988, Newsweek magazine presented those findings in a report entitled “The Search for Adam and Eve.” Those studies were based on a type of mitochondrial DNA, genetic material passed on only by the female. Reports in 1995 about research on male DNA point to the same conclusion—that “there was an ancestral ‘Adam,’ whose genetic material on the [Y] chromosome is common to every man now on earth,” as Time magazine put it."

Did time magazine suggest that human history began a mere 6,000 years ago via supernatural means?

 

[Newtonian]

F

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Arrogance is convincing yourself that you have The Answer, in either direction.

No one knows. If you want to have faith that it's one of the 2,500 or so gods that humans have maintained over the millennia, great, cool, run with that.

Some of us admit we just don't know, that it's likely we won't know during our lifetime, and we accept that and move on to things over which we have more control.

Meanwhile, it's fun and interesting and stimulating, watching science try to figure stuff out, and learn as it goes.

I’ll translate what they were trying to say. Science doesn’t have all the answers and we as humans hate not knowing the answers to all our questions. So, since religion claims to have all the answers, they love it.

Some false religions claim to have all the answers - the true religion does not make that claim.

That's why we keep doing research and change our beliefs when good research demands it.

We used to favor the annular theory - now we are not so sure.

 

[BreezeWood]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

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.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

.
the desert creation or an Almighty - for proof howabout burning all the desert books and stating out fresh, those truths from the past would surly reemerge and most likely without the "sinning".

the evolution of religion is pathetic, you seem on the boarder.

 

[Newtonian]

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Actually, humans are arrogant to believe they are special and this world was made for us.

We even believe we are gods ourselves. Who else but gods live in paradise for the rest of eternity after they die? Talk about arrogant.

Science believes we will never know our true origins. It’s unknowable. Religious people claim they know our true origins not science. Get that right.

yes, some of the universes secrets we will never know. And no we are not in charge. But none of that leads to your conclusion that god exists let alone determines all. Nice try though.

I am religious and I claim our true origins are revealed both from science and from the Bible. For example, Acts 17:26 says all nations come from one man. Science has proven that to be true - note our literature points to the scientific evidence here:

An Ancient Creation Record—Can You Trust It? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"In recent years, scientists have researched human genes extensively. By comparing human genetic patterns around the earth, they found clear evidence that all humans have a common ancestor, a source of the DNA of all people who have ever lived, including each of us. In 1988, Newsweek magazine presented those findings in a report entitled “The Search for Adam and Eve.” Those studies were based on a type of mitochondrial DNA, genetic material passed on only by the female. Reports in 1995 about research on male DNA point to the same conclusion—that “there was an ancestral ‘Adam,’ whose genetic material on the [Y] chromosome is common to every man now on earth,” as Time magazine put it."

Did time magazine suggest that human history began a mere 6,000 years ago via supernatural means?

Your tangent involves comparing Bible history with that of other nations like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptian. Do you wish to pursue that tangent on this thread?

The origin of languages is relevant as well.

 

[barn sour]

I am off to play a game I check this board different times of the day in between playing games so don't declare victory cause I did not post right away.

Take all the time you need. You are grappling with 150 years of theory and evidence, so you will need it.

It is your job not mine to support your claim. You must define what supports your claim then provide evidence to back it up. And no just cause some mammal has some vestigial parts does not support the claim though it does help it I will admit. Take the Horse for example we have thousands of years of evidence to support the claim that the horse evolved, there are actually verifiable bones and fossils to show the evolution. Yet in all that history no evidence it ever evolved into 2 or more DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT species. And you can not provide any such evidence for the claim man came from apes or apes and man came from the same species thousands of year ago.

I accept that science and God both work together, Dinosaurs and such came before man I accept the fact that we all descend from some common things our DNA provides that evidence to many similarities to ignore. I even accept that God didn't just make Adam and Eve, he either allowed other humans to evolve or he made them as Cain had to marry someone as did all of Adam and Eves children. NONE of that means God allowed man and ape to evolve from a single species. And Science can not provide compelling evidence they did.

Human evolution - The fossil evidence These describe fossils that are neither human nor ape but have characteristics of both.
Genetics This describes the genetic similarities between the species. Something by the way that helps in determining as to where fossils can be found. So they are supportive of one another.

Do you accept this as supporting evidence and if no why not?

Gotta check it out, the fact is even though I firmly believe in God I could accept evolution since Adam and Eve were not the only humans would just mean that is how God made them.

Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiplied, and people lived hundreds of years in the beginning, which explains how the multiplying resulted in many offspring.

There is no reason to accept that people lived to be hundreds of years old "in the beginning". Human biology has not seen that kind of change in just a few thousand years.

Adam and Noah both lived over 900 years. It was after the flood that God changed man's life time to three score and 10. Not all the patriarchs lived over 900 years, and not everyone has lived to three score and 10 after the flood, but those are the norms, apparently, from what we see in Scripture and from our own knowledge.

 

[Newtonian]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

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.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

.
the desert creation or an Almighty - for proof howabout burning all the desert books and stating out fresh, those truths from the past would surly reemerge and most likely without the "sinning".

the evolution of religion is pathetic, you seem on the boarder.

Evolution of religion - amazing how many tangents this thread is generating! Did you know many religious beliefs have a common origin? For example, the false doctrine of the immortality of the soul, the use of crosses in worhip, church spires, trinitys and images of the same, Hell Fire, Christmas, Easter, sanctifying war - and the list could go on.

Do you wish to pursue that tangent from thread title?

 

[Hollie]

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Actually, humans are arrogant to believe they are special and this world was made for us.

We even believe we are gods ourselves. Who else but gods live in paradise for the rest of eternity after they die? Talk about arrogant.

Science believes we will never know our true origins. It’s unknowable. Religious people claim they know our true origins not science. Get that right.

yes, some of the universes secrets we will never know. And no we are not in charge. But none of that leads to your conclusion that god exists let alone determines all. Nice try though.

I am religious and I claim our true origins are revealed both from science and from the Bible. For example, Acts 17:26 says all nations come from one man. Science has proven that to be true - note our literature points to the scientific evidence here:

An Ancient Creation Record—Can You Trust It? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"In recent years, scientists have researched human genes extensively. By comparing human genetic patterns around the earth, they found clear evidence that all humans have a common ancestor, a source of the DNA of all people who have ever lived, including each of us. In 1988, Newsweek magazine presented those findings in a report entitled “The Search for Adam and Eve.” Those studies were based on a type of mitochondrial DNA, genetic material passed on only by the female. Reports in 1995 about research on male DNA point to the same conclusion—that “there was an ancestral ‘Adam,’ whose genetic material on the [Y] chromosome is common to every man now on earth,” as Time magazine put it."

Did time magazine suggest that human history began a mere 6,000 years ago via supernatural means?

Your tangent involves comparing Bible history with that of other nations like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptian. Do you wish to pursue that tangent on this thread?

The origin of languages is relevant as well.

That sidestep makes no sense. You were referencing a Time Magazine article from within which you opined about an ancestral Adam. The ancestral Adam (as it is with Eve), was not a suggestion by the magazine of the Biblical characters.

 

[Newtonian]

True

I am off to play a game I check this board different times of the day in between playing games so don't declare victory cause I did not post right away.

Take all the time you need. You are grappling with 150 years of theory and evidence, so you will need it.

It is your job not mine to support your claim. You must define what supports your claim then provide evidence to back it up. And no just cause some mammal has some vestigial parts does not support the claim though it does help it I will admit. Take the Horse for example we have thousands of years of evidence to support the claim that the horse evolved, there are actually verifiable bones and fossils to show the evolution. Yet in all that history no evidence it ever evolved into 2 or more DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT species. And you can not provide any such evidence for the claim man came from apes or apes and man came from the same species thousands of year ago.

I accept that science and God both work together, Dinosaurs and such came before man I accept the fact that we all descend from some common things our DNA provides that evidence to many similarities to ignore. I even accept that God didn't just make Adam and Eve, he either allowed other humans to evolve or he made them as Cain had to marry someone as did all of Adam and Eves children. NONE of that means God allowed man and ape to evolve from a single species. And Science can not provide compelling evidence they did.

Human evolution - The fossil evidence These describe fossils that are neither human nor ape but have characteristics of both.
Genetics This describes the genetic similarities between the species. Something by the way that helps in determining as to where fossils can be found. So they are supportive of one another.

Do you accept this as supporting evidence and if no why not?

Gotta check it out, the fact is even though I firmly believe in God I could accept evolution since Adam and Eve were not the only humans would just mean that is how God made them.

Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiplied, and people lived hundreds of years in the beginning, which explains how the multiplying resulted in many offspring.

There is no reason to accept that people lived to be hundreds of years old "in the beginning". Human biology has not seen that kind of change in just a few thousand years.

Adam and Noah both lived over 900 years. It was after the flood that God changed man's life time to three score and 10. Not all the patriarchs lived over 900 years, and not everyone has lived to three score and 10 after the flood, but those are the norms, apparently, from what we see in Scripture and from our own knowledge.

True - but the Biblical account is much more detailed than that as I am sure you realize. LIfe span decreased gradually after the flood - see the Genesis account. Shem was still alive at Abraham's time when the life span was down to about 120.

There are scientific clues involved as well. Radiation likely increased after the flood, and radiation induces mutations which are 99% harmful and usually recessive. Inbreeding forces recessive traits out so these two factors likely caused the decrease in life span. There was a drastic narrowing of the gene pool (aka genetic bottleneck) at the flood - there is evidence of this in genetics as well.

But the clincher for me is that it wasn't until Moses' time, when the life span had lowered to 70, that incest became against the law!

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob married close relatives - in fact Sarah was Abraham's half-sister!

I believe God instituted the laws against incest in the Mosaic law due to the dangers of forcing out even more harmful recessive traits.

Or, simply: God's love for us!

 

[Hollie]

I am off to play a game I check this board different times of the day in between playing games so don't declare victory cause I did not post right away.

Take all the time you need. You are grappling with 150 years of theory and evidence, so you will need it.

It is your job not mine to support your claim. You must define what supports your claim then provide evidence to back it up. And no just cause some mammal has some vestigial parts does not support the claim though it does help it I will admit. Take the Horse for example we have thousands of years of evidence to support the claim that the horse evolved, there are actually verifiable bones and fossils to show the evolution. Yet in all that history no evidence it ever evolved into 2 or more DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT species. And you can not provide any such evidence for the claim man came from apes or apes and man came from the same species thousands of year ago.

I accept that science and God both work together, Dinosaurs and such came before man I accept the fact that we all descend from some common things our DNA provides that evidence to many similarities to ignore. I even accept that God didn't just make Adam and Eve, he either allowed other humans to evolve or he made them as Cain had to marry someone as did all of Adam and Eves children. NONE of that means God allowed man and ape to evolve from a single species. And Science can not provide compelling evidence they did.

Human evolution - The fossil evidence These describe fossils that are neither human nor ape but have characteristics of both.
Genetics This describes the genetic similarities between the species. Something by the way that helps in determining as to where fossils can be found. So they are supportive of one another.

Do you accept this as supporting evidence and if no why not?

Gotta check it out, the fact is even though I firmly believe in God I could accept evolution since Adam and Eve were not the only humans would just mean that is how God made them.

Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiplied, and people lived hundreds of years in the beginning, which explains how the multiplying resulted in many offspring.

There is no reason to accept that people lived to be hundreds of years old "in the beginning". Human biology has not seen that kind of change in just a few thousand years.

Adam and Noah both lived over 900 years. It was after the flood that God changed man's life time to three score and 10. Not all the patriarchs lived over 900 years, and not everyone has lived to three score and 10 after the flood, but those are the norms, apparently, from what we see in Scripture and from our own knowledge.

Your "... because I say'' commandment about 900 year old humans is utterly unsupported. More to the point, your unsupported comment is presented in the context of unsupported events that are mere legend and fable.

Please identify what supported knowledge you can present in regard to any biblical fables surrounding Adam and Noah.

 

[BreezeWood]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

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.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

.
the desert creation or an Almighty - for proof howabout burning all the desert books and stating out fresh, those truths from the past would surly reemerge and most likely without the "sinning".

the evolution of religion is pathetic, you seem on the boarder.

Evolution of religion - amazing how many tangents this thread is generating! Did you know many religious beliefs have a common origin? For example, the false doctrine of the immortality of the soul, the use of crosses in worhip, church spires, trinitys and images of the same, Hell Fire, Christmas, Easter, sanctifying war - and the list could go on.

Do you wish to pursue that tangent from thread title?

Did you know many religious beliefs have a common origin?

.
that is heartening ... and believable

not yours -

since the 4th century the christian bible has been a haven for the narrow minded and oppressors and has been at the forefront of persecution and victimization of the innocent since that time to the present day ...

is there a reason your book is dead ... howabout bringing to justice the crucifiers - those that wrote that book - we'll be talking turkey with that as a headliner.

 

[Newtonian]

So uou

I believe that humans are too arrogant in thinking that they can determine our true origins by using science. We make our hypotheses based on “laws of nature” that we assume have to be true. I believe that The secrets of the universe are far too advanced for the human mind to comprehend. We as a species need to humble ourselves and realize that we are not in charge of anything, and that god determines all.

Actually, humans are arrogant to believe they are special and this world was made for us.

We even believe we are gods ourselves. Who else but gods live in paradise for the rest of eternity after they die? Talk about arrogant.

Science believes we will never know our true origins. It’s unknowable. Religious people claim they know our true origins not science. Get that right.

yes, some of the universes secrets we will never know. And no we are not in charge. But none of that leads to your conclusion that god exists let alone determines all. Nice try though.

I am religious and I claim our true origins are revealed both from science and from the Bible. For example, Acts 17:26 says all nations come from one man. Science has proven that to be true - note our literature points to the scientific evidence here:

An Ancient Creation Record—Can You Trust It? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

Excerpt:

"In recent years, scientists have researched human genes extensively. By comparing human genetic patterns around the earth, they found clear evidence that all humans have a common ancestor, a source of the DNA of all people who have ever lived, including each of us. In 1988, Newsweek magazine presented those findings in a report entitled “The Search for Adam and Eve.” Those studies were based on a type of mitochondrial DNA, genetic material passed on only by the female. Reports in 1995 about research on male DNA point to the same conclusion—that “there was an ancestral ‘Adam,’ whose genetic material on the [Y] chromosome is common to every man now on earth,” as Time magazine put it."

Did time magazine suggest that human history began a mere 6,000 years ago via supernatural means?

Your tangent involves comparing Bible history with that of other nations like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptian. Do you wish to pursue that tangent on this thread?

The origin of languages is relevant as well.

That sidestep makes no sense. You were referencing a Time Magazine article from within which you opined about an ancestral Adam. The ancestral Adam (as it is with Eve), was not a suggestion by the magazine of the Biblical characters.

So you want me to go with Mork and MIndy? How about Lillith?

Seriously, genetics proves Acts 17:26 to be true - all nations descend from one man.

 

[barn sour]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

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.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

.
the desert creation or an Almighty - for proof howabout burning all the desert books and stating out fresh, those truths from the past would surly reemerge and most likely without the "sinning".

the evolution of religion is pathetic, you seem on the boarder.

LOL So you think if we burn the Bible sin won't exist? Getting rid of a term doesn't get rid of bad behaviour. What you don't understand is that God has seen to it that His Word is here for all men to read, to consider, and to know HIM. He has not left man to his own devices. Just look at the mess unbelievers have made when they lean to their own understanding.

 

[Newtonian]

I am off to play a game I check this board different times of the day in between playing games so don't declare victory cause I did not post right away.

Take all the time you need. You are grappling with 150 years of theory and evidence, so you will need it.

It is your job not mine to support your claim. You must define what supports your claim then provide evidence to back it up. And no just cause some mammal has some vestigial parts does not support the claim though it does help it I will admit. Take the Horse for example we have thousands of years of evidence to support the claim that the horse evolved, there are actually verifiable bones and fossils to show the evolution. Yet in all that history no evidence it ever evolved into 2 or more DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT species. And you can not provide any such evidence for the claim man came from apes or apes and man came from the same species thousands of year ago.

I accept that science and God both work together, Dinosaurs and such came before man I accept the fact that we all descend from some common things our DNA provides that evidence to many similarities to ignore. I even accept that God didn't just make Adam and Eve, he either allowed other humans to evolve or he made them as Cain had to marry someone as did all of Adam and Eves children. NONE of that means God allowed man and ape to evolve from a single species. And Science can not provide compelling evidence they did.

Human evolution - The fossil evidence These describe fossils that are neither human nor ape but have characteristics of both.
Genetics This describes the genetic similarities between the species. Something by the way that helps in determining as to where fossils can be found. So they are supportive of one another.

Do you accept this as supporting evidence and if no why not?

Gotta check it out, the fact is even though I firmly believe in God I could accept evolution since Adam and Eve were not the only humans would just mean that is how God made them.

Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiplied, and people lived hundreds of years in the beginning, which explains how the multiplying resulted in many offspring.

There is no reason to accept that people lived to be hundreds of years old "in the beginning". Human biology has not seen that kind of change in just a few thousand years.

Adam and Noah both lived over 900 years. It was after the flood that God changed man's life time to three score and 10. Not all the patriarchs lived over 900 years, and not everyone has lived to three score and 10 after the flood, but those are the norms, apparently, from what we see in Scripture and from our own knowledge.

Your "... because I say'' commandment about 900 year old humans is utterly unsupported. More to the point, your unsupported comment is presented in the context of unsupported events that are mere legend and fable.

Please identify what supported knowledge you can present in regard to any biblical fables surrounding Adam and Noah.

So, why wasn't incest against the law until Moses' time?

I trust you realize I do not agree with you.

 

[Hollie]

True

I am off to play a game I check this board different times of the day in between playing games so don't declare victory cause I did not post right away.

Take all the time you need. You are grappling with 150 years of theory and evidence, so you will need it.

It is your job not mine to support your claim. You must define what supports your claim then provide evidence to back it up. And no just cause some mammal has some vestigial parts does not support the claim though it does help it I will admit. Take the Horse for example we have thousands of years of evidence to support the claim that the horse evolved, there are actually verifiable bones and fossils to show the evolution. Yet in all that history no evidence it ever evolved into 2 or more DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT species. And you can not provide any such evidence for the claim man came from apes or apes and man came from the same species thousands of year ago.

I accept that science and God both work together, Dinosaurs and such came before man I accept the fact that we all descend from some common things our DNA provides that evidence to many similarities to ignore. I even accept that God didn't just make Adam and Eve, he either allowed other humans to evolve or he made them as Cain had to marry someone as did all of Adam and Eves children. NONE of that means God allowed man and ape to evolve from a single species. And Science can not provide compelling evidence they did.

Human evolution - The fossil evidence These describe fossils that are neither human nor ape but have characteristics of both.
Genetics This describes the genetic similarities between the species. Something by the way that helps in determining as to where fossils can be found. So they are supportive of one another.

Do you accept this as supporting evidence and if no why not?

Gotta check it out, the fact is even though I firmly believe in God I could accept evolution since Adam and Eve were not the only humans would just mean that is how God made them.

Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiplied, and people lived hundreds of years in the beginning, which explains how the multiplying resulted in many offspring.

There is no reason to accept that people lived to be hundreds of years old "in the beginning". Human biology has not seen that kind of change in just a few thousand years.

Adam and Noah both lived over 900 years. It was after the flood that God changed man's life time to three score and 10. Not all the patriarchs lived over 900 years, and not everyone has lived to three score and 10 after the flood, but those are the norms, apparently, from what we see in Scripture and from our own knowledge.

True - but the Biblical account is much more detailed than that as I am sure you realize. LIfe span decreased gradually after the flood - see the Genesis account. Shem was still alive at Abraham's time when the life span was down to about 120.

There are scientific clues involved as well. Radiation likely increased after the flood, and radiation induces mutations which are 99% harmful and usually recessive. Inbreeding forces recessive traits out so these two factors likely caused the decrease in life span. There was a drastic narrowing of the gene pool (aka genetic bottleneck) at the flood - there is evidence of this in genetics as well.

But the clincher for me is that it wasn't until Moses' time, when the life span had lowered to 70, that incest became against the law!

Abraham, Isaac and Jacob married close relatives - in fact Sarah was Abraham's half-sister!

I believe God instituted the laws against incest in the Mosaic law due to the dangers of forcing out even more harmful recessive traits.

Or, simply: God's love for us!

Nonsense. Mutations are not 99% harmful. Most mutations are neither harmful nor helpful.

Mutations can be neutral (neither helpful nor harmful), exclusively helpful, exclusively harmful. Whether they are harmful or helpful depends on the environment. Most mutations are either neutral or their effect depends on the environment.

This is stuff you should have learned in 8th grade biology.

 

[BreezeWood]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

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.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

.
the desert creation or an Almighty - for proof howabout burning all the desert books and stating out fresh, those truths from the past would surly reemerge and most likely without the "sinning".

the evolution of religion is pathetic, you seem on the boarder.

LOL So you think if we burn the Bible sin won't exist? Getting rid of a term doesn't get rid of bad behaviour. What you don't understand is that God has seen to it that His Word is here for all men to read, to consider, and to know HIM. He has not left man to his own devices. Just look at the mess unbelievers have made when they lean to their own understanding.

What you don't understand is that God has seen to it that His Word is here for all men to read, ...

.
that is not true, their word is spoken -

the spoken religion of antiquity as prescribed by the Almighty - the triumph of good vs evil - is all there is. there are many considerations but one that truly is not relevant is sin.

 

[Newtonian]

That does not prove we evolved from the same creature apes did though only that perhaps those were early versions of what would become humans. Evolution with in a species is beyond compelling like I said the horse provides that evidence. As to dna and genetics all of life have similar make ups and we are close matches to more then one species, just means everything came from this planet with same building blocks.

So if species have characteristics from both human and ape that doesn't provide evidence that we have a common ancestor but it does provide evidence that early humans have both ape and human features? Seems convoluted thinking does it not?

Nope or did we descend from Pigs to or are you claiming that one creature somehow evolved in multiple numerous DIFFERENT species? Just means we all came from the same source in the beginning, which could be God or could be the primeval swamp. I believe God created everything, which does not mean science is wrong just mistaken. On some points.

Yes, a common Creator who created all that crept over the ground and flew through the air. They adapted over time.

Gen. 1:20-25​

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.​

​

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.​

​

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.​

​

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.​

​

​

They adapt and change over time, and man is trying to explain it while he denies the existence of the CREATOR.

Maybe if anybody would offer a shred of evidence for the existence of the creator people would be less inclined to deny he exists? By the way, I don't deny he exists. I simply deny that I have good reason to assume he exists.

What creator are we talking about by the way? Zeus, Odin, Ra, Jaweh, Jehova, God, Inti, Budha, etc., etc. All where/are worshipped by people who displayed the same level of certainty of the existence of them.

Yawah and Jehoviah are one and the same. As for proof? Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

Just like science one must BELIEVE in God there is NO proof, but there is tons of evidence.

.
the desert creation or an Almighty - for proof howabout burning all the desert books and stating out fresh, those truths from the past would surly reemerge and most likely without the "sinning".

the evolution of religion is pathetic, you seem on the boarder.

LOL So you think if we burn the Bible sin won't exist? Getting rid of a term doesn't get rid of bad behaviour. What you don't understand is that God has seen to it that His Word is here for all men to read, to consider, and to know HIM. He has not left man to his own devices. Just look at the mess unbelievers have made when they lean to their own understanding.

So true barn sour! In fact, the Bible is available in more languages than any other book on our planet and also has the highest circulation (published copies) of any book on our planet..

We would expect that our Creator would make his counsel available to everyone on the planet.

Btw - our website is in 1021 languages - see:

www.jw.org

and note the list of languages you can select. Of course, this is nothing compared with how many languages the Bible is available in!

And that despite the efforts of many, like emperor Diocletian, who tried to destroy all copies of the Bible and more recently men burned at the stake for translating the Bible into common languages.

Matthew 24:14 is being fulfilled!

 

[Hollie]

I am off to play a game I check this board different times of the day in between playing games so don't declare victory cause I did not post right away.

Take all the time you need. You are grappling with 150 years of theory and evidence, so you will need it.

It is your job not mine to support your claim. You must define what supports your claim then provide evidence to back it up. And no just cause some mammal has some vestigial parts does not support the claim though it does help it I will admit. Take the Horse for example we have thousands of years of evidence to support the claim that the horse evolved, there are actually verifiable bones and fossils to show the evolution. Yet in all that history no evidence it ever evolved into 2 or more DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT species. And you can not provide any such evidence for the claim man came from apes or apes and man came from the same species thousands of year ago.

I accept that science and God both work together, Dinosaurs and such came before man I accept the fact that we all descend from some common things our DNA provides that evidence to many similarities to ignore. I even accept that God didn't just make Adam and Eve, he either allowed other humans to evolve or he made them as Cain had to marry someone as did all of Adam and Eves children. NONE of that means God allowed man and ape to evolve from a single species. And Science can not provide compelling evidence they did.

Human evolution - The fossil evidence These describe fossils that are neither human nor ape but have characteristics of both.
Genetics This describes the genetic similarities between the species. Something by the way that helps in determining as to where fossils can be found. So they are supportive of one another.

Do you accept this as supporting evidence and if no why not?

Gotta check it out, the fact is even though I firmly believe in God I could accept evolution since Adam and Eve were not the only humans would just mean that is how God made them.

Adam and Eve were fruitful and multiplied, and people lived hundreds of years in the beginning, which explains how the multiplying resulted in many offspring.

There is no reason to accept that people lived to be hundreds of years old "in the beginning". Human biology has not seen that kind of change in just a few thousand years.

Adam and Noah both lived over 900 years. It was after the flood that God changed man's life time to three score and 10. Not all the patriarchs lived over 900 years, and not everyone has lived to three score and 10 after the flood, but those are the norms, apparently, from what we see in Scripture and from our own knowledge.

Your "... because I say'' commandment about 900 year old humans is utterly unsupported. More to the point, your unsupported comment is presented in the context of unsupported events that are mere legend and fable.

Please identify what supported knowledge you can present in regard to any biblical fables surrounding Adam and Noah.

So, why wasn't incest against the law until Moses' time?

I trust you realize I do not agree with you.

Per the flood fable, the gods allowed incestuous and familial relations for Noah and his immediate family to repopulate the planet.

Didn't the gods understand the biological dangers of such procreation?