Posted on 08/27/2011 10:07:19 AM PDT by fishtank
National Public Radio recently interviewed Trinity Western University biologist Dennis Venema, who stated his belief that humans did not descend from Adam and Eve.1 Venema, an evangelical evolutionist, claimed that genetics studies show "there is no way we can be traced back to a single couple."2 Do the data really contradict the biblical account of human history?
"Given the genetic variation of people today, [Venema] says scientists can't get that [starting] population size below 10,000 people at any time in our evolutionary history," NPR reported.2 But this claim fails for three reasons. First, it relies on the presumption of "evolutionary history," not scientific data. Second, the idea that an initial group of 10,000 humans evolved from primates is mathematically impossible. Third, a descent from Adam and Eve actually does explain the patterns in modern human genetics....
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
LOL!
God is the Supreme Being, Infinitely Perfect, who made all things and keeps them in existence.
Evolution addresses the how; religion addresses the why. The two really don’t cross much at all, and trying to force each study to cover the other is when you run into problems.
Forget the Bible, there’s too much discussion of Adam and Eve in midrashic sources to believe that it’s all fabricated and that they were not historical people. The “Book of Adam and Eve” can probably be found on the web.
I agree. In my view, God gave us our soul and that is what lives forever and longs to be back with Him. Without that, we are just a bunch of hairless apes.
Where I fell off the evolution band wagon and began to doubt a dozen years of solid indoctrination was the complete lack of evidence for trans-speciation (sp?) and how little physical fossil evidence is actually out there for older extinct primate species. The presumption that those ancient chimps changed over time into modern humans is a nice theory but (IMHO) it has yet to be proven. Plus, since all humans but no other modern primates possess certain traits that are only seen in aquatic mammals (furless, large brained, subcutaneous fat layers, with slightly webbed fingers and toes) I think the experts are looking in all the wrong places for our ancestral stock.
Therefore, if by "evolution" you mean change over time within species (that one can in good faith believe were created by a benevolent G*d) there is no conflict. But self-described "evolutionists" these days tend to also be vocal atheists who push their beliefs well past where physical evidence warrants.
Just because I picked the Nom de Plume “ZULU” everyone assumes I’m black. Guess they never saw the movie “ZULU” with Stanley Baker. I’m NOT Black and Danny Glover is a mental midget.
The literal DNA data does NOT contradict the biblical account. Genesis 1:26 is the flesh men/women created on the sixth day.... (course Peter says that a day with the LORD is as a thousand years...) And the Genesis 2 account where it says there was NO one to tend the 'garden' or otherwise called farmer. Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 according to what Peter says in the Heavenly Father's methodology of calculating 'time' are at minimum 2 and most 3 thousand years apart.
Can’t argue with that.
If there is no first Adam then there can be no ‘2nd Adam’ hence no ‘Gospel’, no ‘Good News’, no hope for anything beyond the here and now. Christianity without Adam is meaningless....
It must have been the Nephilim that added diversity.
nope we are featherless bipeds according to Plato
Well, the fossil record seems to indicate that those “intermediate” creatures existed once at a time when other creatures did not exist. The fossil records is a snapshot in time of a breeding population. He provides precious little about where that population PRECISELY came from and where it PRECISELY went. A lot of the pre-modern humans may have been dead-ends, biologically.
God added diversity, or dna change, as needed.
Color has nothing to do with it. Have you seen the video?
That too. It’s been too many decades since I last read Plato.
Entirely too complex ~ note, though, “everybody” has a liver. Not “everybody” has a heart!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.