to believe or not to believe...

[jazzy]

I totally agree with your beautiful post's comment!! because there is no way for me how can my lineage trace back to africa's lineage.. why should i claim world that africa is my brother?? my answer is no, there in africa has thousand tribes... i have no tribe but I have tribe is here which the slave nation is my tribe!! they are not belong to my own genetics.. they were not slave like me and my fore-fathers who work hard, suffered by their beat to death and their blood sweat on me for 500 years or more.. Now their talking like bsing and wanted to put blind on my eyes for who i am, where i came from, and what i am doing here.. But i acknoweldge me for who i am and where i came from and what i am doing here around. I knew my answered already... they can't take away my ideninty from me.. therefore, there is no way for us can trace back lineage of Noah since we are lost the lineage of noah for long time ago like thousands thousands thousand years ago!!!!! the christian people said so they are the lineage from Noah that what is their benfit, then WHY NOT YOU MOVE OUT OF USA AND BACK TO ISREAL WHERE YOU BELONG TO... Next time, don't bring garbage "new" testment here around.. thanks!


my own believing personal alike quote: DEUTERONOMY 32:39!!!

How can Noah divide into five races with his own blood? Is he white? Or is he brown? or is he black? what color of his hair? None of us knew what he looked alike. What about blood type alike A, B, AB or O. I believe Noah's blood type was O because of area where he used to live and my blood type does not match his so how can I be one of his children.
Unless we all have one similar DNA to Noah then so be it but he does not live now so we cant compare his dna with all of us.

 

[Reba]

How can Noah divide into five races with his own blood?

Each of Noah's sons had a wife with her own set of DNA. Therefore, the children of each of Noah's sons and daughter-in-laws would have a unique set of DNA, and then those would pass down to their descendants. As their families multiplied, and moved to different locations, the DNA of their gene pools would become more concentrated within each "tribe".

 

[Reba]

I do not believe we came from apes nor I do not believe we all come from Noah's children. Those were words of mouth which carried to Moses thousand years later. Believe what u want, u can be Noah's children and I chose not to believe I came from one of Noah's children.

OK. So, where do you think your ancestors came from?

 

[Reba]

How old is earth?

In the 6,000 years range.

 

[Endymion]

In the 6,000 years range.

I thought some Biblical scholars said about 10,000? I've seen citations of articles from the Journal of Biblical Research before that pointed out that number before.

 

[Endymion]

Each of Noah's sons had a wife with her own set of DNA. Therefore, the children of each of Noah's sons and daughter-in-laws would have a unique set of DNA, and then those would pass down to their descendants. As their families multiplied, and moved to different locations, the DNA of their gene pools would become more concentrated within each "tribe".

Wouldn't this have created a much more severe genetic bottleneck than what we would have expected today? I think in terms of the relatively few generations since the time of Noah. I'm not negating what you say, but I do think some very rapid genetic diversification had to happen in order to reach our current state over such a short time. After all, I don't really think that five people all had the genetic traits for Down's Syndrome, Sickle Cell Anemia, Neurofibromatosis, Barth Syndrome, Retinoblastoma, Rett Syndrome, Waardenburg Syndrome, Kleinfelter Syndrome, Huntington's Disease, Gaucher's Disease, ad confusatum. All these (and many of the hundreds of other genetic disorders) most likely came independently of Noah's sons.

This gives us two apparent possibilities:

1) Other humans existed and survived the flood.
or
2) Rapid genetic changes occured in each generation of offspring following Noah.

This leads us to two apparent future consequences:
1) We are not all scions of Noah.
or
2) If the rate of genetic change since Noah continues at the average pace between Noah and now, we may very soon become naturally morphed strange creatures. We may also have a much, much higher incidence of disease and disorders in the future than in the past.

 

[Dennis S.]

2) If the rate of genetic change since Noah continues at the average pace between Noah and now, we may very soon become naturally morphed strange creatures. We may also have a much, much higher incidence of disease and disorders in the future than in the past.

Which would instead support that EVOLUTION is possible, and therefore extremely likely that humans in the past are not like the humans of today; therefore, we are not made "in his image" and thus contradicting the bible as it stands.

 

[Endymion]

Which would instead support that EVOLUTION is possible, and therefore extremely likely that humans in the past are not like the humans of today; therefore, we are not made "in his image" and thus contradicting the bible as it stands.

Correct. Except we know that evolution does not happen at this accelerated rate, especially in complex diploid macroorganisms like Homo Sapiens. This negates the second conclusion I made.

The logical opt-out is divine intervention, which is argumentatively plausible (see Nietzsche's Evil Genie and Dirac's proof that nothing can be proven). Bear in mind I'm not siding with anyone here, I am saying it is argumentatively plausible as much as the statement, "There may be ten orange buildings in Tulsa, Oklahoma." There may indeed be ten orange buildings in Tulsa, but unless someone actually drives there and proves that there are or are not ten buildings in Tulsa, the argument is plausible.

Equivalently, the argument that divine intervention did not happen and instead a strange, undiscovered component of evolutionary theory came into effect is also argumentatively plausible.

 

[deafdyke]

After all, I don't really think that five people all had the genetic traits for Down's Syndrome, Sickle Cell Anemia, Neurofibromatosis, Barth Syndrome, Retinoblastoma, Rett Syndrome, Waardenburg Syndrome, Kleinfelter Syndrome, Huntington's Disease, Gaucher's Disease, ad confusatum. All these (and many of the hundreds of other genetic disorders) most likely came independently of Noah's sons.

Actually Endy, Down's Syndrome isn't familial genetic.....it's a random mutation.

 

[Endymion]

Actually Endy, Down's Syndrome isn't familial genetic.....it's a random mutation.

I stand corrected. Thanks for bringing that to my attention, Deafdyke!

 

[Reba]

I thought some Biblical scholars said about 10,000? I've seen citations of articles from the Journal of Biblical Research before that pointed out that number before.

I did say in the "range"; not an exact number.

 

[Reba]

... After all, I don't really think that five people all had the genetic traits for Down's Syndrome, Sickle Cell Anemia, Neurofibromatosis, Barth Syndrome, Retinoblastoma, Rett Syndrome, Waardenburg Syndrome, Kleinfelter Syndrome, Huntington's Disease, Gaucher's Disease, ad confusatum. ..

Six people--three brothers from one family, and three wives from three different families.

Carrying one genetic trait doesn't necessarily cancel out the possibility of carrying other traits.

 

[Rose Immortal]

Which would instead support that EVOLUTION is possible, and therefore extremely likely that humans in the past are not like the humans of today; therefore, we are not made "in his image" and thus contradicting the bible as it stands.

If there is an evolutionary process going on, who says God cannot be continuing to create through it? This does NOT mean prior generations were less "up to quality standards" as far as their bodies were. Rather, they were necessary steps for what today's generation is intended to be. But I think it's in our soul where our greatest potential for similarity to God (and our greatest dissimilarity thanks to sin) lies.

Again I respect that most of the Christians here have no use for this idea, so please don't flame me over it. I am not trying to force anybody to change their minds who doesn't want to.

 

[Reba]

If there is an evolutionary process going on, who says God cannot be continuing to create through it? This does NOT mean prior generations were less "up to quality standards" as far as their bodies were. ..

God created Adam and Eve as perfect individuals, in a perfect physical environment. After Adam and Eve sinned (the "Fall"), their bodies were cursed, and the physical world environment was cursed. Each subsequent generation has been born less perfect. That is, the people on earth today have lower IQs, weaker bodies, and more disability and disease than earlier generations.

Longevity, live birth rates, disease control, etc., seem better now because of improved medical technology, sanitation, etc. But the human body and mind have not actually improved. We only have better ways of overcoming the shortcomings now.

If anything, our bodies and minds today are less "up to quality standards" of those early generations.

 

[Rose Immortal]

Even if there is not improvement, there is most certainly change. That cannot be argued. I was just trying to pre-empt an argument that some might say, that the previous humans were "less developed" or "less refined" and therefore less gloriously designed.

But let me make something very clear to you--although we disagree about what mechanism God used for His Creation, I do not believe it is any less miraculous either way. If I'm wrong, so be it--I'll ask for forgiveness of that error along with the others I know I must have (not sure what all of them are, but human nature is that I have my share ). If I am correct, my faith stands intact and is not diminished by the particular mechanism used. Both instant creation and incremental creation are equally miraculous...both could only be managed by a divine mind that accounts for more variables than any mortal mind could ever hope to contain.

 

[Endymion]

I did say in the "range"; not an exact number.

Oh. *laughs*

I guess it could have been said a little differently, but yea . . . I see what you're saying now.

 

[Dennis S.]

God created Adam and Eve as perfect individuals, in a perfect physical environment. After Adam and Eve sinned (the "Fall"), their bodies were cursed, and the physical world environment was cursed. Each subsequent generation has been born less perfect. That is, the people on earth today have lower IQs, weaker bodies, and more disability and disease than earlier generations.

Longevity, live birth rates, disease control, etc., seem better now because of improved medical technology, sanitation, etc. But the human body and mind have not actually improved. We only have better ways of overcoming the shortcomings now.

If anything, our bodies and minds today are less "up to quality standards" of those early generations.

I think this is hiliarious. Do you really believe that people lived for hundreds or thousands of years before? And that they were smarter than people of today? And that there's more disease and disability now?

Well, I'll give you that -- there IS more disease and disability now than ever before. Absolutely.

At any point in history before today, the likeihood of me living to my teens would be super tiny. Even without my hearing loss, I would most likely be dead as an infant from some disease. My mother was likely die giving birth to babies. Babies with gross defects were likely abandoned or left to die. Dying before passing on my genes ensures that there won't be any Dennis defects around.

Now, me, a successful deaf person, in the modern age, can make it to maturity and die because my cells are unable to replicate themselves perfectly anymore, instead of dying because of a micro-organism is mistaken as "God's will that I should die early." Of course, since I lived that long, I've probably passed on my genes to my children. Of course, these "defects" or "disabilities" you so kindly points out, aren't desirable, but hey, I'd rather allow people with defects to live, 'cause they can still contribute to society and make it better. Screw those people who only think that their "perfect" genes should survive.

So nice, Reba. You're a hypocrite, since you're one of those "cursed" humans who has children and is contributing to the "less perfect" advancement of humanity. You're cursing your children to live less longer than you.

People who are saved don't live any longer than anyone else. And the "good ol' days" are not better than today. And humans were not living a single lifespan that was longer than 1,000 trips around the sun

 

[Endymion]

Six people--three brothers from one family, and three wives from three different families.

Carrying one genetic trait doesn't necessarily cancel out the possibility of carrying other traits.

Thanks for the correction on the number of people.

On the other hand, the comment about not cancelling out traits kind of misses the point.

Let's say Shem, son of Noah, is heir to 1/6ths of the flaws of humankind. Within his genetic coding, he has hundreds (if not more) of major genetic disorders. With so many major, severe "defects" in his coding, it is almost impossible for Shem to even lead a normal life.

This unfortunate fate for Shem is true even if you account for latent disorders that do not manifest until later generations. The logic is this: if you assume a very conservative two hundred major disorders, Shem will need to suffer from no more than five (a generous figure) to lead some resemblance of a normal life. One hundred and nintey-five "ready-to-go" latent disorders of two hundred disorders is not a normal occurence. In fact, Shem might have better odds of survival past an early age if he stands in the middle of I-90 westbound for a couple weeks, especially New Year's Eve with all the drunks.

Given the perilous health we now clearly expect of Shem, what is his actual physical state?

Genesis 9:1 "And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth."

Clearly God expects Shem to be healthy enough to walk around, find his mate, and multiply. As any parent knows, raising and providing for a child is no simple task.

---
We come to two apparent conclusions:

1) Shem and his peers did not suffer from major genetic defects (which means they came by genetic modification or by survivors of Noah's flood).

or

2) Divine intervention kept the disorders latent and brought them up only later.

 

[Endymion]

Reba,

I hope you realize I'm not trying to put up fists here with anyone, instead I always enjoy the merits of an intelligent discussion, no matter which viewpoint anyone's arguing for.

I do have one thing that has been bothering me for a long time and have not found any answers. Do you have any possible treatments to this difficulty?

1 Timothy 2:11-15 (KJV):

[11] Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
[12] But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
[13] For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
[14] And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
[15] Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

---

According to the above, and especially #12, it seems that many of my teachers (who were wonderful, caring people I will always admire) have done wrong. This is one of my biggest problems with the tradition of masculine dominance to which modern religion is heir. In fact, this really disturbs me.

It seems to me this is terribly misogynist, but there are always parts of the bible I do not know. Do you have a possible treatment for this?

 

[Reba]

I think this is hiliarious. Do you really believe that people lived for hundreds or thousands of years before? And that they were smarter than people of today? And that there's more disease and disability now?

Yes, I do.

... Of course, since I lived that long, I've probably passed on my genes to my children. Of course, these "defects" or "disabilities" you so kindly points out, aren't desirable, but hey, I'd rather allow people with defects to live, 'cause they can still contribute to society and make it better. Screw those people who only think that their "perfect" genes should survive.

I don't understand your conclusion. Just because I stated that human bodies have degenerated since Adam and Eve were created, doesn't mean that people are less valuable now. A person's physical or mental capability has nothing to do with their value as a human being.

Who said that only "perfect" genes should survive? That sounds more like evoluntionary "survival of the fittest" philosophy. Christians don't believe in that. In fact, most organizations that support charitable support for "handicapped" people were established by Christian individuals and organizations. Humanists are more likely to support the abortion of "imperfect" babies, and euthanasia for "defective" or "outlived-their-usefulness" people.

So nice, Reba. You're a hypocrite, since you're one of those "cursed" humans who has children and is contributing to the "less perfect" advancement of humanity. You're cursing your children to live less longer than you.

What a bizarre conclusion. How does any parent know how long their children will live? Is any lifespan worthless?

Where is this anger coming from?

People who are saved don't live any longer than anyone else.

Only in eternity. :P On earth, saved and unsaved bodies have the same limitations.