[__ Science __ ] One of Evolution’s Most Famous Stories Gets a Rewrite

[Barbarian]

There's one quote that almost sounds like he's aware of some equality, at least until we read the entire quote:
"Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races."
"The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man." -Descent of Man

Yes. In Darwin's opinion, those differences are unimportant, and were not independently evolved. The Human Genome project has verified his opinion; those differences are greater withing "races" than they are between them.

What Darwin saw as important is this:

The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate
Charles Darwin The Descent of Man

 

[Barbarian]

The earth "brings forth" because God created living things to reprobuce.....after their own kind.

That's not what He said:

Gen 1:24 And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds.

"Reproduce" is man's addition to make scripture more acceptable to him.

 

[Consecrated Life]

Jesus Christ said that God Created man and woman at the beginning of creation in complete form perfect for procreation .
You have freedom to either believe Him, or call Him a liar.
What you can't do deny what He has clearly said
You certainly would not be the first in calling Jesus Christ a liar in denying His Word.


Mar 10:6
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Mar 10:7
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

 

[journeyman]

You're assuming that Genesis cannot be figurative, when the text itself tells us that it is.

I understand the creation account has a dual meaning. When God said, "Let us make man after our likeness, he meant spiritually.

we all.....are changed into the same image 2Cor.3:18
...conformed to the image of his Son Rom.8:29

And please understand, Paul didn't mean only in the future, because the text describes the suffering of Jesus and those who are conformed to his image through adversity. In fact, Gen.1 is speaking of Christ,

...his dear Son... is the image of the invisible God Col.1:13,15
Christ...is the image of God 2Cor.4:4

Which leads to seeing how mankind changed after he was created, not before.

God created it to do so. Adam's body was made by natural means,

Adam was formed 1st, then given life. The only way all other humans came into this world is through childbirth.

 

[Barbarian]

Jesus Christ said that God Created man and woman at the beginning of creation in complete form perfect for procreation .

Well, the issue is "at the beginning of creation of what?" Here's God's statement:

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. 2 And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.
Neither male nor female were there. That came later at the creation of humanity.

Adam was formed 1st, then given life.

Pretty much as God gives all of us life. "Before I formed you in the womb..."

 

[Barbarian]

Jesus Christ said that God Created man and woman at the beginning of creation in complete form perfect for procreation .

No. "In complete form perfect for procreation" is your addition to His word to make it acceptable to you.

You have freedom to either believe Him, or call Him a liar.

I don't think you mean to call Him a liar. You just aren't willing to accept His word as it is. I think you honestly consider your revision to be the same as His word.

What you can't do deny what He has clearly said
You certainly would not be the first in calling Jesus Christ a liar in denying His Word.

Be very careful about that kind of accusation. It doesn't sit well with the Lord.

 

[Vaccine]

Yes. In Darwin's opinion, those differences are unimportant

And what differences are those?

 

[journeyman]

Pretty much as God gives all of us life. "Before I formed you in the womb..."

Before I formed thee in the womb I knew thee; Jer.1:5

God knew Jeremiah before he was born. That is, God had Jeremiah in mind, not slime.

 

[Barbarian]

God knew Jeremiah before he was born.

Which is my point. We aren't our bodies; we have bodies. Those are formed naturally, Adam was no different; he is of the same genus we are, human.

 

[journeyman]

Jesus Christ said that God Created man and woman at the beginning of creation in complete form perfect for procreation .
You have freedom to either believe Him, or call Him a liar.
What you can't do deny what He has clearly said
You certainly would not be the first in calling Jesus Christ a liar in denying His Word.

Mar 10:6
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

Mar 10:7
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

Jesus affirmed the writings of Moses and Moses said,

in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is... Exo.20:11

It's really no different from our Saviors gospel.

 

[Barbarian]

Yes. In Darwin's opinion, those differences are unimportant

And what differences are those?

Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, etc., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans are as different from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the "Beagle," with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate.

 

[Barbarian]

Jesus affirmed the writings of Moses and Moses said,

I would be open to your demonstration that if Jesus repeated an allegory, that converts it to a literal history. What do you have?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Well, the issue is "at the beginning of creation of what?" Here's God's statement:

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. 2 And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.

Beginning on the 7th day of creation
Before the 5th & 6th days of creation
Before all the fully formed created creatures had been given their names.

Gen 2:19
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

 

[Vaccine]

Yes. In Darwin's opinion, those differences are unimportant


Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, etc., yet if their whole structure be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans are as different from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the "Beagle," with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate.

So the color of hair, shape of the skull, and proportions of the body are unimportant. And the same remark holds good for the numerous points of mental similarity. Got it, they're unimportant.

I'm glad you cleared that up. It seemed as if your comment "those unimportant differences" was directed at the many, many differences Darwin used to justify his case white people are superior to the other races. Which made no sense because Darwin went to great lengths to stress how important those differences are to his theory. Darwin further drove his point home by mentioning how mental similarities between races are like the same color of hair found on a human and dog, not important.

 

[journeyman]

Which is my point. We aren't our bodies; we have bodies.

Your point was Jeremiah was somehow living "before he was in the womb." You didn't mean God seeing his prophet in his body after he came into existence through childbirth as all Adams' children are.

Those are formed naturally, Adam was no different; he is of the same genus we are, human.

"Formed in the womb" is "naturally."

I formed thee in the belly Jer.1:5 is Gods' point. Adam wasn't born.

 

[journeyman]

I would be open to your demonstration that if Jesus repeated an allegory, that converts it to a literal history. What do you have?

A literal history with a literal present and a literal future, in some cases including the consumation of this universe as we know it. And I'll tell you this my friend. This,

the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power Rom.1:20

Doesn't mean "The universe has been around for billions of years." It means "The universe appears to have had no beginning." Paul in no way suggested that, "God is trapped by the "laws" of earthly nature."
Scripture says things that exist now will no longer exist after judgement, so any appearance of true age this universe may offer to mankind is an illusion. It's an "image of billions and billions and...."

It's only an image of the truth. Not the truth itself.

 

[Barbarian]

I would be open to your demonstration that if Jesus repeated an allegory, that converts it to a literal history. What do you have?

A literal history with a literal present and a literal future, in some cases including the consumation of this universe as we know it. And I'll tell you this my friend.

So... nothing but you think so?

The old "appearance of age" idea that makes God out to be deceptive. Since God is truth, that's not a valid excuse.

 

[Barbarian]

Adam wasn't born.

I know you want to believe that, but there's no reason to imagine so. Allegories are not histories.

 

[Barbarian]

Your point was Jeremiah was somehow living "before he was in the womb."

You think souls aren't alive? How so?

 

[Barbarian]

Beginning on the 7th day of creation

We know the "days" were not literal ones, since you cannot have mornings and evenings with no sun to have them. The point is, God tells us what was there at the beginning of creation, and male and female were not there.