Creationists -- Please answer David Attenborough for me...

[Evangelicalhumanist]

So because there are “bad things” there cannot be a god. Fallacious argument.

​

No, there just can't be a god that is -- at one and the same time -- all good and all powerful. Sure, I suppose it's possible that there's a powerful god that creates bad things to make some of its other creations miserable, but I couldn't call that being "all good." ​

By the way, on what basis do you declare these worms are bad?

There are lots of worms, in fact that are very good. Farmers till the soil of their fields, but worms till the soil of the rest of the world -- and that's a great thing. But there are other worms that do absolutely dreadful harm -- many of them in fact. I won't post pictures, because they're troubling, but you can easily look them up.

What this shows, to me, and to many others (especially those with a science background) is that purposeful creation looks about as likely as winning the lottery 30 times in a row, and natural selection -- where every species competes to pass on its own genes -- looks as unlikely as a mother loving her newborn child.

 

[Deeje]

I'm going to address this single quote in your long post, in the hopes that other members will contribute thoughts of their own.

Do you see what you said? "Humans chose this route and its consequences...God did not interfere."

When humans chose to disobey their Creator, they changed life completely, for themselves and their future offspring. Their environment also changed dramatically. That is what the Bible teaches.

If our own children decide to go off on their own because they no longer want to be under parental control and to make their own mistakes (and hopefully learn from them) will parental interference add to the life lesson or detract from it?

If we soften the fall, the lesson is lost. God teaches that we 'reap what we sow'. The Law of Gravity is a prime example....if you defy the Law of Gravity it will teach you painfully and immediately that you should respect it next time. God made the Law of Gravity. Humans learn more by experience than anything you tell them....Eden was a classic example of that.

Are you catching my drift?

This is the quintessence of ignorance about what evolution is and how it works. There is no "choice" involved -- even on the part of God, to interfere or not.

I don't believe in evolution.....but I do accept adaptation as the means for an existing species to keep existing even in a varied form.....and even if the original species dies out. (Like the Peppered Moth.....adaptation changed its color when coal fires changed the color of the trees they inhabited and for which they were camouflaged.....and then, when the pollution was rectified, the moths returned to their original color.) Adaptation is a marvelously designed mechanism.

God defenders and Trump defenders appear to be of the same ilk: dodge, deflect, ignore -- do anything but acknowledge the obvious reality.

Oh dear.....If you want to talk about ilk.....I find evolution defenders also rely on" dodge, deflect and ignore"....go figure...

 

[Etritonakin]

Creation also means...

I am NOT a "creationist" according to most definitions -but I do believe the universe, the various atoms and energies, Earth and Earth life were intentionally created.
Rom 8:19 "The creation waits in eager expectation for the revelation of the sons of God. 20For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but because of the One who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God"

That worm is an example of that which affects our "vile body" -subject "to futility" -within a creation in "bondage to decay"...
Phil 3:21Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

Essentially... if God created the atoms which lend themselves to DNA self-replication, etc., then God would be responsible for creating evolution -which allows for the development and adaptation of endless varieties of life forms -potentially all over the universe (if the universe is generally similar everywhere) -without the necessity of micromanagement.

According to scripture... God -who made beings prior to man who were not subject to the life-death cycle, etc., of Earth life -PURPOSEFULLY caused man to inhabit bodies which were temporary and subject to such things. Striving against this state and environment has made man's minds experienced, strong and capable -and later their bodies will be strong and invulnerable.

Man is unlike other Earth life in that our minds are not simply sufficient to allow us to survive. Our mental capacity far outweighs our physical ability or necessity. One way or another -by self-evolution or resurrection -we would become more -or be made more -than human. We also have the ability to understand ourselves and environment -and increasingly master such. Inhabiting a chaotic situation has essentially forged our minds and forced us to learn to manage complex situations in order to survive and remain healthy.

The life/death cycle allows for adaptation and conservation of resources in a relatively-closed system -but it becomes problematic when life forms have the ability to not want to die -to feel complex pain and sorrow for themselves and others -and to wish things were otherwise. It is not an issue until it is. (However, the fact that creatures harm and consume each other is a matter of design -whether you believe it was designed intelligently or not -and it is not actually a necessity. Different design can allow for energy to be derived differently) This also -by experiencing the opposite -has been part of how compassion and consideration of other humans and other species has been created in us -drawn out by creating a vacuum for it.
After allowing it for a time -and affecting us as it would -those things will be made different. It was scheduled from the beginning.
War will be ceased, creatures harming each other will cease ('the lion will eat straw like the ox", "dust will be the serpent's meat") , we will be given permanence, etc. -and we will be made qualified to manage the entire creation without micromanagement.

God did not attempt to create content humans -but beings which would one day inherit the entire creation/universe -and so subjected them to that which should not be -so they could overcome it -and master it.

Most would accept that self-awareness and creativity were natural developments necessary to allow for that which was not otherwise possible -AFTER THE BIG BANG -but the same would be true on every level.

Ironically...... I believe that God exists as a result of the most pure form of evolution -but we required forethought for mass-production.

The original would have required its own input as increasingly able -whereas we become aware at an instant within an already-extremely-capable interface -which we do not completely understand even at the end of our temporary existence. (Not to mention that we die just about the time we begin to understand how to live.)

An obvious example of how a loving God uses not-so-apparently-loving means -including various creatures affecting man adversely -is that of Egypt's plagues. It may not seem immediately apparent, but all of that was for the eventual good of even those who were plagued or died. All of human history was necessary to create the very different situation which will exist in the future -into which all will be resurrected.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

For those of us who are believers in an Intelligent Creator, it seems obvious that this lifeform is not a direct creation of God.

Really?

How? How is that "obvious"?
Doesn't this worm exhibit "specified complexity", and all the other stuff that is used as an argument to argue for a "creator"?

Not every creature is, so Mr Attenborough is mistaken there, as are many YEC's. No intelligent designer creates things that destroy his own handiwork.

Ow?

So really, any animals that eats is not a created animal, because by eating it "destroys his handiwork"?
And let's not even begin about humans and how they aren't just destroying other creatures (to the point of extinction), but actually destroying the planet itself.

Seems like this "general" rule of yours isn't as "general" as you hoped it was ha?

In his original creation setting, no creature was intended to harm another...

So no creature had to eat?
Then why did they have teeth, a mouth, a stomach, etc?

The only creatures who ate flesh were the carrion birds, animals and insects...nature's clean-up crew.

Right, right....

So lions, tigers, crockodiles, ... they didn't eat live meat? What did they use their carnivorous teeth and massive jaw muscles for then? Cracking cockonuts?

How and why do creatures adapt?

Evolution.

In that setting, many species may have been created simply as an adaptive response to changed conditions.

So because some mythical human in a mythical garden at an apple that he wasn't supposed to, crockodiles went from vegetarians to being an ultimate predator?

:rolleyess

Where you do guys get this stuf.....................................

So don't blame God for these problems...blame humans for providing the conditions that keep these diseases from being controlled.

Be serious. No, humans are not to blame for the existance of disgusting parasites, horrible virusses or things like cancer.

Even bending over backwards and assuming your religious myth - your god didn't HAVE to doom ALL LIVING THINGS because one dude made a bad decision. That was entirely GOD's doing and his terrible temper and overexaggerated, immoral response.

Wealthy pharma companies could help to provide the medicine necessary at no cost...because they can afford to....but they won't.

If they would hand out their products for free, they wouldn't be wealthy. Instead, they'ld go out of business.

How much governmental spending is also wasted on military weapons and politicians' political campaigns and lifestyles?

Agree there. But it's a mystery what that has got to do with the topic.

The Creator has stepped back to show humans how inept they really are without him. But soon he promises to step in and repair the damage, to eradicate sickness and suffering and eliminate from existence all who think man's ways are superior.

So, a couple thousand years of mega suffering from all living things, really is nothing more or less then just a big show-off game for your god?

Sounds like a real douche.

Put the blame where it really lies......that is how I would answer David Attenborough.....

There is nobody to blame. That's the point you keep missing.
You're the one who wants to play the blame game. You're the one engaged in a religion which really isn't anything more or less then a gigantic guilt trip.

The worm parasite developed this strategy as a survival mechanism. "Blame" doesn't enter the equation here. This is just how it is. The only thing we can do is try and protect ourselves.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So, they start off with an a priori view that humans evolved,

No. They start with the a priori knowledge that humans evolved.

and base their inferences, i.e., guesses, to fit it.

No. They add their own findings to the findings of those that came before them who did other studies.

When Einstein added his findings of relativity, he didn't start Newtonian physics from scratch either.
Do you understand how scientific progress works? Because it sounds like you don't.

When Mercedes designs a new car, do you think that they reinvent the wheel every time as well?

How does MtEve fit into this?

mtEve is far older and doesn't have anything to do with this.

And how did these populations then migrate?

They started walking and moved to other area's.

Interesting how closely-related populations become estranged from each other, rather quickly! (African tribes, and Native Americans, are solid evidence of this.) Although I believe that there is a lot of truth in these cultures’ myths, I know much is based on faulty assumptions....these “1000’s of generations” are simply folklore.

Genetic evidence isn't "folklore"

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

These alleged routes could very well be accurate, it seems so. But I believe the assumed timelines are way off.

And your reason for "believing" that is your a priori religious beliefs which isn't compatible with the actual evidence. And you prefer your religious beliefs over the evidence.

Look how little time it took for Europeans to conquer and inhabit the North American continent, less than 600 years!
Australia, even more quickly.

Primitive tribes vs established empires.

Genetics is a field in its infancy....there’s much more to learn.

Which doesn't negate the things we've alreay learned - which is quite substantial.

Here’s a thought related to genetics. There’s been much genetic material found in cells of organisms, labeled “junk DNA”, because it appeared this material has no use...a product of changes caused by evolution.

Some biologists who promote ID, though, predicted that it isn’t useless, or excess “junk”. These predictions are proving accurate, that they are serving some purpose in regulatory processes, switching on or off certain genes, once a goal is achieved!

There are no publishing biologists that support ID.
And there factually exists junk DNA. Like chickens who have broken genes to build teeth.

IMO, as more complexity is discovered, deferring to undirected, naturalistic causes in creating new body plans, will lose its hold on reasoning scientists.

You only believe that because you want it to be true.

Axe, Behe, Meyer, Minnich and others have already shed these assumptions.

Guy like Behe are proven liars.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

And your reason for "believing" that is your a priori religious beliefs which isn't compatible with the actual evidence. And you prefer your religious beliefs over the evidence.





Primitive tribes vs established empires.



Which doesn't negate the things we've alreay learned - which is quite substantial.



There are no publishing biologists that support ID.
And there factually exists junk DNA. Like chickens who have broken genes to build teeth.



You only believe that because you want it to be true.



Guy like Behe are proven liars.

You’re too glib with adjectives, lol.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You’re too glib with adjectives, lol.

No idea what that is supposed to mean.
But it sounds like handwaving again.

 

[Salvador]

When humans chose to disobey their Creator, they changed life completely, for themselves and their future offspring. Their environment also changed dramatically. That is what the Bible teaches.

If our own children decide to go off on their own because they no longer want to be under parental control and to make their own mistakes (and hopefully learn from them) will parental interference add to the life lesson or detract from it?

If we soften the fall, the lesson is lost. God teaches that we 'reap what we sow'. The Law of Gravity is a prime example....if you defy the Law of Gravity it will teach you painfully and immediately that you should respect it next time. God made the Law of Gravity. Humans learn more by experience than anything you tell them....Eden was a classic example of that.

Are you catching my drift?

I don't believe in evolution.....but I do accept adaptation as the means for an existing species to keep existing even in a varied form.....and even if the original species dies out. (Like the Peppered Moth.....adaptation changed its color when coal fires changed the color of the trees they inhabited and for which they were camouflaged.....and then, when the pollution was rectified, the moths returned to their original color.) Adaptation is a marvelously designed mechanism.


Oh dear.....If you want to talk about ilk.....I find evolution defenders also rely on" dodge, deflect and ignore"....go figure...

As I've noted elsewhere in some other discussions about Christianity, Jesus's family tree has a time span of 77 generations listed between his generation and Adam whom the Bible claims was the "first man". Reference: (Luke 3:23-38) and Eve whom the Bible claims as the mother of all the living. (Genesis 3:20)

However, the Australian aborigines have evidently been in Australia for over a thousand consecutive generations. Reference: Aboriginal Australians - Wikipedia

There have been hundreds of generations of Native Americans between the time their common ancestry migrated from Asia until the time of Christ.
Reference: Native Americans in the United States - Wikipedia

Of course, the Bible is wrong; in fact, there were people prior to the 76th generation before Christ that allegedly was spawned by Adam and Eve.

The fossil record isn't the only evidence in support of evolution. There is other collaborating evidence, such as overwhelming genetic evidence of common ancestry between humans and other great ape species.

Specific examples from comparative physiology and biochemistry:

Chromosome 2 in humans

Main article: Chromosome 2 (human)

Further information: Chimpanzee Genome Project § Genes of the Chromosome 2 fusion site

Fusion of ancestral chromosomes left distinctive remnants of telomeres, and a vestigial centromere
Evidence for the evolution of Homo sapiens from a common ancestor with chimpanzees is found in the number of chromosomes in humans as compared to all other members of Hominidae. All hominidae have 24 pairs of chromosomes, except humans, who have only 23 pairs. Human chromosome 2 is a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.

The evidence for this includes:
The correspondence of chromosome 2 to two ape chromosomes. The closest human relative, the common chimpanzee, has near-identical DNA sequences to human chromosome 2, but they are found in two separate chromosomes. The same is true of the more distant gorilla and orangutan.
The presence of a vestigial centromere. Normally a chromosome has just one centromere, but in chromosome 2 there are remnants of a second centromere.
The presence of vestigial telomeres. These are normally found only at the ends of a chromosome, but in chromosome 2 there are additional telomere sequences in the middle.

Chromosome 2 thus presents strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. According to J. W. Ijdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_o...on_descent

Endogenous retroviruses (or ERVs) are remnant sequences in the genome left from ancient viral infections in an organism. The retroviruses (or virogenes) are always passed on to the next generation of that organism that received the infection. This leaves the virogene left in the genome. Because this event is rare and random, finding identical chromosomal positions of a virogene in two different species suggests common ancestry. Cats (Felidae) present a notable instance of virogene sequences demonstrating common descent. The standard phylogenetic tree for Felidae have smaller cats (Felis chaus, Felis silvestris, Felis nigripes, and Felis catus) diverging from larger cats such as the subfamily Pantherinae and other carnivores. The fact that small cats have an ERV where the larger cats do not suggests that the gene was inserted into the ancestor of the small cats after the larger cats had diverged. Another example of this is with humans and chimps. Humans contain numerous ERVs that comprise a considerable percentage of the genome. Sources vary, but 1% to 8% has been proposed. Humans and chimps share seven different occurrences of virogenes, while all primates share similar retroviruses congruent with phylogeny.

There's plenty of evidence humans share common ancestry with other great apes.

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia

ERVs provide the closest thing to a mathematical proof for evolution.. ERVs are the relics of ancient viral infections preserved in our DNA. The odd thing is many ERVs are located in exactly the same position on our genome and the chimpanzee genome! There are two explanations for the perfectly matched ERV locations. Either it is an unbelievable coincidence that viruses just by chance were inserted in exactly the same location in our genomes, or humans and chimps share a common ancestor. The chances that a virus was inserted at the exact same location is 1 in 3,000,000,000. Humans and chimps share 7 instances of viruses inserted at perfectly matched location. It was our common ancestor that was infected, and we both inherited the ERVs.

Johnson, Welkin E.; Coffin, John M. (1999-08-31). "Constructing primate phylogenies from ancient retrovirus sequences". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 96(18): 10254–10260. Bibcode:1999PNAS...9610254J. doi:10.1073/pnas.96.18.10254. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 17875. PMID 10468595

 

[Etritonakin]

As I've noted elsewhere in some other discussions about Christianity, Jesus's family tree has a time span of 77 generations listed between his generation and Adam whom the Bible claims was the "first man". Reference: (Luke 3:23-38) and Eve whom the Bible claims as the mother of all the living. (Genesis 3:20)

However, the Australian aborigines have evidently been in Australia for over a thousand consecutive generations. Reference: Aboriginal Australians - Wikipedia

There have been hundreds of generations of Native Americans between the time their common ancestry migrated from Asia until the time of Christ.
Reference: Native Americans in the United States - Wikipedia

Of course, the Bible is wrong; in fact, there were people prior to the 76th generation before Christ that allegedly was spawned by Adam and Eve.

The fossil record isn't the only evidence in support of evolution. There is other collaborating evidence, such as overwhelming genetic evidence of common ancestry between humans and other great ape species.

Specific examples from comparative physiology and biochemistry:

Chromosome 2 in humans

Main article: Chromosome 2 (human)

Further information: Chimpanzee Genome Project § Genes of the Chromosome 2 fusion site

Fusion of ancestral chromosomes left distinctive remnants of telomeres, and a vestigial centromere
Evidence for the evolution of Homo sapiens from a common ancestor with chimpanzees is found in the number of chromosomes in humans as compared to all other members of Hominidae. All hominidae have 24 pairs of chromosomes, except humans, who have only 23 pairs. Human chromosome 2 is a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.

The evidence for this includes:
The correspondence of chromosome 2 to two ape chromosomes. The closest human relative, the common chimpanzee, has near-identical DNA sequences to human chromosome 2, but they are found in two separate chromosomes. The same is true of the more distant gorilla and orangutan.
The presence of a vestigial centromere. Normally a chromosome has just one centromere, but in chromosome 2 there are remnants of a second centromere.
The presence of vestigial telomeres. These are normally found only at the ends of a chromosome, but in chromosome 2 there are additional telomere sequences in the middle.

Chromosome 2 thus presents strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. According to J. W. Ijdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_o...on_descent

Endogenous retroviruses (or ERVs) are remnant sequences in the genome left from ancient viral infections in an organism. The retroviruses (or virogenes) are always passed on to the next generation of that organism that received the infection. This leaves the virogene left in the genome. Because this event is rare and random, finding identical chromosomal positions of a virogene in two different species suggests common ancestry. Cats (Felidae) present a notable instance of virogene sequences demonstrating common descent. The standard phylogenetic tree for Felidae have smaller cats (Felis chaus, Felis silvestris, Felis nigripes, and Felis catus) diverging from larger cats such as the subfamily Pantherinae and other carnivores. The fact that small cats have an ERV where the larger cats do not suggests that the gene was inserted into the ancestor of the small cats after the larger cats had diverged. Another example of this is with humans and chimps. Humans contain numerous ERVs that comprise a considerable percentage of the genome. Sources vary, but 1% to 8% has been proposed. Humans and chimps share seven different occurrences of virogenes, while all primates share similar retroviruses congruent with phylogeny.

There's plenty of evidence humans share common ancestry with other great apes.

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia

ERVs provide the closest thing to a mathematical proof for evolution.. ERVs are the relics of ancient viral infections preserved in our DNA. The odd thing is many ERVs are located in exactly the same position on our genome and the chimpanzee genome! There are two explanations for the perfectly matched ERV locations. Either it is an unbelievable coincidence that viruses just by chance were inserted in exactly the same location in our genomes, or humans and chimps share a common ancestor. The chances that a virus was inserted at the exact same location is 1 in 3,000,000,000. Humans and chimps share 7 instances of viruses inserted at perfectly matched location. It was our common ancestor that was infected, and we both inherited the ERVs.

Johnson, Welkin E.; Coffin, John M. (1999-08-31). "Constructing primate phylogenies from ancient retrovirus sequences". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 96(18): 10254–10260. Bibcode:1999PNAS...9610254J. doi:10.1073/pnas.96.18.10254. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 17875. PMID 10468595

You are assuming the bible is using the scientific definition of "man" there -and that it must mean it is stating there were no other "humans" -but in that very book -where many ASSUME there were only Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel alive on Earth -Cain was worried that people OUTSIDE OF EDEN would kill him -and also went to Nod and found a wife.

 

[Jose Fly]

First of all, Attenborough begins with a false premise....the Genesis account doesn’t say that God created every species. God created “kinds,” which apparently corresponds to the family taxon level. I say apparently, because the text isn’t specific.

(For example: There were no dachshunds. Or Alaskan Malamutes.)

If you read Isaiah 11 6-9, and meditate on it (like noticing the future tense it’s written in), you’ll see that lifeforms, as we have currently, are not displaying behaviors and living according to God’s original purpose. It all changed — including Jehovah removing His blessing — when His son Adam chose rebellion, and raised the issue of sovereignty. Genesis 3.

Once this issue is settled, then Isaiah 11; Ephesians 1:10; Revelation 21:3-4; Psalms 37 9-11, 29; & other Scriptures, will be fulfilled under Jesus’ rulership.

But remember.....there's nothing religious going on here at all!

 

[Jose Fly]

For those of us who are believers in an Intelligent Creator, it seems obvious that this lifeform is not a direct creation of God....

...How and why do creatures adapt?...a change in environment is often the trigger. When humans were evicted from their paradise home, their environment changed dramatically. Humans themselves became victims of genetic changes as a result of the penalty imposed for their defection. Both may have contributed to the way creatures adapted for their own survival.

In that setting, many species may have been created simply as an adaptive response to changed conditions. Humans chose this route and its consequences.....God did not interfere.

Well there you have it....the complex life history traits and biochemical pathways that the organism needs to do what it does arose via "changes in the environment" and "genetic changes", and God had nothing to do with it. IOW, natural selection and mutations via completely natural means generated complex features and genetic sequences.

How 'bout that?

 

[SkepticThinker]

When humans chose to disobey their Creator, they changed life completely, for themselves and their future offspring. Their environment also changed dramatically. That is what the Bible teaches.

If our own children decide to go off on their own because they no longer want to be under parental control and to make their own mistakes (and hopefully learn from them) will parental interference add to the life lesson or detract from it?

If we soften the fall, the lesson is lost. God teaches that we 'reap what we sow'. The Law of Gravity is a prime example....if you defy the Law of Gravity it will teach you painfully and immediately that you should respect it next time. God made the Law of Gravity. Humans learn more by experience than anything you tell them....Eden was a classic example of that.

Are you catching my drift?

If my infant child, who has no experience with the outside world and no experience in determining between right and wrong, decided that they wanted to "go off on their own because they no longer want to be under parental control" it would be my duty as a parent to stop that child from doing so, because my job in raising them to be able to make intelligent and informed decisions so that they can manage in the world, is not finished yet. Allowing that child to go off on his own without imparting those important lessons upon him would be a failing, on my part.

I don't believe in evolution.....but I do accept adaptation as the means for an existing species to keep existing even in a varied form.....and even if the original species dies out. (Like the Peppered Moth.....adaptation changed its color when coal fires changed the color of the trees they inhabited and for which they were camouflaged.....and then, when the pollution was rectified, the moths returned to their original color.) Adaptation is a marvelously designed mechanism.

Oh dear.....If you want to talk about ilk.....I find evolution defenders also rely on" dodge, deflect and ignore"....go figure...

You accept evolution. You just call it "adaptation" which is kind of a Kent Hovind move, if you ask me.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

But remember.....there's nothing religious going on here at all!

Jehovah established the natural Laws, processes and cycles. Is it hard to believe that He’d create in accordance with them?

Claims of magic, with reference to creating, are from your group’s side of the issue....not ours.

Jehovah gave the genome the ability to mutate. Why? One reason is because Jehovah “loves wondrous diversity”, a line by Morgan Freeman in ‘Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves’. (It fits.)

Another is that He loves us.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

If my infant child, who has no experience with the outside world and no experience in determining between right and wrong, decided that they wanted to "go off on their own because they no longer want to be under parental control" it would be my duty as a parent to stop that child from doing so, because my job in raising them to be able to make intelligent and informed decisions so that they can manage in the world, is not finished yet. Allowing that child to go off on his own without imparting those important lessons upon him would be a failing, on my part.

Were they completely unable to care for themselves? It seems not....
They and their offspring started building society. We’re part of an extension of it, and apparently you like the world you’re living in.

 

[Salvador]

You are assuming the bible is using the scientific definition of "man" there -and that it must mean it is stating there were no other "humans" -but in that very book -where many ASSUME there were only Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel alive on Earth -Cain was worried that people OUTSIDE OF EDEN would kill him -and also went to Nod and found a wife.

If there had been other people on Earth, besides Adam and Eve whom Adam named, then why does the Bible in Genesis 3:20 claim Adam as having named Eve with her name meaning that "she was to be the mother of all the living"?

 

[Jose Fly]

Jehovah established the natural Laws, processes and cycles. Is it hard to believe that He’d create in accordance with them?

Claims of magic, with reference to creating, are from your group’s side of the issue....not ours.

Jehovah gave the genome the ability to mutate. Why? One reason is because Jehovah “loves wondrous diversity”, a line by Morgan Freeman in ‘Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves’. (It fits.)

Another is that He loves us.

So we're in agreement that undirected mutations, natural selection, and other natural mechanisms can generate new, complex life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences.

Good!

 

[Deeje]

Really?

How? How is that "obvious"?
Doesn't this worm exhibit "specified complexity", and all the other stuff that is used as an argument to argue for a "creator"?

So really, any animals that eats is not a created animal, because by eating it "destroys his handiwork"?
And let's not even begin about humans and how they aren't just destroying other creatures (to the point of extinction), but actually destroying the planet itself.

Seems like this "general" rule of yours isn't as "general" as you hoped it was ha?

So no creature had to eat?
Then why did they have teeth, a mouth, a stomach, etc?

Right, right....

So lions, tigers, crockodiles, ... they didn't eat live meat? What did they use their carnivorous teeth and massive jaw muscles for then? Cracking cockonuts?

Evolution.

So because some mythical human in a mythical garden at an apple that he wasn't supposed to, crockodiles went from vegetarians to being an ultimate predator?

:rolleyess

Where you do guys get this stuf.....................................

Be serious. No, humans are not to blame for the existance of disgusting parasites, horrible virusses or things like cancer.

Even bending over backwards and assuming your religious myth - your god didn't HAVE to doom ALL LIVING THINGS because one dude made a bad decision. That was entirely GOD's doing and his terrible temper and overexaggerated, immoral response.

If they would hand out their products for free, they wouldn't be wealthy. Instead, they'ld go out of business.

Agree there. But it's a mystery what that has got to do with the topic.

So, a couple thousand years of mega suffering from all living things, really is nothing more or less then just a big show-off game for your god?

Sounds like a real douche.

There is nobody to blame. That's the point you keep missing.
You're the one who wants to play the blame game. You're the one engaged in a religion which really isn't anything more or less then a gigantic guilt trip.

The worm parasite developed this strategy as a survival mechanism. "Blame" doesn't enter the equation here. This is just how it is. The only thing we can do is try and protect ourselves.

Yep

Who can argue with that kind of reasoning? Straw man after straw man, beaten to death...did that make you feel better? You answered nothing.

This is not our planet....we are just the tenants and there were rules governing our tenancy. Life here was supposed to be enjoyable, peaceful and pleasant, with the human race tending it and keeping things in order....but disobedient idiots messed it up. They continue to do so, using their clever science and greed for wealth, fame and accolades, that end up bringing all living, breathing things on this earth to the brink of extinction.....why? Because it's good for the economy....not because it's good for mankind.

Perhaps you need to watch Michael Moore's documentary on "Capitalism"....you will get a glimpse into how deluded the general public can be in a world ruled by the devil exploiting their self interest and gullibility. But you don't believe in him either.....oh well. You can't fight an enemy that you don't believe exists....

There are only two sides in this battle for the hearts and minds of men.....if you have chosen your side, then that is your decision to make.

I will side with Creator and abide by his rules....that is my choice.
I look forward to the outcome predicted by the Bible.....what outcome are you anticipating? The world at present is in its death throes.....under the burden of fires, floods, earthquakes, volcanoes, war, political chaos, economic mismanagement....not to mention rampant crime, drug addiction and violence, to the point where emergency service workers are threatened and attacked every day......don't you just love a world without God....?

 

[Etritonakin]

If there had been other people on Earth, besides Adam and Eve whom Adam named, then why does the Bible in Genesis 3:20 claim Adam as having named Eve with her name meaning that "she was to be the mother of all the living"?

Adam is the first to be made with the potential to live forever -to have access to the tree of life -to be made in the image and likeness of God.
That does not just mean being more like God than other Earth life -but literally intended to eventually become like God -an immortal spirit, and incorruptible in righteous nature.

Adam and Eve had access to the tree of life -eternal life -in Eden -but when cast out they were cut off from it -and would "surely die" -only to have access to the tree of life again after their human experience outside of Eden and death. Gen 3:22 "And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:"................."So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

So even though "Since by man came death" and "So as in Adam all die", they were still the first with that potential -and would still realize it later.

The definition of the word translated "living" says it can be literal or figurative -similar to how Christ said "Let the dead bury their own dead" when he was actually referring to living people.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So we're in agreement that undirected mutations, natural selection, and other natural mechanisms can generate new, complex life history traits, biochemical pathways, and genetic sequences.

Good!

Is that what I really said?