You do realize that race is just a human construct. All humans belong to just one species.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Scientists and Christianity...
- Thread starter Surrealgurl
- Start date
It's fine if you believe that, but it's contrary to Catholic doctrine about Original Sin, so I doubt that the Catholic members here will accept it.
Also, if you insist on Biblical literalism, regardless of which other races were created on the 6th Day, you've still got a genetic bottleneck at Noah.
Well its a good thing I am Protestant or that mean old Pope would just ex-communicate me.
The human race is not bottle necked at Noah. Noah had 2 of every race aboard the Ark with him as well. Here is proof.
Genesis 6:19 "And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark--you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you.
Genesis 7:2 " You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female;
The difference in these two scriptures is that in Genesis 6:19 two of all flesh is the same as saying two of every race. Then in Genesis 7:2 & 3 is when he is talking about animals only.
Last edited:
I was referring to creationists, not specifically Christians.
Creationists still have several pseudo-astronomy claims such as the speed of light was not constant, they reinterpret redshifts, the planet's magnetic fields, claim accelerated radioactive decay rates, and on and on. They do have a handful of ridiculous arguments concerning all of the sciences while focusing on biology for the most part.
Smoke
Done here.
Dude, you dug up a five-year-old thread to say that?
Smoke
Done here.
I'd to see one of these "scientists" turn out to be a geneticist or palaeontologist for once, instead of a high school biology teacher or somebody with a Ph.D. in mathematics.
Smoke
Done here.
I shouldn't have to tell this to a seminarian, but the Catholic Church has no problem with Catholics believing in evolution, though Pius XII, in Humani Generis, specified:
For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. ...
When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.
In other words, Catholics are allowed to accept the fact of evolution as long as they still believe in the God's creation of souls and in original sin.When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.
Smoke
Done here.
Unscientific and unbiblical. A twofer!
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Neither of which have anything to do with evolution.
Smoke
Done here.
But your point was made not by the scripture, but by your freakishly weird interpretation of it.
You seem to have a deeply confused idea of race, too.
Well its a good thing I am Protestant or that mean old Pope would just ex-communicate me.
The human race is not bottle necked at Noah. Noah had 2 of every race aboard the Ark with him as well. Here is proof.
Genesis 6:19 "And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark--you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you.
Genesis 7:2 " You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female;
The difference in these two scriptures is that in Genesis 6:19 two of all flesh is the same as saying two of every race. Then in Genesis 7:2 & 3 is when he is talking about animals only.
How so. The scripture is quite clear. Would you care to define it in a different way? What do you mean confused idea of race? Clarify
Smoke
Done here.
I think the traditional interpretation makes more sense than yours.
Humanity doesn't consist of distinct races. All humans are related to each other -- it's estimated that no human is more distantly related to any other human than 50th cousin -- and our most recent common ancestor may have lived as recently as the time of Julius Caesar.
themadhair
Well-Known Member
Anyone have a pubmed account?
Modelling the recent common ancestry of all living...[Nature. 2004] - PubMed Result
The scripture is quite clear. God made other people outside of Adam on the sixth day. As shown in Genesis 1:27. This is why we have different races/ethnicities.
We are all related because we are all human but we have unique characteristics that separates us physically, which is what we use to determine race/ethnicity, you cannot deny that.
Smoke
Done here.
You're reading a whole lot into that verse.
What we use to determine race is myth and -- as has already been said -- social convention. Chimpanzees (not including bonobos) are more diverse genetically than humans are.
Genesis 1:27 is quite plain and simple. Even a 5 year old can understand it.
Chimps are more diverse genetically than us? That suppose to negate the fact that we as humans are diverse at all? That does not make any sense. Each race/ethnicity of humans has its physical differences. As minor as they are, they are still there nonetheless.
Smoke
Done here.
All right, then, explain the differences between the races.
It's fascinating how often creationist claims delve into racist misconceptions and general ignorance all too easily. Something similar is happening in this thread.
themadhair
Well-Known Member
FIFY
Genetics are a killer to the Adam and Eve story.