Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Create a topic and discuss! No subject is off limits, but moderators have the right to remove asshat posts. What's an asshat post? Selling stuff, trolling, harassing--the usual stuff you don't want to see either. Happy posting!
User avatar
SEG
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by SEG » Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:55 pm

Indoctrinated Christians have been fed the lie that Adam was an historical person. He is a cornerstone of their faith and his mythical story is the reason why they think that Jesus died on the cross for their sins.

Flip through the pages of the Bible and you will find God, Jesus and Paul talking about Adam as if he were a real, living person.

Did he have a biological mother and father, like all biological animals? No, of course he didn't!

Thus Christians cannot believe in the real scientific truth of biological evolution and choose to belief in the fairytales of Adam and Eve instead.

A Christian that believes in the "truth" of the Bible and the overwhelming evidence of evolution at the same time is untenable.

If this is not true, state your case.
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

Claire
Posts: 1349
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:25 am

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by Claire » Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:01 am

SEG wrote:A Christian that believes in the "truth" of the Bible and the overwhelming evidence of evolution at the same time is untenable.

If this is not true, state your case.
I don't believe animal-brute evolved into animal-man.

Two questions for you:

(i) If man is a spin-off from the monkey, which by progressive evolution has become man, how is it that over so many years in which humans have maintained this theory one has never succeeded, not even with the perfected instruments, and methods at present, in making a man from a monkey?

(ii) If man came from the monkey, how is it that man, even with grafts, and repugnant forms of cross-fertilization, does not become a monkey again?

If you can answer me with facts, I will no longer combat this degrading theory.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by SEG » Sun Aug 18, 2019 6:44 am

Claire wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:01 am
SEG wrote:A Christian that believes in the "truth" of the Bible and the overwhelming evidence of evolution at the same time is untenable.

If this is not true, state your case.
I don't believe animal-brute evolved into animal-man.

Two questions for you:

(i) If man is a spin-off from the monkey, which by progressive evolution has become man, how is it that over so many years in which humans have maintained this theory one has never succeeded, not even with the perfected instruments, and methods at present, in making a man from a monkey?

(ii) If man came from the monkey, how is it that man, even with grafts, and repugnant forms of cross-fertilization, does not become a monkey again?

If you can answer me with facts, I will no longer combat this degrading theory.
I hope that you wouldn't have put great thought into this Claire. Your ignorance of Evolution is astounding. It tells me that instead of reading that MV bunk, you would do much better reading Dawkins or any other evolutionary biologist of similar ilk.

You can't make a human out of a monkey, any more than you can make a human out of a cow. Although cows, monkeys and humans are biologically related. Try reading this article for a broad view: How are humans and monkeys related?
Humans and monkeys are both primates. But humans are not descended from monkeys or any other primate living today. We do share a common ape ancestor with chimpanzees. It lived between 8 and 6 million years ago. But humans and chimpanzees evolved differently from that same ancestor. All apes and monkeys share a more distant relative, which lived about 25 million years ago.
Were you serious when you said;
not even with the perfected instruments, and methods at present

Lol! Who said that we have "perfected instruments and methods"? I hope we have Christians here reading this that have a much better idea of biological evolution than you!
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

Claire
Posts: 1349
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:25 am

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by Claire » Sun Aug 18, 2019 7:05 am

SEG wrote:
Claire wrote:
SEG wrote:A Christian that believes in the "truth" of the Bible and the overwhelming evidence of evolution at the same time is untenable.

If this is not true, state your case.
I don't believe animal-brute evolved into animal-man.

Two questions for you:

(i) If man is a spin-off from the monkey, which by progressive evolution has become man, how is it that over so many years in which humans have maintained this theory one has never succeeded, not even with the perfected instruments, and methods at present, in making a man from a monkey?

(ii) If man came from the monkey, how is it that man, even with grafts, and repugnant forms of cross-fertilization, does not become a monkey again?

If you can answer me with facts, I will no longer combat this degrading theory.
I hope that you wouldn't have put great thought into this Claire. Your ignorance of Evolution is astounding. It tells me that instead of reading that MV bunk, you would do much better reading Dawkins or any other evolutionary biologist of similar ilk.
There's some people who think the monkey evolved into man, so I asked you questions based on this theory. I say man is not the result of an evolution, just as Creation is not the product of an autogenesis.
SEG wrote:Were you serious when you said;
not even with the perfected instruments, and methods at present
Lol! Who said that we have "perfected instruments and methods"?
What do you think is meant by that?

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by SEG » Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:33 pm

Claire wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 7:05 am
There's some people who think the monkey evolved into man, so I asked you questions based on this theory.
I doubt whether you know what a scientific theory is and your opinion whether man evolved or not doesn't really matter as it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt though many fields of science.

What proof have you that Adam existed at all or didn't have a biological mother and father?
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by SEG » Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:43 pm

Here is an in depth article on this topic:
The Adam Bomb
Many scientifically-literate Christians hold on to their faith while admitting to the truth of biological evolution. This is actually an untenable position. The New Testament scriptures reveal that Christianity is dependent on the Adam and Eve story, not biological evolution, being the literal truth.

In Luke 3:38, Jesus’s genealogy is traced back to Adam. If evolution is true, then Adam would have had a father as well.

In Matthew 19:4-6, Jesus is alleged to have made the following statement:

“Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

In this verse, Jesus is showing that he believed in the initial creation story, including the first man, Adam, as a literal historical figure.

In Romans 5: 12-14, we read:

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.

This verse indicates that sin entered the world through the actions of Adam.

In 1 Corinthians 15:22, Paul makes this statement:

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

This is an unambiguous statement that ties the sacrifice of Jesus to the sin of Adam. If Adam did not exist, the meaning of Christ’s death and resurrection is significantly diminished.

In 1 Corinthians 15:45, Paul makes this statement:

So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.

This verse cements Christian theology to a historical Adam, and directly ties Jesus (the last Adam) to this figure.

In 1 Timothy 2:13-14, we read:

For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Here, a doctrine of men possessing hierarchy over women is shown to be a consequence of a literal belief in the events discussed in Genesis concerning the Garden of Eden.

In Jude 1:14, we read:

Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones.

This is yet another reference to Adam as if he actually lived and was the first human being.

What should be gleaned from this discussion is that one of the foundations that Christianity rests upon is the assumption of the literal truth of the Garden of Eve story and the creation of Adam as the first human. For those who accept the overwhelming evidence for biological evolution, this foundational pillar is removed and Christianity suffers a serious blow to its authenticity.
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by SEG » Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:45 pm

Claire wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 7:05 am
I say man is not the result of an evolution, just as Creation is not the product of an autogenesis.
False equivalence
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

Claire
Posts: 1349
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:25 am

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by Claire » Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:52 pm

SEG wrote:
Claire wrote:I say man is not the result of an evolution, just as Creation is not the product of an autogenesis.
False equivalence
In order to have an evolution, one always needs to have a first creative fount. And, to think that the innumerable species existing could have derived from the autogeny of a single cell is an impossible absurdity. In order to live, the cell needs a vital ground with elements that allow for and maintain life. If the cell formed itself from nothing, where did it find the elements in order to form, live, and reproduce itself? If it did not exist when it began to exist, how did it find the vital elements: air, light, heat, and water? What is not yet, cannot create. And, how then did the cell find the four elements at its formation? And, who gave them to it, which fount had the seed of "life"? What source? And when, supposing that this non-existence [cell] had been able to form itself from nothing, how, from its unique unity and species could there have come from it so many diverse species, as many as there are to be found in the sensible Creation?

Stars.....

Planets....

Plant kingdom...

Animal kingdom..

All having come from a single cell? Everything from a spontaneous generation? If this were the case, the cell would be bigger than the Infinite One. The reason, of which many are so proud, should convince them that the initial thing cannot form itself from nothing, and from a unique and initial thing cannot come everything. Is it logical, purely logical and reasonable, for us to accept the miracle of self-ordering chaos generating the cell by itself, while God is described as unable to make all of creation by Himself? Is it logical and reasonable to maintain the evolution of the species — indeed, of one given species as far as the animal form which is most perfect because it is endowed with speech and reason, even these alone — when we see that for millennia all other animal creatures have not acquired reason or speech, though coexisting with man? Only God can put chaos in order and populate it with innumerable creatures which form the Creation.

Therefore, the chimeras on which the evolutionists would like to base the edifice of their presumption do not sustain it, but actually favor its collapse. The theory of the origin of man according to evolutionism, which is based on the conformation of the skeleton and on the diversity of the colors of skin and appearance, in order to sustain its erroneous assertion is not a theory against the truth of the origin of man — creature created by God — but in its favor. Because what reveals the existence of a Creator is exactly the diversity of the colors, of the structures, of the species of the creatures wanted by Him, the most Powerful One.

Source: The Poem of the Man-God
Last edited by Claire on Mon Aug 19, 2019 2:58 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by SEG » Mon Aug 19, 2019 2:49 am

Claire wrote:
Sun Aug 18, 2019 8:52 pm
In order to have an evolution, one always needs to have a first creative fount. And, to think that the innumerable species existing could have derived from the autogeny of a single cell is an impossible absurdity. In order to live, the cell needs a vital ground with elements that allow for and maintain life. If the cell formed itself from nothing, where did it find the elements in order to form, live, and reproduce itself? If it did not exist when it began to exist, how did it find the vital elements: air, light, heat, and water? What is not yet, cannot create. And, how then did the cell find the four elements at its formation? And, who gave them to it, which fount had the seed of "life"? What source? And when, supposing that this non-existence [cell] had been able to form itself from nothing, how, from its unique unity and species could there have come from it so many diverse species, as many as there are to be found in the sensible Creation?

Stars.....

Planets....

Plant kingdom...

Animal kingdom..

All having come from a single cell? Everything from a spontaneous generation? If this were the case, the cell would be bigger than the Infinite One. The reason, of which many are so proud, should convince them that the initial thing cannot form itself from nothing, and from a unique and initial thing cannot come everything. Is it logical, purely logical and reasonable, for us to accept the miracle of self-ordering chaos generating the cell by itself, while God is described as unable to make all of creation by Himself? Is it logical and reasonable to maintain the evolution of the species — indeed, of one given species as far as the animal form which is most perfect because it is endowed with speech and reason, even these alone — when we see that for millennia all other animal creatures have not acquired reason or speech, though coexisting with man? Only God can put chaos in order and populate it with innumerable creatures which form the Creation.

Therefore, the chimeras on which the evolutionists would like to base the edifice of their presumption do not sustain it, but actually favor its collapse. The theory of the origin of man according to evolutionism, which is based on the conformation of the skeleton and on the diversity of the colors of skin and appearance, in order to sustain its erroneous assertion is not a theory against the truth of the origin of man — creature created by God — but in its favor. Because what reveals the existence of a Creator is exactly the diversity of the colors, of the structures, of the species of the creatures wanted by Him, the most Powerful One.
Look familiar?
Jesus says:

"One of the points at which your pride founders in error--which, above all, degrades precisely your haughtiness by giving you an origin that, if you were less corrupted by pride, you would repudiate as degrading--is that of Darwin's theory.

In order not to admit God, who, in His power, was able to have created the universe from nothing and man from the already created mud, you take the paternity of a beast as your own.

Don't you realize you are diminishing yourselves, for--consider this--won't a beast--no matter how exemplary, selected, improved, and perfected in form and instinct, and, if your wish, even in mental formation--always be a beast? Don't you realize this? This testifies unfavorably regarding your pride as pseudo-supermen.

But if you fail to realize, I will not be the one to waste words to make you aware of it and converted from the error. I ask you only one question which, in your great numbers, you have never asked yourselves. And if you can answer Me with facts, I will no longer combat this degrading theory of yours.

If man is a spin-off from the monkey, which by progressive evolution has become man, how is it that over so many years in which you have maintained this theory you have never succeeded, not even with the perfected instruments and methods at present, in making a man from a monkey? You could have taken the most intelligent offspring of a pair of intelligent moneys and then their intelligent offspring, and so on. You would now have many generations of selected, instructed monkeys cared for by the most patient, tenacious, and sagacious scientific method. But you would still have monkeys. If there happened to be a mutation, it would be this: the beasts would be physically less strong than the former ones and morally more degenerate, for, with all your methods and instruments, you would have destroyed that perfection of the monkey which My Father created for these quadrumans.

Another question. If man came from the monkey, how is it that man, even with grafts and repugnant forms of cross-fertilization, does not become a monkey again? You would be capable even of attempting these horrors if you knew that it could give approvative sanction to your theory. But you do not do so because you know that you would not be able to turn a man into a monkey. You would turn him into an ugly son of man, a degenerate, perhaps a criminal. But never a real monkey. You do not try because you know beforehand that you would get a poor result and your reputation would emerge therefrom in ruins.

For this reason you do not do so. For no other. For you feel no remorse or horror over degrading a man to the level of a beast to maintain a thesis of yours. You are capbable of this and of much more. You are already beasts because you deny God and kill the spirit, which distinguishes you from the beasts.

Your science causes Me horror. You degrade the intellect and like madmen do not even realize you are degrading it. In truth, I tell you that many of the primitive are more men than you are."



Written by Maria Valtorta ***Stolen by Claire***
http://valtorta.org/darwin_and_monkeys_defaultpage.asp
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 2143
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Adam's Mother and Father Didn't Exist

Post by SEG » Mon Aug 19, 2019 2:53 am

Last time I am asking: What proof have you that Adam existed at all or didn't have a biological mother and father?

If you don't answer directly we are done, but others are welcome to respond.
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

Post Reply