m_nwankwo:

@Poster

It is improbable for the entire human population to have decended from a single male and a single female. First, if the first man and woman were genetically identical except in the sex chromosomes, then reproduction between them and then their children, will in few generations came to a halt as homogeneity in the gene pool favours the reproduction of recessive traits which are often deleterious. Even if we assume that this first man and woman have perfect genes at the time they were created, mutation would have been introduced as a mark of adaptation and some of those mutations are likely to be harmful. Besides, heterogeneity in gene pool is a requirement for the successful propagation of any species including man. Once inbreeding is introduced, such a specie will slowly but surely become extinct. Inbreeding is a genetically flawed process and for God who is omniscience to use inbreeding for the propagation of the human specie contradicts the very notion of omniscience. In addition, a homogenous gene pool cannot account for the diversity presently observed in the human population as is evident in the various races on earth. Neither can such a diversity be explained by the occurence of mutations accross time. It is more likely that God created a heterogenous gene pool from which evolved the genetic diversity of the human population. Thus I am of the view that the first batch of humans that God created was not a single man or woman but several men and women. Cheers.

Please Can you throw more light on that sir? Thank you.

I'm not arguing with you,I'm talking fact abi were you the one that carried out the research or came to the conclusions,no,you read something that was revised and will still be revised in the very near future.A lot of work is still going on in the field and the best instruments are yet to be invented.With God in the equation,there's more to reproduction than chromosomes and gene pool.you can't just imagine by probability that reproduction will cease in few generations because of some probable homogeneity or some likely mutation.

Image123:

I'm not arguing with you,I'm talking fact abi were you the one that carried out the research or came to the conclusions,no,you read something that was revised and will still be revised in the very near future.A lot of work is still going on in the field and the best instruments are yet to be invented.With God in the equation,there's more to reproduction than chromosomes and gene pool.you can't just imagine by probability that reproduction will cease in few generations because of some probable homogeneity or some likely mutation.

I did not carry the reseach on human origin but I have done and published similar genetic research with viruses and eukaryotic organisms. My training gives me the skills to analyse the work of peers and make valid conclusion. Having said that, it is your choice to dismiss my postings. Cheers

@m_nwankwo
Would I still get an answer I suck at biology so any layman explanation would do. Thanks

Chrisbenogor:

Please Can you throw more light on that sir? Thank you.

Happy new year chris. Their are two competing scientific theories on the origin of modern humans. One is called the multi region model which postulates that modern humans evolved from an ape like ancestor in parralel in different regions of the world. The other is the out of Africa model which postulates that modern humans originated from Africa some 150000-200000 years ago and then dispersed into different regions of the world. Present scientific evidence support the out of Africa model . In this model it is suggested that a cluster of 10000-50000 humans with limited genetic heterogeneity left east Africa and replaced other Homo species in other regions of the world. Thus the root of human ancestry according to this model lies in Africa and these modern humans in Africa has more genetic heterogeneity within each other than any other racial group. Thus their is a higher genetic diversity between Africans than between Africans and Asians or between Asian and caucasian. The evidence of variation in the gene pool of the modern humans from Africa strongly indicate that all other human populations in Asia, Europe etc came from the African stock. I am not saying that this cluster of modern humans from Africa represent Adam and Eve but rather that a limited genetic heterogeneity is a criteria for an organism to sit at the root of an evolutionary tree. It is  evident that a single man and woman that are genetically identical except on the sex chromosomes cannot depict such an evolutionary root. Note that I refer to the evolution of the human body. Stay blessed.

mnwanko,are you comparing the human race to virus.you believe its possible that whites came out from some group of africans,but its just impossible for those africans to come out of two people.how?

Thanks I wish I even understood most of what you wrote.

definitely, there would be so many question time in heaven, so prepare your now.

Image123:

mnwanko,are you comparing the human race to virus.you believe its possible that whites came out from some group of africans,but its just impossible for those africans to come out of two people.how?

Hi Image 123. You seem not to understand what I said. I am not comparing human beings to a virus rather it is that the methods of studying genes in living organisms is the same. Thus one who works with the genes of bacteria, viruses, mouse etc can easily work with the genes of humans. That is the point. Secondly I only stated what the current scientific knowlege on the origin of the human body. Their are limitation even to the current model and I am certain that future advances will modify the out of African model. What I believe about the origin of the human body is far older than the out of african model and indeed goes beyound what is available to modern science. I have in several of my posts on this forum given my perception about the origin of the human body as distinguished from the origin of the human spirit. However since the modern man with his sophisticated brain can only understand what science offer, I often follow that path in my explanation and if they can follow that we will gradually move into things that are not perceptible to modern science. One thing is however certain, science cannot contradict Truth if what is offered is actually the Truth. If such a contradiction exist, then what is called Truth is not Truth afterall.Thus even if future discoveries will modify or even reject the out of African model, it will not affect the core arguments against the believe that the entire humankind came from one man and one woman. The argument is simple:

First a limited heterogeneity in the gene pool is required for the successful propagation of species including humans. A single man or woman cannot produce such limited heterogeneity but rather a population comprising many men and women. If the creation stories are interpreted literally as many do, then God created a man and from the man he created a woman. That implies that the woman is almost a clone except in the sex chromosomes. Such a scenario implies an almost identical genetic pool which in generations will come to a halt. If you doubt what inbreeding can do, then pick any plant and animal of similar or identical genepool and allow them to inbreed for several ggenerations and study what happens to the offsprings across generations.Inbreeding or what in humans is called incest is not just morally wrong but an invitation to genetic errors and consequent species extinction.

Second if we leave genetics alone and consider wheather incest is a sin or not. I am not sure that their is any believer irrespective of religion that will consider incest good. Thus if their is only one man and one woman, then their is no way they would have propagated the human specie except through incentous relationships. The question then is if incest is a sin. If it is a sin, why will God use sin to propagate the human specie. If sin is disobedience to the laws of God, how will God disobey his own laws? Stay blessed.

Thanks m_nwankwo (is the m = Mark?)

Your explanation seems to be getting us somewhere about how Man possible spread all over the world. So in a nutshell, literal translation of the creation account will not lead us anywhere?

@m_nwankwo
i understand what you're saying.anybody that studies bacteria,mouse and virus can easily study humans.anybody that treats dogs can easily treat children.No sir no.Humans are of a different class,created in a different image.the human anatomy is distinct and higher in every way.I'm glad you know that science has got its many limitations.It cant be a final authority on these matters.I'll rather agree with the bible than current day science because I know they're coming to meet us.The Word is indeed Truth.
Talking about a limited heterogeneity required for success and continuity,I'll like to tell you/remind you that Adam and Eve weren't created limited.they were UNLIMITED.Perfect,very good.They lived for 100s of years.They had the heterogeneity required to replenish the earth.God made it so.And by the way,when Eve was created,GOD did something greater than cloning.something that is yet to enter the human mind.Eve was not a clone,she was a Complement.created to make Adam complete,a help meet.not a clone.These 2Perfect creatures had 'limited homogeneity'.and if you know what is called mutation,you'll know that positive changes do occur in gene structure that can enhance continuity.

About incest being a sin.you'll do well to recall that sin is missing the mark of God's standard of righteousness.In lay man terms,sin is disobedience to God,simple.Where there's no law,there's no sin.If God says don't jump up,and you jump up,you've committed sin.Why because you disobeyed God,not necessarily because of what you feel about jumping up.At the time of Adam and Eve,even till Abraham,there was no law against incest.Now the law is in place,and as they say 'the hands of the law are big to catch offenders'.Cheers to you

@Image123: « #33 on: January 07, 2009, 09:15 PM »

I'm not arguing with you,I'm talking fact abi were you the one that carried out the research or came to the conclusions,no,[b]you read something that was revised and will still be revised in the very near future.[/b]A lot of work is still going on in the field and the best instruments are yet to be invented.With God in the equation,there's more to reproduction than chromosomes and gene pool.you can't just imagine by probability that reproduction will cease in few generations because of some probable homogeneity or some likely mutation.

Is it save to say that anything that is revised or going through revision may in a nutshell not completely accurate, 100% for sure?

I wonder which is closer to 100%, the revised or the one revision? I hope it applies to everything including Books of religions and faiths; Torah, Psalm, New Testament and Qur'aan.

@m_nwankwo
i understand what you're saying.anybody that studies bacteria,mouse and virus can easily study humans.anybody that treats dogs can easily treat children.No sir no.Humans are of a different class,created in a different image.the human anatomy is distinct and higher in every way.I'm glad you know that science has got its many limitations.It can't be a final authority on these matters.I'll rather agree with the bible than current day science because I know they're coming to meet us.The Word is indeed Truth.
Talking about a limited heterogeneity required for success and continuity,I'll like to tell you/remind you that Adam and Eve weren't created limited.they were UNLIMITED.Perfect,very good.They lived for 100s of years.They had the heterogeneity required to replenish the earth.God made it so.And by the way,when Eve was created,GOD did something greater than cloning.something that is yet to enter the human mind.Eve was not a clone,she was a Complement.created to make Adam complete,a help meet.not a clone.These 2Perfect creatures had 'limited homogeneity'.and if you know what is called mutation,you'll know that positive changes do occur in gene structure that can enhance continuity.  

Hi again image 123. I have made my point and it is not my intention to change what you believe. God gave you the abiltiy to decide what to believe or not to believe. If you believe that the whole mankind came from a single man and a single woman, then keep to it.

About incest being a sin.you'll do well to recall that sin is missing the mark of God's standard of righteousness.In lay man terms,sin is disobedience to God,simple.Where there's no law,there's no sin.If God says don't jump up,and you jump up,you've committed sin.Why because you disobeyed God,not necessarily because of what you feel about jumping up.At the time of Adam and Eve,even till Abraham,there was no law against incest.Now the law is in place,and as they say 'the hands of the law are big to catch offenders'.Cheers to you

Statements like this is one of the reasons why many genuine people overeact to the concepts of God presented to them and sadly end up as atheists or agnostics. Thus in your concept God will say that something is not a sin and years later the same thing is a sin. According to your argument incest does not exist until after Abraham. According to your argument if the children of Adam and Eve interbreed, it is not incest but after Abrahmam if brothers and sisters have sexual relationships, then it is incest and a sin. If incest didnot exist proir to Abraham, why then did it exist after Abraham? Just give one reason why sexual relationship between the children of Adam and Eve is different from sexual relationship between brothers and sisters today. God does not change and his laws are the same from the beginning to the end. Incest is incest, murder is murder, lies are lies etc wheather before Abraham or after Abraham. When men claim that God told them to murder, to comit aldultry, to lie, to slander etc and because "God" told them, these acts are not sin anymore is a mockry of the omnipotence, omniscience and perfection of God. You need to explain why incest is not against the  law of God before Abraham and then became a sin after Abraham. You need to expalin why an omnipotent and all knowing God accepts the same sexual acts between brothers and sisters prior to Abraham and condems the same sexual acts between brothers and sisters after Abraham. Cheers.

@m_nwankwo
sin is the transgression of the law.like Romans4 says,where no law is there's no transgression.The law against 'incest' was put in place during the time of Moses.sin is simply disobedience to God's command.it has nothing to do with God changing.It's not necessarily ritual killing or blasphemy.it could be a little lie to save face.It could be a little don't look back.Every thing against God's revealed plan is sin.if the revealed plan is 'do not go to Asia to preach at this time',disobedience to that will be a sin/offence/transgression. If God says don't eat this or that,then keep it.If tomorrow He says eat it,I have clensed it,then you eat it.He's the boss. It's not a matter of God cannot change.That's not the root of what is meant by the unchanging God.If God remained static and not forgive your sins,wouldn't He be 'unchanging'?at the times of this ignorance God winked at but now commandeth every man to repent'Repent and believe the gospel.

@olabowale
I'm thinking at this moment of revising the quoran into 'sakonko' language.A language am going to form during the revision.It'll probably make it the most impure book till date. Hahahahahahahahahahaha

@ Topic

Thats where religion meets science.

Cains wife was the daughter of the first Cave Man.

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
sin is the transgression of the law.like Romans4 says,where no law is there's no transgression.The law against 'incest' was put in place during the time of Moses.sin is simply disobedience to God's command.it has nothing to do with God changing.It's not necessarily ritual killing or blasphemy.it could be a little lie to save face.It could be a little don't look back.Every thing against God's revealed plan is sin.if the revealed plan is 'do not go to Asia to preach at this time',disobedience to that will be a sin/offence/transgression. If God says don't eat this or that,then keep it.If tomorrow He says eat it,I have clensed it,then you eat it.He's the boss. It's not a matter of God cannot change.That's not the root of what is meant by the unchanging God.If God remained static and not forgive your sins,wouldn't He be 'unchanging'?at the times of this ignorance God winked at but now commandeth every man to repent'Repent and believe the gospel.

Hi again. You have not yet explained why sexual relationship between brothers and sisters is not incest until after Abraham. It is indeed strange that you can assert that because God is the boss, he will change his commandments or issue new commndments that clearly contradicts previous ones. If God is the boss as you seem to assert,can God contadict his own commandments? Can God lie? Can God murder? Can God slander? Can God be envious or jealous? etc The commandments or rather the the laws of God are expression of the will of God and since the will of God cannot change, it follows that the commandments which are expression of the will of God cannot change too. That means that it is impossible for God to contradict himself or his will. Thus God cannot sin or command his creatures to sin or ignore the sin of his creatures. Ignorance to the laws of God does not negate the consequences of disobeying it. If you put your hand in a high tension wire you will be electrocuted wheather or not you think it is high tension wire or just a rubber thread or that the high tension wire is an optical illusion. It is not what you know or do not know that determines that is high tension wire but the nature of the substance flowing through it, that is, the electricity. The same analogy can be applied to the laws of God for indeed what is often called the laws of physics are the laws of God operating in the material universe. The laws of God are not like a law passed by a parliament or a decree passed by a milatary dictator  that can be revised,modified or annuled according to the whims and caprices of the parliament or the dictator but an expression of the very nature or attributes of God, a reflection of these attributes is given to man to guide him so that he can come to the recognition of God. Human beings contradict themselves and then attribute such contradictions to God. As per how the unchangeability of God can be reconciled with forgiveness, you can open a thread on that and I will offer my perceptions.  Discussing it here will divert the topic of this thread. Stay blessed.

@m_nwankwo
I've not put abraham as a bridge or a turning point.you keep mentioning Abraham.what I said was that even till the time of Abraham,there was no law handed to man against incest.Sorry if you got me wrong but I wasn't implying that the law came to be at the time of Abraham.i just mentioned Abraham to show the time gap between Adam/Cain and the law/Moses.There's big time gap already inbetween Abraham and Moses.Now there's no need imagining a contradiction where there is none.There was NO law given to man against incest when Cain was alive.The law was given at the time of Moses.where there's no law,there's no transgression.That's in the Bible.I'm aware of and agree with your logic about the high tension wire and ignorance.That's not my point here.My point is there was no law against such.Moses law against incest was not an amendment.amendment of what.There was no law

Image123:

@m_nwankwo
I've not put abraham as a bridge or a turning point.you keep mentioning Abraham.what I said was that even till the time of Abraham,there was no law handed to man against incest.Sorry if you got me wrong but I wasn't implying that the law came to be at the time of Abraham.i just mentioned Abraham to show the time gap between Adam/Cain and the law/Moses.There's big time gap already inbetween Abraham and Moses.Now there's no need imagining a contradiction where there is none.There was NO law given to man against incest when Cain was alive.The law was given at the time of Moses.where there's no law,there's no transgression.That's in the Bible.I'm aware of and agree with your logic about the high tension wire and ignorance.That's not my point here.My point is there was no law against such.Moses law against incest was not an amendment.amendment of what.There was no law

I am aware of your points but I do not agree with them and I have stated my reasons for saying so, that is, the laws of God has always being in existence wheather or not creatures are aware of the laws of God is inconsequential. It did not start with Moses nor will it ever end. For etenity incest is sin. That is my point. Stay blessed.

@m_nwankwo
i get your point,notwithstanding,let's take into consideration that some laws are made as the need arises.All laws are not 'eternal'.The laws of God are rules,commands,injunctions.We have simple ones that are just from a period or to a period.the beginning and the end has power to start laws when He pleases and end them when He wishes in accord with His nature.He who made the laws of gravity stopped it to allow the ascension of Elijah.He's not contradicting it,HE's fulfilling His will.He introduced a law to Adam when He told him not to eat of the fruit of THE tree.He introduced a law to Abraham when He told him to circumcise his household.He introduced a law to the 12disciples when He gave them a new law of love.He gave Moses the law of sabbath.He is author and finisher.He can start and He can stop.He's unlimited.No one tells Him when to introduce anything.God does what He pleases.Be blessed

@ Image
Will you try to reason for yourself and stop spewing rubbish that will never make sense? gosh. Can you explain to us how all men decended from adam?

Image123:

God does what He pleases.Be blessed

Like trying to kill his best friend Moses? does that sound sensible to you. After the BibleGod decleared Moses his best friend the next minute he wanted to kill him. Does this act also fall under the bibleGod's action of doing what ever he pleases?

@bindex
sorry I have to sleep.I wish you could be available for discussions and not just post and run.I don't owe you any explanations.But let me say this to you.Men descended from Adam through his reproductions with Eve.Thats CLEAR if only you'll think for yourself and not stay under the bigotry of unbelief.God declared that moses was his best friend and then immediately wanted to kill him?Obviously,you've not been reading the bible but copying and pasting.anyway good night for now. You PRAY that I'm chanced to see your replies tomorrow.to God of course

Image123:

@bindex
sorry I have to sleep.I wish you could be available for discussions and not just post and run.I don't owe you any explanations[b].But let me say this to U Men descended from Adam through his reproductions with Eve.[/b]Thats CLEAR if only you'll think for yourself and not stay under the bigotry of unbelief.God declared that moses was his best friend and then immediately wanted to kill him?Obviously,you've not been reading the bible but copying and pasting.anyway good night for now. You PRAY that I'm chanced to see your replies tomorrow.to God of course

Men decended from Adam through his reproduction with Eve? how? That is FACTUALLY not possible. Can you please go ahead and tell me how the Chinese decended from Adam a person from the middle east who's existence is very questionable(same with most of the other biblical patriarchs )?  What about the Indians? did they also decended from Adam too? This is riddiculous I must say. So the bibleGod used incest(sin) to spread men into the world only to later realize that sin was what he used to help spread men into the world and change his mind? Remember that Abraham married his half sister, Lots children commited incest with him etc.

I like the way this points out the structure of a typical theist conversation;

Theist: I'm right.

Atheist: OK. Show me.

Theist: Well, you don't know everything.

Atheist: I didn't say I knew everything. What do you have to prove your case?

Theist: See, you don't know everything , so I may as well be right!

Atheist: Do you have any evidence?

Theist: The arrogance! You materialists, you naturalists, you make no sense! God will take care of you!

Atheist: *facepalm*

@bindex
stop copying and pasting, can you?think for yourself mr.I'm sure you're aware of the history of the yoruba people/tribe for example.if you're not then get aware.Does their descendancy from Asia beat your understanding?aa,such hypocrisy.This took just couple of centuries and There's a wide gap already.Are you aware of the yorubas in Nigeria,the ones in Togo and the ones in South America.Less than a century ago,FYI they were together.Bring them together and compare how different they're already looking like. Mr learner,there's something called change,there's something called mutation,there's something called philology,there's something called migration.Go and figure

Image123:

@bindex
stop copying and pasting, can you?think for yourself mr.I'm sure you're aware of the history of the yoruba people/tribe for example.if you're not then get aware.Does their descendancy from Asia beat your understanding?aa,such hypocrisy.This took just couple of centuries and There's a wide gap already.Are you aware of the yorubas in Nigeria,the ones in Togo and the ones in South America.Less than a century ago,FYI they were together.Bring them together and compare how different they're already looking like. Mr learner,there's something called change,there's something called mutation,there's something called philology,there's something called migration.Go and figure

Go ahead and prove to me that the yorubas descended from Asia, The yorubas in South America were taken there during slavery, you point is ridiculous, the yorubas in Togo, Benin and Ghana are all the same people, who migrated just like tha Hausas in Cameroun, Nigeria and Ghana. Apart from words and belief what else have you got to show that all men decended from Adam? Science has shown that the bible assertion is FACTUALLY not true.

So it really beats your imagination that the yorubas migrated from a non yoruba tribe in Asia.thats sad

Image123:

So it really beats your imagination that the yorubas migrated from a non yoruba tribe in Asia.thats sad

Thats not what we are talking about here, all i asked is for you to show how it is possible for all men to have decended from one man(Adam). By the way what is the name of the non yoruba tribe in Asia that the youruba tribe migrated from? Is there any archeological evidence to support you assertions? n_nwanko should you that it is not possible for all men to have decended from one man, but all you have been saying is the hogwash you have memorized from your pastors and the bible. Prove that all men came from Adam and all we have been hearing is that God this and God that, you guys are not serious. You don't believe that prophet Mohammed divided the moon into two halves but you believe that all men decended from Adam.

@bindex
so you really prayed that I should be chanced to reply you today?smart guy.lol
so it really still beats your imagination that the yorubas migrated from Asia.waoh.You need archeological evidence.Go and do yoruba history mr.They migrated.nobody proved that Adam didn't give birth to humanity.There was talk about chromosomes and its siblings.And m_nwankwo agreed to the flaws in science' research.He is a scientist.You can reread the discussion.This is common sense,why are you asking such questions.Villages start from families all over the continent in various instances.A couple produces 8kids,8kids produce 24.Thats already 30+. And so on and so forth.Communities become villages,to towns to cities and empires.etc.

bindex:

Thats not what we are talking about here, all i asked is for you to show how it is possible for all men to have decended from one man(Adam). By the way what is the name of the non yoruba tribe in Asia that the youruba tribe migrated from? Is there any archeological evidence to support you assertions? n_nwanko should you that it is not possible for all men to have decended from one man, but all you have been saying is the hogwash you have memorized from your pastors and the bible. Prove that all men came from Adam and all we have been hearing is that God this and God that, you guys are not serious. You don't believe that prophet Mohammed divided the moon into two halves but you believe that all men decended from Adam.

YOU CAN find out about yoruba ancestry very easily today by doing genetic testing. Me personally I have the feeling that we will find out that yoruba people share a lot with a lot of their neighbours and in fact many yoruba people share their genes with igbo people. I have no proof. it is just a feeling I have.

Does "Image" mean that the Almighty changes His laws from time to time? If so how does that make Him perfect. A simple explanation would do and I hope " Image " understands what perfection is.