This is a question that I have asked christians and I have got interesting answers. Some Nigerian christians believe that they are and some believe that they are not descendants of Adam. The reasons for not believing in Adam as the common ancestor of all humans are;


1) Adam is a Hebrew name. There are older languages than Hebrew. It would be more realistic if the first man had a name from the oldest language.

2) Civilization started in Africa and not the middle east. It is unlikely that asemitic or middle eastern people would be or know the first men.



So what do Nigerian muslims believe? Are you a descendant of Adam?

More reasons not to believe that Adam is not the first man or common ancestor of all men;


-Genetics shows that we didnt come from just two people


[size=14pt]Genetic evidence indicates humans descended from a group of at least 10,000 people due to the amount of human genetic variation. If all humans descended from two individuals several thousand years ago, it would require an impossibly high mutation rate to account for the observed variation. .[/size]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve#Science_vs._literalism

Are you in search for truth or out for a debate?

To the Question, Yes , all humans including yourself came from Adam and Eve.

To your points

i. Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages. You will have to give me a detailed history of the name before you claim,that its original root is hebrew. Unless you can do that, you are clutching at straws.

ii. Science changes as evidence emerges, besides there is no place in the Quran that details all the places on earth that Adam lived so he could have lived in a number of places or just one place. And Allah knows best where he lived. I depend on the irrefutable evidence of the Quran and the Sunnah, i do not throw stones in the dark.

Logicboy03: More reasons not to believe that Adam is not the first man or common ancestor of all men;

-Genetics shows that we didnt come from just two people

[size=14pt]Genetic evidence indicates humans descended from a group of at least 10,000 people due to the amount of human genetic variation. If all humans descended from two individuals several thousand years ago, it would require an impossibly high mutation rate to account for the observed variation. .[/size]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve#Science_vs._literalism

Wiki boy.

In recent times, Genetic evidence is seen by scientists as more compelling than the fossil argument. Scientists discovered that some species share similar genetic sequences and some genes are conserved across many species and some only within a smaller group of species. E.g Man and chimps share about 96% of genomes

Looking at this, the following assumption was made by scientists: two species with similar genetic sequences means that these species arose from a common ancestor.

The problem is that this assumption is just an interpretation and cannot be falsified (can not be tested). An alternative interpretation can also not be falsified. For instance, an alternative interpretation could be that that species with similar genomes share similar environments.

Therefore, that conclusion is based on an assumption that can not be falsified. I can only take it with a pinch of salt.

I would rather depend on the Quran and the sunnah, much more trustworthy and reliable.

Q.E.D

tbaba1234: Are you in search for truth or out for a debate?

To the Question, Yes , all humans including yourself came from Adam and Eve.

I was not looking for a debate. I just wanted to know what you guys believe. Your above quote here would have been enough for me.

However, now that you have given me a reason to debate since you challenge my points.

tbaba1234:
To your points

i. Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages. You will have to give me a detailed history of the name before you claim,that its original root is hebrew. Unless you can do that, you are clutching at straws.

Adam is a Hebrew name- you should read more;

"Adam" (Hebrew: אָדָֿם) comes from the trilateral root אָדַֿם ( 'ADM ), meaning "red", "fair", "handsome".[2] In the Book of Genesis, Adam occurs as a proper name in chapters 2-5. As a masculine noun, 'adam [3] means "man", "mankind" usually in a collective context as in humankind,[2] and may also refer to the individual human.[4] The noun 'adam is also the masculine form of the word adamah which means "ground" or "earth". It is related to the words: adom (red), admoni (ruddy), and dam (blood).[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam#Etymology

tbaba1234:
ii. Science changes as evidence emerges, besides there is no place in the Quran that details all the places on earth that Adam lived so he could have lived in a number of places or just one place. And Allah knows best where he lived. I depend on the irrefutable evidence of the Quran and the Sunnah, i do not throw stones in the dark.

Adam has a Hebrew name- Middle eastern language

Adams direct descendant- Noah was the father to Semites and Hamites- Middle eastern.


Unfortunately, life started in Africa and that is beyond doubt.

tbaba1234:
Wiki boy.

In recent times, Genetic evidence is seen by scientists as more compelling than the fossil argument. Scientists discovered that some species share similar genetic sequences and some genes are conserved across many species and some only within a smaller group of species. E.g Man and chimps share about 96% of genomes

Looking at this, the following assumption was made by scientists: two species with similar genetic sequences means that these species arose from a common ancestor.

The problem is that this assumption is just an interpretation and cannot be falsified (can not be tested). An alternative interpretation can also not be falsified. For instance, an alternative interpretation could be that that species with similar genomes share similar environments.

Therefore, that conclusion is based on an assumption that can not be falsified. I can only take it with a pinch of salt.

You have just misstated the genetic evidence for common descent.

Evidence of common descent of living things has been discovered by scientists working in a variety of fields over many years. This evidence has demonstrated and verified the occurrence of evolution and provided a wealth of information on the natural processes by which the variety and diversity of life on Earth developed.

This evidence supports the modern evolutionary synthesis, the current scientific theory that explains how and why life changes over time. Evolutionary biologists document the fact of common descent: making testable predictions, testing hypotheses, and developing theories that illustrate and describe its causes.
Comparison of the DNA genetic sequences of organisms has revealed that organisms that are phylogenetically close have a higher degree of DNA sequence similarity than organisms that are phylogenetically distant. Further evidence for common descent comes from genetic detritus such as pseudogenes, regions of DNA that are orthologous to a gene in a related organism, but are no longer active and appear to be undergoing a steady process of degeneration from cumulative mutations

You are free to criticize sceince but dont criticize it out of ignorance. Te fact remains that it is scientifically impossible that we as humans descended from only 2 people with all the variation in humans to day.

tbaba1234:
I would rather depend on the Quran and the sunnah, much more trustworthy and reliable.

Q.E.D

Why dont you take the flu medicine from 5 years ago that bacteria has evolved to be resistant to if you dont trust evolution?


The Quran didnt give you the internet or medicine that you use now.

Logicboy03:

Adam is a Hebrew name- you should read more;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam#Etymology

Adam has a Hebrew name- Middle eastern language

Adams direct descendant- Noah was the father to Semites and Hamites- Middle eastern.

REad the previous response: Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages. You will have to give me a detailed history of the name before you claim,that its original root is hebrew. Unless you can do that, you are clutching at straws.

You are still quoting wiki... Provide me with a detailed history of the name from its inception, its influences etc. Then we can start talking.The truth is that links are probably lost by now or the name came purely by revelation.

Do you know how many kids Adam had?, where they migrated and how many nations they formed? So Noah, one of his descendents lived in the middle east. How many generations were between Adam and Noah? We do not know as muslims. (Please do not bring up the biblical geneology, we all know it is inaccurate)....

My point still stands.

You are free to criticize sceince but dont criticize it out of ignorance. Te fact remains that it is scientifically impossible that we as humans descended from only 2 people with all the variation in humans to day.

You haven't said anything or shown my ignorance.

It is still based on a non-testable assumption. We can't run away from that. The truth is we depend on many non falsifible assumptions to build scientific theories and that is fine but that is until new evidence comes out. Science according to Karl Popper are concepts and observations that can be falsified and validated.

For me, the evidence of the Quran and the Sunnah is far more solid than a scientific theory based on an assumption that can not be validated. If the Quran says Adam was placed on the earth then that is what happened.

I do not believe that macro-evolution for Man took place. Now did other human-like creatures exist on the earth?? As muslims, we have no problem with that. We consider all of them to be creatures of Allah, we know the earth existed with creatures way before the creation of man. The only thing we can say conclusively is that Adam did not evolve from these creatures and that Adam was placed on the earth.

Why dont you take the flu medicine from 5 years ago that bacteria has evolved to be resistant to if you dont trust evolution?

The Quran didnt give you the internet or medicine that you use now.

Again, i have no problem with micro evolution within a species. Genetic changes within a species can give rise to adaptations with that species. I am completely fine with that. In Islam, we know it happens. It is called adaptation.

The Quran gave muslim scientists(mostly religious scholars) the inspiration that set the stage and lay the foundations for the advancement in learning, technology and science as you know it today.

tbaba1234:

REad the previous response: Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages. You will have to give me a detailed history of the name before you claim,that its original root is hebrew. Unless you can do that, you are clutching at straws.

You are still quoting wiki... Provide me with a detailed history of the name from its inception, its influences etc. Then we can start talking.The truth is that links are probably lost by now or the name came purely by revelation.

Did you just make up some rule from nowhere just to say that I am wrong? Adam is clearly a Hebrew name for the same reasons Muhammad is an Arabic name.

Does one need to start giving the history of Arabic or Hebrew to know that these names come from these languages?

The very fact that one can break down these names in these languages and explain the root of these names means that the names came from these languages.

Adam is broken down in Hebrew (ADM, ADAMAH....handsome, mankind). Muhammad is broken down in Arabic (HMD.....praise).



For a more practical rebuttal, please, is it necessary for me to give you the history of Yoruba language to know that "Temitope" to know that it is Yoruba? One just needs to have a basic understanding of Yoruba and see the roots of "Temitope".



You have only succeeded in making an argument from ignorance.


Logicboy; X is from Y language because it has roots in Y language

Tbaba; You dont know that Y language can be influenced by another language and so you are wrong.


You'd have to ignore the fact that names are also very peculiar to their root language. Adam is a common name in English. But it is not an English name because its roots can not be found in English but in Hebrew.

tbaba1234:
Do you know how many kids Adam had?, where they migrated and how many nations they formed? So Noah, one of his descendents lived in the middle east. How many generations were between Adam and Noah? We do not know as muslims. (Please do not bring up the biblical geneology, we all know it is inaccurate)....

My point still stands.

Your point does not stand. I mentioned Adam's supposed descendants because I wanted to show you that everything about Adam points to the middle east.


But still, it is irrelevant because two people can not populate the earth. Impossible. A practical experiment would be for you and your wife to live on an isolated island and then try to make as many descendants. By the fourth generation, you guys will start dying off and getting "re.tarded" children from all the inbreeding.

Very practical and testable fact of life. Continuous inbreeding from bros and sisters will get you nowhere fast!

tbaba1234:
You haven't said anything or shown my ignorance.

It is still based on a non-testable assumption. We can't run away from that. The truth is we depend on many non falsifible assumptions to build scientific theories and that is fine but that is until new evidence comes out. Science according to Karl Popper are concepts and observations that can be falsified and validated.

Really? I dont see you jumping out of buildings in your disbelief in the theory of gravity. I dont see you playing with germs in your disbelief in germ theory. Yes, the fact that germs cause diseases is only a theory. You should read up on scientific theories before you challange them.


Now you claim that the assumptions are non-testable. With regards to Adam and Eve, the science is very testable. Human variation is something we can observe and study. We know that from the amount of variation between humans today, it is quite impossible for humans to come from a single set of parents.

tbaba1234:
For me, the evidence of the Quran and the Sunnah is far more solid than a scientific theory based on an assumption that can not be validated. If the Quran says Adam was placed on the earth then that is what happened.

The same quran that makes mistakes about embryology?

tbaba1234:
I do not believe that macro-evolution for Man took place. Now did other human-like creatures exist on the earth?? As muslims, we have no problem with that. We consider all of them to be creatures of Allah, we know the earth existed with creatures way before the creation of man. The only thing we can say conclusively is that Adam did not evolve from these creatures and that Adam was placed on the earth.

tbaba1234:
Again, i have no problem with micro evolution within a species. Genetic changes within a species can give rise to adaptations with that species. I am completely fine with that. In Islam, we know it happens. It is called adaptation.

What does islam have to do with genetics? Who gave islam the authority to speak on genetics?


Saying that you believe in micro evolution and dont believe in macro evolution just shows how shallow your thinking is.

1) First, you copy the christian apologist argument that creates a false dichotomy between micro and macroevolution. Even many christians have moved away from this position.

2) It would be like saying that you believe in flesh wounds but not scars/scarring. One leads to the other.

3) Macro-evolution has been witnessed in a lab condition. Speciation

4) Macro evolution is just micro evolution on a larger scale.

tbaba1234:
The Quran gave muslim scientists(mostly religious scholars) the inspiration that set the stage and lay the foundations for the advancement in learning, technology and science as you know it today.

Science existed before islam. Yes, muslims contributed to science but others contributed both before and after the islamic golden age.


Science advances and progresses but the Quran doesnt.

Logicboy03:
Did you just make up some rule from nowhere just to say that I am wrong? Adam is clearly a Hebrew name for the same reasons Muhammad is an Arabic name.

Does one need to start giving the history of Arabic or Hebrew to know that these names come from these languages?

The very fact that one can break down these names in these languages and explain the root of these names means that the names came from these languages.

Adam is broken down in Hebrew (ADM, ADAMAH....handsome, mankind). Muhammad is broken down in Arabic (HMD.....praise).

For a more practical rebuttal, please, is it necessary for me to give you the history of Yoruba language to know that "Temitope" to know that it is Yoruba? One just needs to have a basic understanding of Yoruba and see the roots of "Temitope".

You have only succeeded in making an argument from ignorance.

Logicboy; X is from Y language because it has roots in Y language

Tbaba; You dont know that Y language can be influenced by another language and so you are wrong.

You'd have to ignore the fact that names are also very peculiar to their root language. Adam is a common name in English. But it is not an English name because its roots can not be found in English but in Hebrew.

Your point does not stand. I mentioned Adam's supposed descendants because I wanted to show you that everything about Adam points to the middle east.

But still, it is irrelevant because two people can not populate the earth. Impossible. A practical experiment would be for you and your wife to live on an isolated island and then try to make as many descendants. By the fourth generation, you guys will start dying off and getting "re.tarded" children from all the inbreeding.

Very practical and testable fact of life. Continuous inbreeding from bros and sisters will get you nowhere fast!

We are not claiming that Temitope is the name of the first man, We do not need to know the history or the roots of temitope. Adam is the name of the first man meaning the name must have a detailed history. if you claim it isn't the first name, Then give me its history so that we know where it began.

Having roots in hebrew does not suggest that it originated from hebrew language, it only suggests that a previous language is somehow linked to Hebrew or the meaning of the name in Hebrew translates to Adam.

Jesus is called ESa in Arabic, Esho in Aramaic and Yeshua in Hebrew, same name.... You can probably look at the roots in all three languages.

In the modern age, Adam can be called a hebrew name but if you are claiming that it is not the name of the first because it has hebrew roots, then you have a lot more investigation to carry out because there are two options.

Two Options

i. It come from an ancient language that is linked to the semetic languages...

ii. It is the meaning of the original name of the first man in Hebrew and it came via revelation.

You can not disprove either

Do you know anything about the development of diseases? The fact that conditions exist today does not mean that they always existed.

Do you know that the pharaoh married their sisters? How many generations did they last for?? Far more than four generations, for sure. How many of them died off??

Now start giving more intellectual responses. Please.

The same quran that makes mistakes about embryology?

From someone, who has studied the language of that ayah extensively, are you a joker?? All atheist contentions are built on quick sand....

What does islam have to do with genetics? Who gave islam the authority to speak on genetics?


Saying that you believe in micro evolution and dont believe in macro evolution just shows how shallow your thinking is.

1) First, you copy the christian apologist argument that creates a false dichotomy between micro and macroevolution. Even many christians have moved away from this position.

2) It would be like saying that you believe in flesh wounds but not scars/scarring. One leads to the other.

3) Macro-evolution has been witnessed in a lab condition. Speciation

4) Macro evolution is just micro evolution on a larger scale.

1) There is a difference between the two because the odds for macro-evolution are much higher, it requires a lot more conditions to be met.

2.) Very poor analogy ... Scarring is not as a result of multiple and continous flesh wounds. One flesh wound could leave a scar.. Micro-evolution is usually not over a long period at all. The changes are sometimes immediate,sometimes between one or two seasons. Not even taking up to a year, to suggest a change in species over millions of years is a very long shot and requires too many variables. The odds are sometimes mind-boggling.

Science is based on degrees of certainty not facts, that is why there are changes as time passes. Macro-evolution is just the best explanation you can come up with at the moment. It is far from perfect, it is riddled with flaws that even evolutionary biologists would acknowledge.

The degree of certainty i have for the Quran is so much higher and i am yet to see one flaw from my studies.

3. The best example of speciation is that of fruit flies and it is simply fruit flies adapting to their environment and changing to fit it. It does not prove macro-evolution of the scale you are talking about.

4. An astronomically higher scale....

Science existed before islam. Yes, muslims contributed to science but others contributed both before and after the islamic golden age.
Science advances and progresses but the Quran doesnt.

The Quran is just an incredible book. The Quran is not a science book, it is a book of guidance. Studying the Quran is one of the most amazing experience one can have. It drops heavy points on you all the time.

No non-scientific book in history has made as much impact on science as the Quran has. None.

tbaba1234:

We are not claiming that Temitope is the name of the first man, We do not need to know the history or the roots of temitope. Adam is the name of the first man meaning the name must have a detailed history. if you claim it isn't the first name, Then give me its history so that we know where it began.

Having roots in hebrew does not suggest that it originated from hebrew language, it only suggests that a previous language is somehow linked to Hebrew or the meaning of the name in Hebrew translates to Adam.

Jesus is called ESa in Arabic, Esho in Aramaic and Yeshua in Hebrew, same name.... You can probably look at the roots in all three languages.

In the modern age, Adam can be called a hebrew name but if you are claiming that it is not the name of the first because it has hebrew roots, then you have a lot more investigation to carry out because there are two options.

Two Options

i. It come from an ancient language that is linked to the semetic languages...

ii. It is the meaning of the original name of the first man in Hebrew and it came via revelation.

You can not disprove either

You are still making the same argument from ignorance. Adam is a Hebrew name. It has hebrew roots. End of story. Fact.


The logic is simple. The first man can not have a Hebrew name. There are older languages than Hebrew. Civilization in Africa was long before the Hebrews



Your first argument about Yeshua falls flat on its face. Yeshua is the only form of Jesus that has proper roots at all (Hebrew roots). If Yeshua had roots in Arabic then, we could apply that to saying that Adam could have roots in other languages. Yeshua is transliterated into Arabic as Isa or Yasu.


Your second argument is clearly an argument from ignorance;


Logicboy; X is a name from Y language because X has roots in Y language

Tbaba; Nobody knows whether X is from an older language


You dont know and you are arguing against what is already known. If a name has roots in a langauge, then it is of that language

tbaba1234:
Do you know anything about the development of diseases? The fact that conditions exist today does not mean that they always existed.

Do you know that the pharaoh married their sisters? How many generations did they last for?? Far more than four generations, for sure. How many of them died off??

Now start giving more intellectual responses. Please.

Incest carries a genetic problem not bacterial or viral infections that evolve.


You actually make my point- the Pharoahs married their sisters or step-sisters to keep the royal blood and have a smaller family in order to have less competitors for the throne.

Brother-sister marriage cant work for the population. Such incest was not carried out in the ancient Egyptian populace that only went as close as first cousin marriage.http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/brother-sister%20marriage.htm


Like I said, 2 people cant not populate the earth with such incest that would have to take place for generationw.

tbaba1234:


From someone, who has studied the language of that ayah extensively, are you a joker?? All atheist contentions are built on quick sand....

Lol...please give me a proper English translation for Surah 23;13-14? I want to debunk you with your own interpretation


That verse is a travesty to embryology.

tbaba1234:
1) There is a difference between the two because the odds for macro-evolution are much higher, it requires a lot more conditions to be met.

2.) Very poor analogy ... Scarring is not as a result of multiple and continous flesh wounds. One flesh wound could leave a scar.. Micro-evolution is usually not over a long period at all. The changes are sometimes immediate,sometimes between one or two seasons. Not even taking up to a year, to suggest a change in species over millions of years is a very long shot and requires too many variables. The odds are sometimes mind-boggling.

Science is based on degrees of certainty not facts, that is why there are changes as time passes. Macro-evolution is just the best explanation you can come up with at the moment. It is far from perfect, it is riddled with flaws that even evolutionary biologists would acknowledge.

The degree of certainty i have for the Quran is so much higher and i am yet to see one flaw from my studies.

3. The best example of speciation is that of fruit flies and it is simply fruit flies adapting to their environment and changing to fit it. It does not prove macro-evolution of the scale you are talking about.

4. An astronomically higher scale....

1) It seems you have been reading religious sources on Evolution. Your false dichotomy remains false. Macro-evolution is micro-evolution over time.

2) The analogy was only meant to say that one thing leads to the other. You are attacking something of a straw man. There are the fossils and there is the DNA reconstruction to prove common descent. Please, feel free to mention the flaws of evolution

3) The example of the Hawthorn fly is a great example of speciation in progress. The flies show much more than adaptation. They have become distinct from the normal population of flies genetically and reproductively.

Rhagoeitis pomonella fruit flies originally attacked the fruit of hawthorn trees. But about 150 years ago, a portion of the hawthorn fly population shifted and began to feed on apples. In ecologically adapting to apples as a new host plant, apple flies are becoming genetically distinct and reproductively isolated from hawthorn flies. Apple and hawthorn flies are therefore considered to represent “host races” in the early stages of actively diverging into species

http://newsinfo.nd.edu/news/15540-paper-offers-important-new-insights-into-the-genomics-of-speciation/


4) There is evidence for evolution. Fossils, DNA/Genetics and current evolution. Seriously, I am tired of this argument. I have debunked you long ago on this topic.

tbaba1234:
The Quran is just an incredible book. The Quran is not a science book, it is a book of guidance. Studying the Quran is one of the most amazing experience one can have. It drops heavy points on you all the time.

No non-scientific book in history has made as much impact on science as the Quran has. None.

There are more christians than muslims on this planet. That alone should shrink the impact of the Quran a bit.


The Quran has created so many failed governments up till this day with Sharia law being a guarantee of human rights abuse in any country. For such a guide book, it is always "misused" to create political problems.


Can you explain why the Quran has never created a society that human rights were held up? Even during your islamic golden age, here was still slavery.

First and foremost, about the name Adam, it really doesnt prove anything, for it was just a name, Allah(swt) in His wisdom choose it, for all i care, He might well Name the first man Sino! Let me amuse you a little, do you know that Adam is a yoruba word? Ok, it is originally "a da mo..."(imo), meaning literally, we created him with...(knowledge). Now dont come asking me for my source, its simply my language .

I find it funny you stating that, it cannot be scientifically proven that we all came from two people, but you can fully understand and also prove that we came from a simple,single unicellular organism? Or that the whole universe came from nothing?!

The human genome contains about 3billion DNA molecules, each being replicated,transcribed and translated with apt specificity, even, there happens to be a check mechanism to eliminate errors. This makes it completely certain that, humans, will definately reproduce humans.

Well, its quite unfortunate that we cant get a sample of the first man's DNA to know what information it carries, but the Qur'an makes me understand that Allah had created Adam and from his loins came all other human.

Let me come up with my own assumption...
Adam and eve, were encoded with information in regards to the various variations which can be found in all humans. As they beget children, some of these variations became pronounced in some of their offsprings and then still carrying other information which would later manifest...(dominant and recessive genes)

Another factor, is the fact that mutation do occur, which can be inherited, and as a result of that, various kind of variation were also established.

Humans also needed to adapt to different environment they happen to find themselves, hence the need to develop new characteristics to adapt. An example of such adaptation, even though not human, is the ability of a prokaryotic cell(E. Colli) to synthesize new genes to make use of lactose for energy when it finds itself in a lactose environment instead of glucose.

Guy, abeg, i'll rather stick wiv the Qur'an than some assumption of evolution.

sino: First and foremost, about the name Adam, it really doesnt prove anything, for it was just a name, Allah(swt) in His wisdom choose it, for all i care, He might well Name the first man Sino! Let me amuse you a little, do you know that Adam is a yoruba word? Ok, it is originally "a da mo..."(imo), meaning literally, we created him with...(knowledge). Now dont come asking me for my source, its simply my language .

I have always said it that it is only religion that can make rational person pull nonsense out of his behind and claim that it makes sense!

Seriously? God speaks Hebrew and gave Adam a Hebrew name but Adam is the first man? How does that make sense? You ridicule your own God! So, you are now admitting that some languages existed before your God? Men were speaking other languages years before Hebrew.


Adam is not a Yoruba name. Shut up. Stop pulling things from nowhere.

sino:
I find it funny you stating that, it cannot be scientifically proven that we all came from two people, but you can fully understand and also prove that we came from a simple,single unicellular organism? Or that the whole universe came from nothing?!

Straw man- no one here has said that the universe comes from nothing


Straw man-no one here has said that all life comes from a single unicellular organism.



If you weren't ignorant about science, you would no that there is no such ting as "nothing" even empty space is something. All we have is evidence of something. The big bang is an expansion of something- space. Furthermore, the science is that life came from single-celled prokaryotic cells, such as bacteria (plural)

sino: The human genome contains about 3billion DNA molecules, each being replicated,transcribed and translated with apt specificity, even, there happens to be a check mechanism to eliminate errors. This makes it completely certain that, humans, will definately reproduce humans.

Humans will produce more evolved humans.

Terminology can be deceiving but we are nothing more than evolved apes

sino:
Well, its quite unfortunate that we cant get a sample of the first man's DNA to know what information it carries, but the Qur'an makes me understand that Allah had created Adam and from his loins came all other human.

Nonsense. Are you arguing now that humans devolved (evolved backwards) from a superhuman Adam?

sino:
Let me come up with my own assumption...
Adam and eve, were encoded with information in regards to the various variations which can be found in all humans. As they beget children, some of these variations became pronounced in some of their offsprings and then still carrying other information which would later manifest...(dominant and recessive genes)

Evolution is not an assumption. Your comment is invalid. NEXT!

sino:
Another factor, is the fact that mutation do occur, which can be inherited, and as a result of that, various kind of variation were also established.

Humans also needed to adapt to different environment they happen to find themselves, hence the need to develop new characteristics to adapt. An example of such adaptation, even though not human, is the ability of a prokaryotic cell(E. Colli) to synthesize new genes to make use of lactose for energy when it finds itself in a lactose environment instead of glucose.

NEXT!

sino:
Guy, abeg, i'll rather stick wiv the Qur'an than some assumption of evolution.

Finally, the appeal to the Quran, just like Tbaba did.


Tell me when the Quran has ever produced an ideal society that respects human rights

Logicboy03:

You are still making the same argument from ignorance. Adam is a Hebrew name. It has hebrew roots. End of story. Fact.

The logic is simple. The first man can not have a Hebrew name. There are older languages than Hebrew. Civilization in Africa was long before the Hebrews

Your first argument about Yeshua falls flat on its face. Yeshua is the only form of Jesus that has proper roots at all (Hebrew roots). If Yeshua had roots in Arabic then, we could apply that to saying that Adam could have roots in other languages. Yeshua is transliterated into Arabic as Isa or Yasu.

Your second argument is clearly an argument from ignorance;

Logicboy; X is a name from Y language because X has roots in Y language

Tbaba; Nobody knows whether X is from an older language

You dont know and you are arguing against what is already known. If a name has roots in a langauge, then it is of that language

This is becoming circular, The fact is that you can not disprove the two possibilities:

i. It comes from an ancient language that is linked to the semetic languages...

ii. It is the meaning of the original name of the first man in Hebrew and it came via revelation.

How do you disprove revelation?

How do you disprove that it comes from a previous language?

Why do you talk about things you do not know about? transliteration?? Are you kidding me?

Now let me give you the roots of Adam in Arabic:

Adam ( آدم ) -

The root letters for Adam are Alif, dal, and miim. If we look at Lanes Lexicon, this is what those root letters when put together mean:

Alif-Dal-Miim = seasoned (e.g. food), to mix/associate/unite/mingle together, a means of access, pattern/exemplar, object of imitation, tanned skin/hide, leather, the surface of the earth/ground, Adam, Children of Adam, human beings.

Lane’s Lexicon, Volume 1, pages: 72, 73, 74

Now if we relate the bolded meanings to Prophet Adam’s name and his history, we see that -according to Qur’an and Sunnah- he (Adam) was;

1 – Mixed/mingled and united (created) from Dust.

2 – Created from the dust of the Earth (surface) of the ground.

3 – He is a Pattern/exemplar, object of imitation for all his children. (i.e. he committed a mistake, but repented and continued to be a good person till death.) The second meaning could be that; we -children of Adam- are imitations of him (because we look like him.)

Does it now mean it is an arabic word since it has arabic roots?

Linked languages have roots for same words. So Again the name Adam could come from an ancient language linked to these semetic languages or is as a result of revelation.

Inbreeding carries a genetic problem not bacterial or viral infections that evolve.

You actually make my point- the Pharoahs married their sisters or step-sisters to keep the royal blood and have a smaller family in order to have less competitors for the throne.

Brother-sister marriage cant work for the population. Such Inbreeding was not carried out in the ancient Egyptian populace that only went as close as first cousin marriage.http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/brother-sister%20marriage.htm


Like I said, 2 people cant not populate the earth with such Inbreeding that would have to take place for generationw.

The major problems with inbreeding occurs mainly in the first generation.

Since we are talking of the first man created and the power of almighty creator who allowed humans to populate by such means, i have no conflicts with that being the way man populated the earth.

God describes himself as the creator and the shaper ... It is only if you negate the creative power and influence of God that constant inbreeding becomes a problem for you.

A recent study in Iceland by the deCODE genetics company, published by the journal Science, found that third cousins produced more children and grandchildren, suggesting that "in spite of the fact that bringing together two alleles of a recessive trait may be bad, there is clearly some biological wisdom in the union of relatively closely related people". For hundreds of years, inbreeding was historically unavoidable in Iceland due to its then tiny and isolated population.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/ReproductiveHealth/story?id=4258128&page=1

From the above, we see that it is quite possible for it to not only populate the earth but at a faster reproduction rate as well.

1) It seems you have been reading religious sources on Evolution. Your false dichotomy remains false. Macro-evolution is micro-evolution over time.

2) The analogy was only meant to say that one thing leads to the other. sad You are attacking something of a straw man. There are the fossils and there is the DNA reconstruction to prove common descent. Please, feel free to mention the flaws of evolution

3) The example of the Hawthorn fly is a great example of speciation in progress. The flies show much more than adaptation. They have become distinct from the normal population of flies genetically and reproductively.

4.) There is evidence for evolution. Fossils, DNA/Genetics and current evolution. Seriously, I am tired of this argument. I have debunked you long ago on this topic.

1) I like watching documentaries on evolution, my views are not solely based on religious views.

2.) The fossil argument is actually no longer used, too many holes.It is actually one of the flaws of evolution. The genetic argument is a stronger argument but i already outlined my problem with that

3.) More like a creature making changes as a result of its environment. That is still a long road to Humans coming from apes. I do not even care as much about other creatures as regards their creation and shaping, It is all in the creative power of God. As a muslim, The thing i am certain of is that Adam was sent to the earth and was not as a result of an adaptive or evolutionary process. Once it is mentioned in the Quran, it negates any other theory because i consider the Quran a far more reliable resource.

Humans over time have made changes as well, but we are still humans.

4.) Fossil records, too many holes.. Genetics- already discussed extensively, Current evolution- Still a long shot from proving anything...

I think evolution is an interesting area of study and i hope more muslims go into it.

Lol...please give me a proper English translation for Surah 23;13-14? I want to debunk you with your own interpretation

That verse is a travesty to embryology.

I can give you a word by word analysis using links to modern embryology textbooks and classical Arabic dictionaries...

You can not win that discussion. Waste of time.

There are more christians than muslims on this planet. That alone should shrink the impact of the Quran a bit.

The Quran has created so many failed governments up till this day with Sharia law being a guarantee of human rights abuse in any country. For such a guide book, it is always "misused" to create political problems.

When christians were ruled by the bible, what was their state... Compare with when muslims were ruled by the Quran.

Logicboy03:


I have always said it that it is only religion that can make rational person pull nonsense out of his behind and claim that it makes sense!

Seriously? God speaks Hebrew and gave Adam a Hebrew name but Adam is the first man? How does that make sense? You ridicule your own God! So, you are now admitting that some languages existed before your God? Men were speaking other languages years before Hebrew.

Muhehehehe!
Dis logicboy no go kill me with laff o...
God created man and the language he speaks. Using the name to prove adam is not the firstman to me, is baseless. God named him Adam.

logicboy03:
Adam is not a Yoruba name. Shut up. Stop pulling things from nowhere.

Hehehehe. You didnt get the joke?
Well, because adam has a meaning in hebrew doesnt mean that it is originally hebrew. Gerrit?

logicboy03:
Straw man- no one here has said that the universe comes from nothing


Straw man-no one here has said that all life comes from a single unicellular organism.



If you weren't ignorant about science, you would no that there is no such ting as "nothing" even empty space is something. All we have is evidence of something. The big bang is an expansion of something- space. Furthermore, the science is that life came from single-celled prokaryotic cells, such as bacteria (plural)

You need to go back to a basic science class bro. Unicellular organism are prokaryotes, single-celled organisms. For life to have evolved up to this level, what kind of massive mutations are we looking at?

logicboy03:
Humans will produce more evolved humans.

Terminology can be deceiving but we are nothing more than evolved apes

No, not me, you definately are an ape.
How many millions of years are wait for the super humans?

logicboy03:
Nonsense. Are you arguing now that humans devolved (evolved backwards) from a superhuman Adam?



Evolution is not an assumption. Your comment is invalid. NEXT!

Lol, give me a break bro, i am also trying to do what your scientist do, hypothesize. Well, Adam is a super human though, Allah(swt) taught him everything!
Evolution is still an assumption. Even with all the fossils and DNA analysis. The assumption of massive mutation and complex changes in species.
if i may ask you, what is the driviing force of evolution? Why do we evolve?

logicboy03:
Finally, the appeal to the Quran, just like Tbaba did.


Tell me when the Quran has ever produced an ideal society that respects human rights

Last time i checked, this is Islam for muslims section, what else would i quote if not the Qur'an?

tbaba1234:

This is becoming circular, The fact is that you can not disprove the two possibilities:

i. It comes from an ancient language that is linked to the semetic languages...

ii. It is the meaning of the original name of the first man in Hebrew and it came via revelation.

How do you disprove revelation?

How do you disprove that it comes from a previous language?

Why do you talk about things you do not know about? transliteration?? Are you kidding me?

Now let me give you the roots of Adam in Arabic:

Adam ( آدم ) -

The root letters for Adam are Alif, dal, and miim. If we look at Lanes Lexicon, this is what those root letters when put together mean:

Alif-Dal-Miim = seasoned (e.g. food), to mix/associate/unite/mingle together, a means of access, pattern/exemplar, object of imitation, tanned skin/hide, leather, the surface of the earth/ground, Adam, Children of Adam, human beings.

Lane’s Lexicon, Volume 1, pages: 72, 73, 74

Now if we relate the bolded meanings to Prophet Adam’s name and his history, we see that -according to Qur’an and Sunnah- he (Adam) was;

1 – Mixed/mingled and united (created) from Dust.

2 – Created from the dust of the Earth (surface) of the ground.

3 – He is a Pattern/exemplar, object of imitation for all his children. (i.e. he committed a mistake, but repented and continued to be a good person till death.) The second meaning could be that; we -children of Adam- are imitations of him (because we look like him.)

Does it now mean it is an arabic word since it has arabic roots?

Linked languages have roots for same words. So Again the name Adam could come from an ancient language linked to these semetic languages or is as a result of revelation.

First of all, the first lesson in Dawah should be that you dont use revelation or miracles with atheists. You know better than that. Please, we are using logic and evidence here.


Sorry but you pulled those fake Arabic roots out of thin air. Adam is not even an Arabic name so how does it even have Arabic roots?

I found another person claiming that Adam is from the Arabic word "udma" (colour of his skin) some claim "adeem" or "adim" http://www.savethetruearabs.com/gpage2.html
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2190733

[size=14pt]All of you are lying[/size]

Seriously, this is becoming too funny for me. It seems that some muslims want to deny the Hebrew language that gave them many of their prophets names.



Get over it, Adam is a hebrew name. It is impossible for a Hebrew name to be the name of the first man.

tbaba1234:
The major problems with inbreeding occurs mainly in the first generation.

Since we are talking of the first man created and the power of almighty creator who allowed humans to populate by such means, i have no conflicts with that being the way man populated the earth.

God describes himself as the creator and the shaper ... It is only if you negate the creative power and influence of God that constant inbreeding becomes a problem for you.

Remember that I dont believe in god. You are supposed to be an expert in Dawah. The moment you answer a logical problem with God as the solution instead of a logical answer, you leave me no choice but mockery.

You wouldnt like it if I mock Allah now, would you?

tbaba1234:
A recent study in Iceland by the deCODE genetics company, published by the journal Science, found that third cousins produced more children and grandchildren, suggesting that "in spite of the fact that bringing together two alleles of a recessive trait may be bad, there is clearly some biological wisdom in the union of relatively closely related people". For hundreds of years, inbreeding was historically unavoidable in Iceland due to its then tiny and isolated population.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/ReproductiveHealth/story?id=4258128&page=1

From the above, we see that it is quite possible for it to not only populate the earth but at a faster reproduction rate as well.

3rd cousins? Hmmm


Do you know the meaning of and importance of consanguinity in genetic disorders?

Surely, if had ever come across this term, you wouldnt have cited the above study

tbaba1234:
1) I like watching documentaries on evolution, my views are not solely based on religious views.

2.) The fossil argument is actually no longer used, too many holes.It is actually one of the flaws of evolution. The genetic argument is a stronger argument but i already outlined my problem with that

3.) More like a creature making changes as a result of its environment. That is still a long road to Humans coming from apes. I do not even care as much about other creatures as regards their creation and shaping, It is all in the creative power of God. As a muslim, The thing i am certain of is that Adam was sent to the earth and was not as a result of an adaptive or evolutionary process. Once it is mentioned in the Quran, it negates any other theory because i consider the Quran a far more reliable resource.

Humans over time have made changes as well, but we are still humans.

4.) Fossil records, too many holes.. Genetics- already discussed extensively, Current evolution- Still a long shot from proving anything...

Lmao


1) You probably watch Islamic documentaries on evolution

2) Wrong. Just plain wrong

3) Yes, Allah did it

4) Seriously, how am I meant to reply this point?

tbaba1234:
I think evolution is an interesting area of study and i hope more muslims go into it.

You mean to say that evolution is an interesting area of science that is convenient for you to disbelieve and more muslims should learn how to deny it without looking ignorant.

tbaba1234:


I can give you a word by word analysis using links to modern embryology textbooks and classical Arabic dictionaries...

You can not win that discussion. Waste of time.

Just post the translation

tbaba1234:
When christians were ruled by the bible, what was their state... Compare with when muslims were ruled by the Quran.

Ah but I dont support the christians either! However, the muslims were better at organizing slaves from Africa, including your country Nigeria.

12 million black slaves and you want me to believe that islam prohibits slavery?

Imagine if Arab muslims consumed 12 million pigs- that is impossible because it is haraam.

sino:
Muhehehehe!
Dis logicboy no go kill me with laff o...
God created man and the language he speaks. Using the name to prove adam is not the firstman to me, is baseless. God named him Adam.

Hehehehe. You didnt get the joke?
Well, because adam has a meaning in hebrew doesnt mean that it is originally hebrew. Gerrit?






You need to go back to a basic science class bro. Unicellular organism are prokaryotes, single-celled organisms. For life to have evolved up to this level, what kind of massive mutations are we looking at?





No, not me, you definately are an ape.
How many millions of years are wait for the super humans?




Lol, give me a break bro, i am also trying to do what your scientist do, hypothesize. Well, Adam is a super human though, Allah(swt) taught him everything!
Evolution is still an assumption. Even with all the fossils and DNA analysis. The assumption of massive mutation and complex changes in species.
if i may ask you, what is the driviing force of evolution? Why do we evolve?




Last time i checked, this is Islam for muslims section, what else would i quote if not the Qur'an?

I dont believe in God and therefore, I cant believe in your revelation of prophet Adam or whatever.

I think we should end it there. Tbaba is tiring me.


Most people dont realise that it is not easy explaining evolution and arguing with theists that already believe that you are going to hell and that you are immoral.

First of all, the first lesson in Dawah should be that you dont use revelation or miracles with atheists. You know better than that. Please, we are using logic and evidence here.

Sorry but you pulled those fake Arabic roots out of thin air. Adam is not even an Arabic name so how does it even have Arabic roots?

I found another person claiming that Adam is from the Arabic word "udma" (colour of his skin) some claim "adeem" or "adim" http://www.savethetruearabs.com/gpage2.html
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2190733

All of you are lying

Seriously, this is becoming too funny for me. It seems that some muslims want to deny the Hebrew language that gave them many of their prophets names.

Get over it, Adam is a hebrew name. It is impossible for a Hebrew name to be the name of the first man.

We are not just logical creatures and i use both logic and revelation.

Lane's Lexicon is one of the best dictionaries of Classical Arabic.... That is where the roots were obtained from...

The point is that semitic languages share roots... Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic are very connected languages.

Remember that I dont believe in god. You are supposed to be an expert in Dawah. The moment you answer a logical problem with God as the solution instead of a logical answer, you leave me no choice but mockery.

You wouldnt like it if I mock Allah now, would you? lipsrsealed

Well, I do believe in God.

I will always talk from that position.


I am sure, I have destroyed the arguments of an atheist on embryology on this forum.. I could try looking for the thread, You know the Quran is more detailed than just writing a translation...

I think your three points raised at the beginning have been trashed, time to take my leave.

First of all, the first lesson in Dawah should be that you dont use revelation or miracles with atheists. You know better than that. Please, we are using logic and evidence here.

Sorry but you pulled those fake Arabic roots out of thin air. Adam is not even an Arabic name so how does it even have Arabic roots?

I found another person claiming that Adam is from the Arabic word "udma" (colour of his skin) some claim "adeem" or "adim" http://www.savethetruearabs.com/gpage2.html
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2190733

All of you are lying

Seriously, this is becoming too funny for me. It seems that some muslims want to deny the Hebrew language that gave them many of their prophets names.

Get over it, Adam is a hebrew name. It is impossible for a Hebrew name to be the name of the first man.

We are not just logical creatures and i use both logic and revelation.

Lane's Lexicon is one of the best dictionaries of Classical Arabic.... That is where the roots were obtained from...

The point is that semitic languages share roots... Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic are very connected languages.

Remember that I dont believe in god. You are supposed to be an expert in Dawah. The moment you answer a logical problem with God as the solution instead of a logical answer, you leave me no choice but mockery.

You wouldnt like it if I mock Allah now, would you? lipsrsealed

Well, I do believe in God.

I will always talk from that position.


I am sure, I have destroyed the arguments of an atheist on embryology on this forum.. I could try looking for the thread, You know the Quran is more detailed than just writing a translation...

I think your three points raised at the beginning have been trashed, time to take my leave.

tbaba1234:



We are not just logical creatures and i use both logic and revelation.

Lane's Lexicon is one of the best dictionaries of Classical Arabic.... That is where the roots were obtained from...

The point is that semitic languages share roots... Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic are very connected languages.




Well, I do believe in God.

I will always talk from that position.


I am sure, I have destroyed the arguments of an atheist on embryology on this forum.. I could try looking for the thread, You know the Quran is more detailed than just writing a translation...

I think your three points raised at the beginning have been trashed, time to take my leave.

I am not surprised that you have not provided any links for your claims about the Arabic roots of Adam. It is a lie. Just like those who claim udma and adim.

If Adam is not an Arabic word, why would an Arabic dictionary list the roots of Adam?


Your point is invalid. Everyone can see that I backed up my claims for the Hebrew roots and the false Arabic roots.



As for the rest, we are agreed. You love Allah and I dont believe in him.

Link: http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000072.pdf
http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000073.pdf
http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000074.pdf

tbaba1234: Link: http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000072.pdf
http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000073.pdf
http://www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume1/00000074.pdf

Yeah right, I'm gonna search through 3pdfs?

Well you asked for the references.. You can check it or take my word.

Adam ( آدم ) - check the root letters

tbaba1234: Well you asked for the references.. You can check it or take my word.

Adam ( آدم ) - check the root letters

Adam is Adam

Ah yes.....I forgot to give Tbaba the final blow;


First he is still making the failure of claiming that Adam is from a semitic language if not Hebrew. Guess what? African civilizations preceded semitic languages!!!

There is also the issue of 2 people populating the earth.

a) Does Allah allow incest?

b) Continous incest between brothers and sisters and first cousins leads to genetic problems.

c) Variation. With all the variations present in human beings, it is impossible that we descended from 2 people and more likely from thousands as the science clearly shows.

Olodo!!

Back to lesson 1:

i. Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages.

1. I never said, the ancient language was a semitic language, i said the ancient language might havte links to the semitic language, an ancestor if you like to words in semitic langugauge.

2. The Second option is that adam is just the translation in hebrew and it was from revelation

You have thus far failed woefully to disprove any because you simply can't.

There is also the issue of 2 people populating the earth.

a) Does Allah allow Inbreeding?

b) Continous Inbreeding between brothers and sisters and first cousins leads to genetic problems.

c) Variation. With all the variations present in human beings, it is impossible that we descended from 2 people and more likely from thousands as the science clearly shows.

a.) Inbreeding was permitted for the first few generations but is no longer permissible.

b.) Yes, in this time and age... You can not prove to me that the inbreeding between the sons and daugthers of adam, those genetic conditions existed. As a believer in the creative power of God, We know that God creates all diseases and if he permitted inbreeding than it must have been safe.

c.) Based on a non falsifiable assumption, The Quran to the muslim is far more reliable...


NEXT!!!

tbaba1234: Olodo!!

What!!!?? Tbaba threw an insult? Are my kaffir ways influencing you?

tbaba1234:
Back to lesson 1:

i. Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages.

1. I never said, the ancient language was a semitic language, i said the ancient language might havte links to the semitic language, an ancestor if you like to words in semitic langugauge.

2. The Second option is that adam is just the translation in hebrew and it was from revelation

You have thus far failed woefully to disprove any because you simply can't.

You assert 2 things that have no evidence whatsoever. You mention this mysterious ancient language that no one (not even you) has heard of and claimed that Adam is from that language while ignoring the fact that names are peculiar to specific languages.

Revelation is nonsense because the person delivering the revelation must speak a language that the person receiving it must understand.


Anyway, the main fact remains that you have made an argument from ignorance. Such arguments bring no provable claim. You argue things that you can not prove and ask people to prove it?

Imagine me asking you to disprove that I am a white british man (who has lived in Nigeria for sometime). It isnt true but nothing you say can disprove it. I have to table the evidence for my claims before we debate on my skin colour and nationality.

Before you make claims, table your evidence.

tbaba1234:
a.) Inbreeding was permitted for the first few generations but is no longer permissible.

b.) Yes, in this time and age... You can not prove to me that the inbreeding between the sons and daugthers of adam, those genetic conditions existed. As a believer in the creative power of God, We know that God creates all diseases and if he permitted inbreeding than it must have been safe.

c.) Based on a non falsifiable assumption, The Quran to the muslim is far more reliable...


NEXT!!!

a) You mock your own God. Allah can not be a hypocrite. Either incest is immoral or it is not. An all-knowing God should have created multiple people rather than just 2

b) Read what you just wrote. You after mocking Allah. Allah can not work like a schizophrenic. Allowing incest to work in one place and then putting a natural problem or punishment for incest in another place then claiming incest is bad.

Even from a scientific point of view, it doesnt make sense. As long as one is human, continuous incest will cause problems

c) Variation is not based on assumpition. We know that we have variations from empirical evidence. This is something testable. 2 people can not give us the variation we have today accross humanity.

tbaba1234: Olodo!!

Back to lesson 1:

i. Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages.

1. I never said, the ancient language was a semitic language, i said the ancient language might havte links to the semitic language, an ancestor if you like to words in semitic langugauge.

2. The Second option is that adam is just the translation in hebrew and it was from revelation

You have thus far failed woefully to disprove any because you simply can't.



a.) Inbreeding was permitted for the first few generations but is no longer permissible.

b.) Yes, in this time and age... You can not prove to me that the inbreeding between the sons and daugthers of adam, those genetic conditions existed. As a believer in the creative power of God, We know that God creates all diseases and if he permitted inbreeding than it must have been safe.

c.) Based on a non falsifiable assumption, The Quran to the muslim is far more reliable...


NEXT!!!

This is the problem with religion, it never gives you concrete and satisfying answers that are verifiable, it ALWAYS leaves you with maybe. . .Here is the problem with the advent of DNA it is possible to trace and know if all of humanity came from one single man and woman. The scientific evidence through DNA shows that we did not come from one man and one woman. . .It is scientifically impossible. . .Then comes the assertion that the koran is more reliable than science. . .Pls can you name one problem facing humanity the koran has helped solved?. . .Any "reliable" solution from the koran to many of the disease facing mankind for example?. . .The koran says the first man is Adam where is the verifiable evidence for that?. . .Now tbaba will run and hug the faith cake while insisting that his faith based belief has everything to do with reality. . .

tbaba1234: Olodo!!

Back to lesson 1:

i. Languages are influenced by each other and even a dead language has influences on living languages.

1. I never said, the ancient language was a semitic language, i said the ancient language might havte links to the semitic language, an ancestor if you like to words in semitic langugauge.

2. The Second option is that adam is just the translation in hebrew and it was from revelation

You have thus far failed woefully to disprove any because you simply can't.



a.) Inbreeding was permitted for the first few generations but is no longer permissible.

b.) Yes, in this time and age... You can not prove to me that the inbreeding between the sons and daugthers of adam, those genetic conditions existed. As a believer in the creative power of God, We know that God creates all diseases and if he permitted inbreeding than it must have been safe.

c.) Based on a non falsifiable assumption, The Quran to the muslim is far more reliable...


NEXT!!!

This is the problem with religion, it never gives you concrete and satisfying answers that are verifiable, it ALWAYS leaves you with maybe. . .Here is the problem, with the advent of DNA it is possible to trace and know if all of humanity came from one single man and woman. The scientific evidence through DNA shows that we did not come from one man and one woman. . .It is scientifically impossible. . .Then comes the assertion that the koran is more reliable than science. . .Pls can you name one problem facing humanity the koran has helped solved?. . .Any "reliable" solution from the koran to many of the disease facing mankind for example?. . .The koran says the first man is Adam where is the verifiable evidence for that?. . .Now tbaba will run and hug the faith cake while insisting that his faith based belief has everything to do with reality. . .

mazaje:

This is the problem with religion, it never gives you concrete and satisfying answers that are verifiable, it ALWAYS leaves you with maybe. . .Here is the problem with the advent of DNA it is possible to trace and know if all of humanity came from one single man and woman. The scientific evidence through DNA shows that we did not come from one man and one woman. . .It is scientifically impossible. . .Then comes the assertion that the koran is more reliable than science. . .Pls can you name one problem facing humanity the koran has helped solved?. . .Any "reliable" solution from the koran to many of the disease facing mankind for example?. . .The koran says the first man is Adam where is the verifiable evidence for that?. . .Now tbaba will run and hug the faith cake while insisting that his faith based belief has everything to do with reality. . .

Thank you! This is what I have been saying since.


Tbaba resorts to improbable conspiracies or revelations to explain what science has already proven to be impossible.

Olodo is a joke, not meant to be an insult. No offense meant.

You assert 2 things that have no evidence whatsoever. You mention this mysterious ancient language that no one (not even you) has heard of and claimed that Adam is from that language while ignoring the fact that names are peculiar to specific languages.

Revelation is nonsense because the person delivering the revelation must speak a language that the person receiving it must understand.


Anyway, the main fact remains that you have made an argument from ignorance. Such arguments bring no provable claim. You argue things that you can not prove and ask people to prove it?

Imagine me asking you to disprove that I am a white british man (who has lived in Nigeria for sometime). It isnt true but nothing you say can disprove it. I have to table the evidence for my claims before we debate on my skin colour and nationality.

Before you make claims, table your evidence.

You are the one claiming that Adam is not the name of the first man. I present you with two possibilities.. Non of which you can disprove.

Muslims for instance are both intellectually and emotionally convinced that the Quran is revelation, we are also convinced that there have been previous revelations.

My second assertion about revelation is that even if Adam spoke a different language, the translation of the meaning of his name in the semitic languages is Adam.

I do not have to show you any evidence, you are the one starting this thread making assertions without evidence or considering all possibilities.

I know you badly want the name of the first man not to be Adam but you are debating over something that there is no way, you can disprove that it wasn't Adam.

Give it a rest.

a) You mock your own God. Allah can not be a hypocrite. Either Inbreeding is immoral or it is not. An all-knowing God should have created multiple people rather than just 2

b) Read what you just wrote. You after mocking Allah. Allah can not work like a schizophrenic. Allowing Inbreeding to work in one place and then putting a natural problem or punishment for Inbreeding in another place then claiming Inbreeding is bad.

Even from a scientific point of view, it doesnt make sense. As long as one is human, continuous Inbreeding will cause problems

c) Variation is not based on assumpition. We know that we have variations from empirical evidence. This is something testable. 2 people can not give us the variation we have today accross humanity.

a. What is morality? The only anchor for objective morality is God... And if He allows something based on the necessity at the time then who are you exactly??

Muslims don't eat pork but if we are forced by extreme hunger then we can have some to beat the hunger. If Allah decides that all human will come from the seed of Adam, Who are you exactly??

b. As muslims, as much as we acknowledge science, we put it in its place

c. Do i have to repeat myself a million times?? Variation exists, that is true. The interpretation is based a on non falsifiable assumption

mazaje:
This is the problem with religion, it never gives you concrete and satisfying answers that are verifiable, it ALWAYS leaves you with maybe. . .Here is the problem, with the advent of DNA it is possible to trace and know if all of humanity came from one single man and woman. The scientific evidence through DNA shows that we did not come from one man and one woman. . .It is scientifically impossible. . .Then comes the assertion that the koran is more reliable than science. . .Pls can you name one problem facing humanity the koran has helped solved?. . .Any "reliable" solution from the koran to many of the disease facing mankind for example?. . .The koran says the first man is Adam where is the verifiable evidence for that?. . .Now tbaba will run and hug the faith cake while insisting that his faith based belief has everything to do with reality. . .

Hi, long time

Science is based on degrees of certainty, I have a much higher degree of certainty in the Quran based on my studies of it. So while i have respect for science, i put it in its place.

As regards, what the Quran has done for humanity, It might interest you to know that a large number of muslim scientists in the middle ages (Islamic golden age) were directly influenced by the Quran. Many of them were also religious scholars. I can give you many instances in Islamic history where Quranic principles like the Zakat improved the lives of the citizens. I do not want to prolong the discussion.

Finally, i address many of my points from a logical perspective but i also realise that as humans, we are not purely logical. We make many decisions based on other factors not just pure logic.

The problem with the atheists is that you want everything to be logical but we see that there are so many things, even scientific precepts based on non falsifiable assumption. so not everything is verifiable.

And even when everything is presented in a logical manner to you, you stray into another valley looking for another logical explanation.. You go straying into every valley there is.

There is nothing anyone can do to convince you particularly when you have tied your knot and decided on atheism

Logicboy, let us agree to disagree... I am tired of this thread

tbaba1234: Logicboy, let us agree to disagree... I am tired of this thread

Tired? No problem but I want to make something clear;


I knew that you were joking about the olodo comment! I was only teasing you.

tbaba1234:

Hi, long time

Science is based on degrees of certainty, I have a much higher degree of certainty in the Quran based on my studies of it. So while i have respect for science, i put it in its place.

As regards, what the Quran has done for humanity, It might interest you to know that a large number of muslim scientists in the middle ages (Islamic golden age) were directly influenced by the Quran. Many of them were also religious scholars. I can give you many instances in Islamic history where Quranic principles like the Zakat improved the lives of the citizens. I do not want to prolong the discussion.

Finally, i address many of my points from a logical perspective but i also realise that as humans, we are not purely logical. We make many decisions based on other factors not just pure logic.

The problem with the atheists is that you want everything to be logical but we see that there are so many things, even scientific precepts based on non falsifiable assumption. so not everything is verifiable.

And even when everything is presented in a logical manner to you, you stray into another valley looking for another logical explanation.. You go straying into every valley there is.

There is nothing anyone can do to convince you particularly when you have tied your knot and decided on atheism

Long time man, nice to hear from you. . . hope you are good?. . .

I get what you are saying. . .What I was saying is simple. . .Religious assertions are mostly unverifiable compared to that of science(of course scientist also make unverifiable assumptions and assertions). . .But when claims that are verifiable like the one you are making here are looked at, the scientific position is the one that has evidence to back it up. Even Christian scientist that have looked into it have now changed their position on the genesis account. Most now claim that the Adam and Eve narrative is an allegory, am talking about christians in very high places like the late pope Johen Paul and other christians of all denominations that have looked at the evidence science has provided, we now have evolution-theist as a result of the scientific findings that have been shown . . .

But then to each his own. . .My point is religions have made so many assertions and when looked at the evidence just does not support the narrative they have put forth. . .