If humans evolved from apes......?

Question

If you hold to a literal reading of Genesis then God created two humans, Adam and Eve. From them all the people of the world are descended.

Now we have different people in the world today. Lots of different races. Now how do we get all these races from one breeding pair? I can think of two possible answers:

1. They evolved! In which case the "if we evolved from apes why are there still apes" argument goes out of the window. Pick a race for Adam and Eve, black for instance. Now if white people evolved from black people why are there still black people? or
2. God created the races seperately

So, Creationism must either accept some evolution and give up one of its most cherished jibes or hold to a position that is inherently racist.

C'mon Creationists which are you going to admit to:
- There is no problem with humans evolving from apes or
- Racism
Which is worse to admit? I'm fascinated to find out.

I know humans are apes. I have no problem with humans being apes and/or evolving from apes (and whether it was an ape or a "common ancestor" it was furry climbed trees and had a banana fixation.

I have no problem with religion either. I think religion and evolution are great.

I have a problem with anti-rational creationists! Now come on creationists, play fair and answer the question will you admit evolution or embrace racism? Who are you - Dawkins or Hitler? (I should have used "Dawkins or Hitler" as the title of my question!)

Answer 1

humans are apes .

Answer 2

Just like this earth goes through ice ages and different changes we humans have changed through the ages . There is no known conclusive evidence to support the ape theory nor conclusive evidence to support the Adam and eve story.
I do not believe that we came from Adam and eve. I was raised Christian and as a child was told over and over about creation. Now that I've grown I've leaned towards the story of creation as a folk story for children to warn them of the consequences in wrong doings (the forbidden tree). I always questioned the fact that there aren't any facts behind the bible story on creation and the line that was always thrown my way was " do not be a doubting Thomas. Believing is not seeing but knowing that it is all real in your heart"
I hope that scientific studies reveal the factual truth one day so that all the speculation can be put to rest. That we are more complex than just Adam and eve. or the Noah's ark story.

Answer 3

The only racist here is you. First of all, there is no biological basis for race. "Race" is only a conglomeration of superficial features that occur in greater congruence in certain populations. An African man and an Inuit woman are both human beings and are capable of reproducing successfully. This is just an example of so-called micro-evolution, which is in perfect accordance with literal readings of Genesis.

You attempt to argue that the formation and differentiation of species is therefore valid. This is in no way supported by the data you provided. Macro-evolution, the transition of one species into another, has nothing to do with the various "races" of humans on the planet.

The emergence of different skin colors is no more difficult for creationist than asking them why some people are blond and some people have red hair.

Answer 4

The "if man evolved from apes why are there still apes" is the most senseless argument out there. If children came from adults, why are there still adults? Fact is at one time multiple forms of hominids existed concurrently, we are just the sole survivors.

The creationists can't logically argue against genetics which can establish individual DNA at a crime scene with mathematical accuracy that is overwhelmingly convincing. The same technology determined that our ancestors came out of Africa (also it is noteworthy we share DNA with chimpanzees indicating a common ancestor). To any creationists using this asinine argument let me point out that cats share a common ancestor and today we have lions, tigers, leopards, lynx etc that all share a common ancestor. You can't argue they don't exist so why do you have a problem with the existence of apes?? And don't quote from a 3000 year old book of myths.

Answer 5

Great question.
For which there is a good answer.
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3677

There has certainly not been any evolution - rather there is devolution.

There is no such thing as different races - we are all one race.
The different people groups are all descended form Adam and Eve, and more recently from Noah.

Check out the link.

Answer 6

Your proposition is very thin and uninformed.
Read Darwin's book, On the Origin of Species, and also read the Bible.

To say you have learned in your life can be to say your intelect has evolved. So this can be seen as evolution.

Christian are not opposed to all forms of evolution. The opposition cames from teaching an unproven theory as fact in the schools.
Is there any proof man evolved from apes??

Did you know, your body temperature is the same as some rhinos? Does this mean you share a common ancestry?

Darwin said that if one little part of his theory can be misproven, then all of it would have to be thrown out.

Science has already proven many of Darwin's ideas were totally wrong. You would have to be very familiar with his written works to understand and see this.

Answer 7

You've misunderstood evolution. Humans are a species of great ape (fact) but we and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

Darwinism breaks down into two parts....
first is:
Common Descent.
this is proved now since the unscrambling of the human genome, humans share genes with banana's and bacteria.

The other part of Darwinism is:
Natural Selection.
Darwin's finches in the Galapagos have been studied for decades now and subjected to countless field and laboratory studies, Darwin is not in danger, together with the fossil record evidence makes evolution the most complete explanation we presently have for the origins of life on Earth and nobody has disproved it.

Answer 8

You're overrating peoples' desire to think things through and
derive a total philosophy. All of us have got so much to get
on with that we don't have the time to think everything through,
unless we are intellectuals and get a lot of pleasure thinking
through these things.

Christians are sure of the stuff in the gospels as that is very clear
to think through, and you can have experiential evidence in your own life that it is true, as you can have a real sense of sins forgiven and real and dramatic experiences of God's Holy Spirit, e.g healings that are quite impossible naturally or an absolutely overwhelming sense of joy or love. Then people in their walk of faith find that God actually answers them, if they are going the way God wants them to, i.e becoming better people.

Since the gospel in itself can explain even without much of the Old Testament these salvation experiences and christians are sure of that, its not a great issue practically to many of them, specially if they haven't studied sciences, to just accept the Genesis account of creation along with the many other useful teachings.
Many popular works on science are by diehard atheists with an axe to grind (eg Dawkins), so you have to think a lot to counteract the arguments..its a lot of time and effort to investigate..we've all got loads of things to get on with..some of us are naturally weak at science anyway.

I think of the pre-Genesis 12 (Abraham arrives on the scene) stuff as symbolic and having a spiritual meaning. I think men biologically stem from the apes. That doesn't stop for instance the possibility that God in-spirited men at some point, lifting them above the merely animal, thats my own theory as to what happened.

Some may say spirits don't exist and that there is just the mind, and yet christians encounter the Holy Spirit experientially..He's a spirit, and invisible except when He manifests in unusual ways such as the 'Shekinah glory', so its easy for chrisians to accept we have spirits to, hard for atheists. "The wind blows where it wills; you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone who is born from the Spirit." (John 3:8)

The biggest statement of theology in the new Testament is
probably the letter of Romans. Paul doesn't argue from some Adam-and-Eve rooted history of man, since the Romans didn't
believe in that, he argues from the way society is, with biblical references to sad outworkings of human selfishness. He does mention Adam later but in a symbolic way, Adam being as it were the head of the race of men before Jesus provided an opportunity to upgrade.

Answer 9

Ok, 1st I too am an atheists, but you have evolution all wrong. Plus, the bible says Adam and Eve were the first two people on earth, it doesn't say they were the only two god created, just the first two. I think god could have made as many as he wanted.

Answer 10

You are confusing micro-evolution with macro-evolution. All creationists accept the former: slight variation within the gene pool, but a monkey remains a monkey, a dog remains a dog, and a finch remains a finch. However, it has never been shown that an ape changed to a man!

Therefore, your proposition that creationists must accept one of your postulates is invalid.

Answer 11

If you have taken biology already you would know about genetics. Now God did create Adam and Eve and they did polute the earth. They had the genes for every single person that has ever been on this world (except Jesus, the son of God) in them. After thousands of years the genes spread out making many races and many different people.