Us vs. them arguements?

Question

Some double standards I have found, can you explain...
Q#1 Adam and Eve =Incest, gross, inbred...
but if all life came from a single cell, wouldn't that = incest?
Q#2 Evolution is evidence of non-intelligent creation
Don't scientist still say that they still aren't sure exactly how life started on Earth ["we don't know (we can't prove it), but we're pretty sure"]?
Q#3 Embryo's are just a clump of cells
What are humans? (ok this one isnt really part of the whole subject, but every time I see this answer, this thought comes up)
Q#4 If cells can just form under the right conditions, why not grow stem cells from nothing?

I'm not trying to start an argument here, these are just some things I wonder about...If you have the answers...please share.
I'm on the fence when it comes to creation of life...Logic tells me to go with what science speculates, but I believe in God which tells me through him anything is possible...

Answer 1

There is no necessary contradiction between science and religion. The conflict between them results from scientists and their groupies insisting to the rest of us that science has proven that all life arose from purely material causes, implying, or stating outright, that it was not created by God.

As you astutely pointed out, no scientist can say specifically how the first life arose from material causes. Yet they claim that it's been proven that it did so. But they don't know how. But it's been proven. Anyone with common sense can see that this is nonsense.

Scientists are overstepping their boundaries when they claim to know how life arose. We're perfectly within our boundaries when we affirm that God did it. Don't let them confuse you.

Answer 2

A#1: Most evolutionary geneticists are pretty sure that we're all essentially fiftieth cousins of each other. Also, the evolution theory requires some incest to hold water. Incest is not inherently a bad thing, biologically speaking. The fear of birth defects is blown WAY out of proportion amongst everybody. Former president Franklin Roosevelt and his wife Eleanor were second or third cousins -- none of their children ended up deformed or menially handicapped, and their marriage was both Christian and legal.

A#2: Wrong. Evolution and "Creationism" or "Intelligent design" are not incompatible. There are many very religious people who believe that evolution was the "how" while "Intelligent Design/Creationism" is the "why". I'm one of them, but at the same time, I also understand that evolution (as a scientific theory), is constantly being tweaked and redefined and that the same arguments that Atheistic evolution supporters use to explain the missing links in the fossil record are also somehow "not good enough" to support the possibility of Bigfoot or a yeti (ie: "just because there are no fossils does not mean it never existed"). Science is a useful tool for learning, but it's just as much speculation as it is "evidence".

[and just for the record, no, I'm not a Christian, I'm a pagan with a rather complex, and sometimes archaic belief structure, but that's what works for me]

A#3: There is a major difference between a clump of cells with a fully functioning brain (as in, one that can regulate bodily functions and feels pain) and one that cannot. A human embryo only two or three weeks into gestation has *not* yet developed a fully functioning brain as defined above.

A#4: We don't yet have the technology to do so.


Serious, dude. This isn't rocket science. Or brain surgery. Or even rocket surgery.

Answer 3

Q#1 - Incest wasn't a sin until God declared that it was. In the beginning it was necessary for reproduction and was safe. Later it became unnecessary and also posed a health threat to the offspring. The only reason anything is a sin is because it does harm.

Q#2 - Evolution only finds the "evidence" it wants to find. There are two dating methods - one that can only date material that is millions of years old, and one that can date material less than 40,000 years old. Guess which one evolution uses? The first. As a result they of course "discover" that certain materials are millions of years old. When you use the other dating method, most material will date less than 10,000 years old, putting it more within the biblical timeline. By the way, when you use the first method to test a freshly killed animal it will also tell you that the animal has been dead for "millions of years", or at least many thousands. Go figure.

Q#3 - You're made of cells too. Human embryos are human no more or less than we are.

Q#4 - Cells don't "just form". Something has to start them.

Answer 4

Vice is nice but incest is best?

#1 - the gross part of Adam and Eve is Cain and Abel either having sex with their mother or with the apes. There were no other females in the literal bible.

#2 - you are correct, scientists don't know how life started (although there are theories and we know more today than we did in the past). But this does allow rational christians to believe that god created the first microbial life several billion years ago and watched (or even guided) evolution to get us to where we are today. Genesis is nonsense in either case.

#3 - human embryos are a clump of self organizing human cells whose self organizational mechanisms are fairly well known (although potentially disruptive experiments have only been conducted with cells in non-human embryos).

#4 - stem cells are incredibly complex and scientists do not have the abiltiy to create them from chemicals. At the present time, scientists are working their way up the ladder of complexity from RNA and DNA to viruses. Eventually I would guess that scientists will be able to create stem cells but they will not be able to mass produce them as well as a stem cell factory (like the embryo) can.

Answer 5

If the bible listed all the children born from Adam to The New Testiment It would take a mighty big book.The bible doesn't say how many total sons and daughters Adam and Eve had.Have you heard about the brother and sister in Germany that want to be legally married and already have children?

Answer 6

1. Incest wasn't bad until our genetics got mutated to the point where deformities and mental problems would result from having a child with a spouse that has genetics very similar to yours. That's why God made it a sin around the time of Moses. The less in common spouses have in genes, the less likely their children will have problems. (Similar to overbreeding in dogs. Golden Retrievers are starting to get all these medical problems. Mutts tend to be the healthiest dogs.)

I'd answers the rest, but I have to leave...

Answer 7

Each person is going to believe the way they choose to believe. Those who do not believe in a divine creator will tend to believe what scientists have to say. Scientific explanation is very valid, for the most part in all cases. It at least can give infallible proof. I believe in a divine creator, so I tend to believe that something bigger than me started creation. I'm not saying science doesn't make sense about how things started, but I CHOOSE to believe that the Divine started it all.

I tend to look at it this way. Whose to say that the Divine (God) didn't "clap" his hands and BANG here we go?!! Exactly how things got started will never have an exact answer, and even if it does, there will still be those who choose to believe differently. What would help everyone is if each person would accept the fact that the right to believe as you choose is something that everyone is entitled to. For me to tell you or anyone else you're wrong for what you believe is taking that right away from them. The sooner we can accept difference of opinions in ALL aspects of our lives, the better off humankind will be.

When you allow people to believe as they choose, the one thing you have to take into consideration is that each person is entitled to their beliefs, PROVIDED that their beliefs cause no harm. Each persons interpretation of right and wrong and exactly what "Harm" is will be different. It is a fine line and we each have to tread carefully, but if it literally causes no harm, by my definition "Physical" harm, what is the problem with differences of opinion?

Answer 8

Some people, most people have to believe in some greater being to cope. Not stating that there is or is not a greater being, just that in order to have any resemblance of peace, the world has to believe in some form of god. Without a implanted threat of penance there would be anarchy.

As for creation, whether orchestrated by a greater being or happenstance, let your logic be the judge.

Answer 9

You have biological questions which should be asked in the biology section. Take note however: it doesn't matter what your opinion is, only what the physical evidence is. Your beliefs do not change reality.

Answer 10

Japan has attacked this united states of america! There are 1000's upon 1000's of folk of eastern descent dwelling on the west coast. we've not have been given any theory of their loyalty...many being of recent immigration and/or descent to others in Japan. it fairly is crucial that we shield our western states, the place maximum of those immigrants stay. moving them inward and confining them to a given area will supply us extra secure practices against espionage and terrorists assaults. i'm surely having a complicated time supplying you with good reasons for this, yet i'm attempting. there's a compelling State interest in moving those persons. we are actually not saying that they are siding with the eastern government, yet we are saying for OUR pastimes, whilst at conflict with the rustic of Japan, we would desire to look after our seashores and a momentary relocation of persons of eastern background is mandatory, the two for their secure practices and ours. they are going to be obvious through their beneficial aspects - we can't assure their secure practices - as a effect to place them under Federal secure practices not basically assures their secure practices, yet in addition ours. it fairly is of their superb pastimes that we pursue this coverage.