How does the story of Adam and Eve compatible with science?

[ChristineM]

first, let's all agree that we're all descended from one man and one woman and this has been verified.

Some folks get their nose out of joint over the idea of the universe being created in 6 days --you know, the sun coming up and going down days? My take is that Genesis doesn't have the sun created until the fourth day, so how long were those first few days w/o the sun?

Genesis says "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Ask an honest scientist what happened chronologically before the big bang that could make the big bang happen and they should say that there was no "before" that preceded the big bang because that's when time began. Any talk about parallel universes etc are purely unfalsifiable conjecture w/ no scientific observability to confirm or contradict. Also the words "at once" do not appear in the first chapter of Genesis. However, in the second chapter of Genesis there was a second creation of the earth, the heavens, and man (and woman) but once again the words "at once" do not appear.

My point is that just as science teaches many things, the Bible also teaches many things and it's our job to make sense out of everything and consult about it all. However that's my take and I understand that there are other opinions.

Plants growing before sunlight?
Anyway my answer was to the claim "Wait a sec, DNA research world wide has proven that we're all descendants s of one woman and one man." Which is true, but they did not meet there was thousands of years difference between them which sort of contradicts the garden of eden idea doesn't it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How does the story of Adam and Eve compatible with science?

Not.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How it is not? The history of science is full of errors, why believe it would be correct about possibility of Adam and Eve?

The history of science is full of errors, yes.
And the only reason you know about that is because you can also say that science has a history of CORRECTING errors.
That's how we know there were errors........... Because through (more and better) science, we discover our errors and subsequently correct them.
This is how science zero's in on truth.


As for the adam and eve bit...... well.... that's one of the errors science has already correct.
There never were just 2 humans. Human population never fell below a couple thousands (some 70.000 years ago, around the time of the Toba volcano eruption - humans were an endangered species back then as a result of this genetic bottleneck, but our ancestors managed to bounce back).

These are genetic facts. Adam & Eve myth is what the error was.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Wait a sec, DNA research world wide has proven that we're all descendants s of one woman and one man.

... who lived 10s of thousands of years apart from one another.

And while every man / woman can trace his / her ancestry back to "mitochondrial eve" and "y chromosome adam", neither of them were the only male / female alive when they lived (in their respective age which, again, was not remotely during the same period in history). Instead, both these individuals were part of a population.

It's just that all the other lineages over time have died out.


This genetic fact has nothing at all to do with the myth of the bible.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The account in Genesis suggests multiplication happened freely and readily with lots of sons born to men.

The account of Gendalf says that there is the one ring to rule them all.

But that also has no bearing on actual reality.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why don’t you supply evidence that has facts.

It would be like trying to teach quantum physics to a 3 year old.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The Bible can only be disproved by facts and you haven’t got any.

Blatant shift of the burden of proof.

As an analogy, do you have any facts to refute Star Wars?

(incidently, plenty of facts disprove plenty of bible myths when read literally, but I'm not even going to go there since it's obviously an exercise in futility)

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You’ve brought your twisted debate from the other thread. We humans have evolved from the real Adam and Eve in the Bible but we are not a new species and so your evolution theory remains unproven. Try not to confuse the two.

I just love it every time a science denier tries to be clever and puts emphasis on the word "theory" as if that somehow is a point against its credibility.

You might want to read this web page:

Evolution is Not Just a Theory: home

notjustatheory.com

But you likely won't. Because you aren't interested in learning, nor do you care that you argue strawmen, misrepresentations and repeat the same errors ad nauseum.
Instead, all you care about is preaching and holding on tightly to your faith based religious beliefs.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I had already ascertained you’re a babbler. No scoffing but this latest comment demonstrates it perfectly in spades. A “theory is as good as it gets”….. oh wait, until there are facts. That will happen when you will see God.

Theories explain facts.
Facts support theories.

"good theories" don't become facts.
Theories stay theories. They are explanatory models of sets of facts and laws.

Facts = data
Theory = explanatory model that explains the facts / data

But you can just keep getting it wrong and doubling down on strawmen.
We all know you will.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why would I worry when I have my own empirical evidence God exists.

"empirical"... It doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It’s easier for me just accepting the whole of the Bible so there’s no worries.

Right. It's "easier".
That way you can just be lazy and never learn or study or think.

I don’t bother with non-creation science.

And yet you make use of exactly that every time you use your internet capable device to post your anti-science religious rethoric.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It hasn’t. Non-creation science has no empirical evidence.

Honest and sincere question: are you a Poe?
Is your account an attempt at satire?

 

[Apostle John]

Honest and sincere question: are you a Poe?
Is your account an attempt at satire?

There’ll be no bite from me today or Fryday, so use the time to find some more theoretical science that’s not so easy to pull apart.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes I observed it. So back to my original question try not to evade. Why would I worry when I have my own empirical evidence God exists. You’re like a crackpot non-creation scientist who has a peculiar notion that Christians need brainwashing with lies. Try to respond rationally why I should worry and not you, see if you can do that at least.

Well, that is easy. Your standard of evidence is one I can use too. See you in Hell, because your God is Satan.

That is the beauty of "I" am the standard. You are not the only "I".

 

[exchemist]

first, let's all agree that we're all descended from one man and one woman and this has been verified.

Some folks get their nose out of joint over the idea of the universe being created in 6 days --you know, the sun coming up and going down days? My take is that Genesis doesn't have the sun created until the fourth day, so how long were those first few days w/o the sun?

Genesis says "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Ask an honest scientist what happened chronologically before the big bang that could make the big bang happen and they should say that there was no "before" that preceded the big bang because that's when time began. Any talk about parallel universes etc are purely unfalsifiable conjecture w/ no scientific observability to confirm or contradict. Also the words "at once" do not appear in the first chapter of Genesis. However, in the second chapter of Genesis there was a second creation of the earth, the heavens, and man (and woman) but once again the words "at once" do not appear.

My point is that just as science teaches many things, the Bible also teaches many things and it's our job to make sense out of everything and consult about it all. However that's my take and I understand that there are other opinions.

While we do seem to have a most recent common male ancestor and a most recent common female ancestor, it is important to realise these are two individuals that would have never known each other, because they lived at different times and most likely in different places. They bred with other members of the species, not with one another.

Furthermore they are not fixed individuals. As lineages in modern humans die out, the last common ancestor moves forward in time. They are a concept in genetics, not specific people.

So to say we are "all descended from one man and one woman" is sort of true, but not in the sense of being descended from a couple that bred together.

 

[1213]

As for the adam and eve bit...... well.... that's one of the errors science has already correct.
There never were just 2 humans. Human population never fell below a couple thousands (some 70.000 years ago, around the time of the Toba volcano eruption - humans were an endangered species back then as a result of this genetic bottleneck, but our ancestors managed to bounce back).

These are genetic facts. Adam & Eve myth is what the error was.

Sorry, that is a very weak argument, nothing substantial supporting your claim. Can you give any solid to support your belief?

 

[1213]

Yet science corrects its errors, the Bible doesn't.

What error should be fixed in the Bible? I don't think there is any meaningful error. Some translations may have small mistakes, but i wouldn't count that an error in the original Bible.

 

[1213]

Science has a history of errors, but you are not looking at the pattern of those errors. The errors keep getting smaller and smaller as time goes on.

The problem with that is, the mistakes are always found much later. Now you believe they are small, but after 100 years they can be huge.

The myth was shown to be that a long time ago and every new discovery only confirms that. It is so bad that to believe the Adam and Eve myth is now calling God a liar. You would have to explain where the endless evidence comes from that tells us that it never happened. If the story is true than God also had to lie by planting endless false evidence to cover up that fact.

I don't think you can show any real evidence that would make Adam and Eve a myth.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sorry, that is a very weak argument,

It's not an argument. I'm just informing you of a couple of facts you don't seem to know about.

nothing substantial supporting your claim. Can you give any solid to support your belief?

The human genome. It is what it is.
See, unlike unfalsifiable claims of supernatural stuff, some myths from the bible, like the adam and eve story, make actual testable predictions about the real world.

A population of just 2 predicts a grotesk genetic bottleneck. But this genetic bottleneck doesn't exist in the human genome.
Noah's flood predicts such grotesk bottlenecks in the genome of pretty much ALL species.

These however do not exist.

ps: in biology, populations anywhere below 200 is considered doomed to eventual extinction, due to the lack of genetic diversity. Basically, the biological problem of incest will surface.

Anyhow... these things are facts. There are no such bottlenecks in humans.
There never were just 2 humans. Not an argument. Not a claim. Instead, a genetic fact.

The adam and eve myth requires such a bottleneck. It predicts it. A population of 2 = bottleneck. Virtually no genetic diversity.
So since there is no such bottleneck, the story ain't true.

It makes a testable prediction and when tested, it fails.
So yeah... don't know what else to tell you

 

[Subduction Zone]

The problem with that is, the mistakes are always found much later. Now you believe they are small, but after 100 years they can be huge.

I don't think you can show any real evidence that would make Adam and Eve a myth.

that is because you do not know what "reald evidence" is. That is a phrase used by people that do not understand the concept of evidence.

Are you willing to learn?