Honestly, I don't know. I'm not aware of any Biblical mentioning of different colorations of ethnicities. There's a lot of mention of different tribes and all the "-ites" (i.e. Hittite, Jebusites, Moabites, Ammonites, etc).

The Bible addresses the origin of different languages at the tower of Babel, but I'm not aware of any mention of different races of people.

There's a lot of "why is the world this way" things are not spelled out in the Bible.

I can assure you that they did NOT come about as the LDS church believes. For those that don't know, it was formal LDS doctrine that blacks were pigmented the way they are as a curse by God because of theie misdeeds in the "pre-existence". This is why the LDS church denied membership to blacks as recently as the 1970s. There aren't very many black Mormons even to this day.

The different races may have come about at the same time as the languages-- caused directly by God. Or, maybe they came about just through genetic variation. I honestly have no idea, nor do I feel that not knowing is of significant consequence.

JMO

 

Thanks for the response Hohn. Did I see you type genetic variation? Would that have any relationship with evolution?

 

The Bible is a great story, but boy is it full of holes.

 

Some got turned to salt.

 

dieseljon,

Thanks for your clarification or definition of evolution. The only way I can think of to get to common ground is to very specifically define just what is being rejected or accepted into each of our belief systems. So many simply reject something when it's not at all what is being said. Such as God vs science and evolution vs creation.

Maybe I'm missing something in your response about evolution. I still don't see the conflict between evolution and creation. The evolution that so many reject outright and that I'm referring to is the idea of change over time after creation of the universe or the big bang or whatever happened. Many have said evolution can't create something from nothing or they are not apes, etc. It sounds like you are including evolution as part of creation. Is that right?

With macro evolution, I don't know. I can't be specific with an example that "proves" anything and I won't try to prove something with a silly example. But I am curious about your findings on the matter. Is there a connection between mammals (whales, dogs, humans) that is evolutionary or is it just coincidence? Or, once again, were all animals simply created as they are now? Not different colors of dogs, but mammals that give live birth, live in the sea or on land, have variations of hands and fingers, etc. My point has never been something from nothing, just evolution by genetic mistakes that lead to an accidental advantage in a process that can go on for many thousands of generations or just a few. It doesn't talk about the specific rate of change or that all species will continue to change. But clearly there are similarities in animals and there is change.

On my comments about the flood. I don't reject the idea of a flood but an earlier post attempted to use the flood as the ONLY way that fossils were created, that none had been formed since the flood. In other words, because there are fossils, it proves the flood, and creation. That is what I reject. The idea that Noah and the dinosaurs were alive at the same time, thus dino fossils from the flood.

I guess we could throw archaeology and all modern science out the window in order to have no conflict with religious thought. But there are very few of us that really think all science is bunk. Some sound like they would just proclaim it all a bunch of nonsense, or make it a contest between God and science, but I won't. Where's the common sense? This is where we need to be specific and not set up a science vs God debate.

Thanks for your excellent post. A clear and thoughtful assembly of ideas and responses that leads to further understanding. It adds to the discussion.

By the way, what a great thread this is! I keep trying to get out of here but I just get sucked back in.

John

 

I've been spending the last hour reading this and I havent seen anyone mention about the creditability of the bible. How many times has it been written. How many times does a story get passed around and when gets back to the original person its totally different. In 2000 plus years is the bible the same story. Who just happened to keeping a journal that far back? I'm not saying its wrong but who is to prove its right. You talk about the monkeys to man being wrong but I don't see you proving the bible is right. I think before you go "preaching" about a theory being wrong you ought to make sure yours is right. You ask if I die tonight were will I go tommorrow. I don't care. I may or may not burn in eternity for saying that but all that matters is my family will be taken care of when I'm gone. I know I have this life I am going to make the most of it.

 

Could you find a hole so I could fill it for you.


God vs. Science

God invented science. problems solved

 

I have posed a question several times in page 10. I will be happy to read your answer.

 

That problem is a big part of the credibility of the whole story. Every time someone quotes the Bible as proof or says "because the Bible says so", I just roll my eyes. Not only is the story 2000 years old but many of the stories that didn't fit the dogma were not included and the final writing wasn't finished for, what, 600 years or so. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there no room for error there? Should we hang on every word? And invariably, the Bible quoters leave out inconvenient passages when using the book to make a point.

It's wonderful story, great history, good insights and probably has a lot of truth to it, but the literal interpretation is a bit much for me.

Uh oh, now I'm really in trouble.


John

 

Phew! I'll be right back. I gotta go talk about Dodges for a minute.


John

 

No athiests in a hurricane at sea either....some great post here, kinda makes you pause and think......has anyone here seen or thought they saw angels???

 

What are you after Clayten? I read page 10. Is it not possible that we are all his creation or are you suggesting that color is the product of evolution? Clarify yourself.

 

I am not suggesting anything. My question speaks for itself.

 

So many of you want answers but the Bible makes it perfectly clear that apart from the Holy Spirit no man can understand His word.

1 Cor 2:14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.


I am not sure that any explanation about certain things will be readily accepted by some folks.

Great topic anyway, keep it going...

 

Clayten, here is a good read on how different "races" of humans came about. http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home...ok/races18.asp

Raspy, the thing about evolution is, if we just evolved, who has authority over us? Who makes right or wrong? Morals? Who sets the ground rules? These things will have a foundation in a Creator.

I am very open to learn what credibility issues anyone has. To say it is just a great story, that is partially true. It has been proven to be very historically accurate. In fact, as far as I know, it is the only Book used by a certain religion (Christianity) that has maps that have NOT been inaccurate! As for how many time it has been translated, retold, here is something for you.http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t003.html

On another note, how are ya'll feeling tonight?