Proof of Adam and Eve

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

I found this video that uses science, of all things, to prove that everyone on earth is descended from one man and one woman who lived about 6000 years ago.

You'll want to mute the volume on your computer before you play this video, because it uses devil music for the soundtrack. I don't know why that is. That doesn't make any sense unless the video was supposed to be a parody of creationist views.

If that's the case, then it is a failure because it makes a very strong case for creationism, and whatever subtle parodic intent was there is completely lost in the swarm of evidence.

[Kornissues9]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

I found this video that uses science, of all things, to prove that everyone on earth is descended from one man and one woman who lived about 6000 years ago.

You'll want to mute the volume on your computer before you play this video, because it uses devil music for the soundtrack. I don't know why that is. That doesn't make any sense unless the video was supposed to be a parody of creationist views.

If that's the case, then it is a failure because it makes a very strong case for creationism, and whatever subtle parodic intent was there is completely lost in the swarm of evidence.

Pastor, Thats my Video, go on "more from kornissues9" and you'll see more video's from me, if you have no noticed the owner of the video "kornissues9" is also my name on this.

[Pastor Billy-Reuben]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

Pastor, Thats my Video, go on "more from kornissues9" and you'll see more video's from me, if you have no noticed the owner of the video "kornissues9" is also my name on this.

That's excellent work, but what's the deal with the devil music? Is it some misguided attempt to get the unsaved to sit still long enough to pay attention?

Pastor Billy-Reuben

[Kornissues9]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

That's excellent work, but what's the deal with the devil music? Is it some misguided attempt to get the unsaved to sit still long enough to pay attention?

Pastor Billy-Reuben

Well its quite relaxing and comforting at the beggining of the music until it kicks in, its just to keep their attention a video with no music and just writing isnt exactly going to keep you entertained much is it.

And its not really the devils music, although i can see why but the band are not devil worshipers, although i agree A LOT of bands are into that.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

Well its quite relaxing and comforting at the beggining of the music until it kicks in, its just to keep their attention a video with no music and just writing isnt exactly going to keep you entertained much is it.

And its not really the devils music, although i can see why but the band are not devil worshipers, although i agree A LOT of bands are into that.

Impressive stuff, but I'm with Pastor Billy-Reuben on the music side - something soothing is more conducive to attention - Hey but as you see, I'm not exactly 18 years old any longer.

[JennyD]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

Very interesting, Korneater. Have you responded to any of the comments on the page? Like this one:

WeedGreenPowerRanger (2 days ago) Show Hide
0
Marked as spam
Reply | Spam

0:30: Thats a cell, not mitochonria DNA.

1:14 EPIC FAIL. African Eve was the first human. There weren't other women walking around pregnant, they were all 48 chromosome apes.

1:31: "They used a new clock in a new study and do you know what? The eve that we all go back to, using the new clock, she would be a mere 6000 years old."

Wow, you just pull numbers out of your ass on ALL your videos dont you? Where do you derive these calculations?

I'd be most interested to hear your responses. Especially about this "new clock". Was it a Timex, perhaps, and the old one a Sunbeam? After all, Timex is much more reliable. Takes a licking, they say, and keeps on ticking.

[LyingDingDong]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

I did not see any evidence in that video to suggest that everyone women came from Eve.

First off let's explain why the mitochondria could be traced back to one woman. Mitchondria is different than any other organelle in the cell. Mitchondria has its own DNA and its function is to synthesize ATPs with the help of food molecules. Mitchondria, along with chlorophyll, are the leading evidences to the endosymbiotic theory, the origin of the eukaryotic cell. During fertilization the mitochondria in the egg cell is the only mitochondria present within the cell, because sperm do not carry any mitochondria (that the offspring inherits). This means that mitochondria has done no genetic recombination ever since the creation of the eukaryotic cell. That means that the mitochondria found in a human, a dog, or even a plant, would be very identical.

You don't elaborate on the new clock. So, I will say that it's wrong.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

I did not see any evidence in that video to suggest that everyone women came from Eve.

First off let's explain why the mitochondria could be traced back to one woman. Mitchondria is different than any other organelle in the cell. Mitchondria has its own DNA and its function is to synthesize ATPs with the help of food molecules. Mitchondria, along with chlorophyll, are the leading evidences to the endosymbiotic theory, the origin of the eukaryotic cell. During fertilization the mitochondria in the egg cell is the only mitochondria present within the cell, because sperm do not carry any mitochondria (that the offspring inherits). This means that mitochondria has done no genetic recombination ever since the creation of the eukaryotic cell. That means that the mitochondria found in a human, a dog, or even a plant, would be very identical.

You don't elaborate on the new clock. So, I will say that it's wrong.

I read your fine, $10 words right up to the end - then you write "very identical".

LBDD - "very identical" is like "very dead" or "very extinct". Something is either identical or it is not.

I note all your argument is based upon a "theory". A theory is unproven. You accuse us at Landover on basing our trust in God's Word on something, which in your view alone, is based upon something which is unproven.

You can't have it both ways.

Thus you appear to me to be someone who is trying to sell me a boat, which you assure me is seaworthy, yet it has a few holes in it.

I think that for the time being you will have to accept that Eve existed.

[LyingDingDong]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

I read your fine, $10 words right up to the end - then you write "very identical".

LBDD - "very identical" is like "very dead" or "very extinct". Something is either identical or it is not.

I note all your argument is based upon a "theory". A theory is unproven. You accuse us at Landover on basing our trust in God's Word on something, which in your view alone, is based upon something which is unproven.

You can't have it both ways.

Thus you appear to me to be someone who is trying to sell me a boat, which you assure me is seaworthy, yet it has a few holes in it.

I think that for the time being you will have to accept that Eve existed.

Ow. Your irrational reasoning just hurt me.

I say very identical, because the mitochondria could have mutated slightly by various point or substitue mutations. But the overall structure and function is unchanged.

A theory is a best explained testable model of a natural phenomenon. Saying that God did it is not a theory, fact, or law. It is a hypothesis that is not tested and can never explain any phenomena.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

Ow. Your irrational reasoning just hurt me.

They say the truth hurts…

I say very identical, because the mitochondria could have mutated slightly by various point or substitute mutations. But the overall structure and function is unchanged.

I think the word you are looking for is, “similar” or, as a phrase, “bears remarkable similarities.”

A theory is a best explained testable model of a natural phenomenon. Saying that God did it is not a theory, fact, or law. It is a hypothesis that is not tested and can never explain any phenomena.

Ah, in the 6,000 or so years that the earth has been here, God’s Law has been tested and found correct thousands of times. It is unchanging and will continue to be shown to be true and accurate.

[LyingDingDong]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

Ah, in the 6,000 or so years that the earth has been here, God’s Law has been tested and found correct thousands of times. It is unchanging and will continue to be shown to be true and accurate.

What is God's Law, tell me how it has been tested.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

What is God's Law, tell me how it has been tested.

As usual you ask a question so wide ranging that it would take several books to explain the answers – fortunately the answers are available to you in one book (albeit not always with an explanation) The Bible. So your first job is to read it – and read the KJV1611, it is inerrant.

The Bible tells of the
The Flood
The parting of the Red Sea
Extinction of the dinosaurs
The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah
The prohibited degrees of marriage
The ten commandments
Dietary laws and the production of toxins (Later amended by Christ, who knew of basic hygiene)

The reasons behind these were not know to your so called scientists until the 18th C. onwards but all is laid out in the Bible.


The Bible explains life, disease, famine, global warming, the weather, gravity, the universe, etc., etc.

[Robbie]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

Am I the only one who finds this "science" rather unnerving? The Lord should not be tested as He was at Massah:

"they [the Israelites] tempted the LORD, saying, Is the LORD among us, or not?"

Exodus 17:7

"Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah"

Deuteronomy 6:16.

In questioning or scientifically investigating the existence of Adam and Eve, we are questioning Genesis 1 and 2 (which describe God's creation of Adam and Eve), and so we are in turn questioning the Word of the Lord. Does not this mean we are questioning God Himself? Is this not the same as "tempting" the Lord? Is this, in effect, us asking "is the Lord among us, or not?"?

Pastors of our most holy church, I seek your guidance on this matter.

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

Ah, now here is a question that Pastor Ezekiel would have enjoyed answering. His answer would have been pithy, direct and germane, in his regrettable absence, mine is more prolix:

Am I the only one who finds this "science" rather unnerving?

May be, may be not

The Lord should not be tested as He was at Massah:

"they [the Israelites] tempted the LORD, saying, Is the LORD among us, or not?"

Exodus 17:7

"Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah"

Deuteronomy 6:16.

There is questioning by way of temptation, e.g. “Would you like this? Then do this.” and questioning by way of learning, e.g. “Why would The Lord cause bastards to be cripples?”

LBDD above, seeks knowledge – he is an unreconstructed follower of science, yet we are working to save his very soul.

Was not the Ministry of Christ to explain and offer Salvation to the heathen, the ignorant and misled? Did He come not to call the sinners rather than the righteous?

In questioning or scientifically investigating the existence of Adam and Eve, we are questioning Genesis 1 and 2 (which describe God's creation of Adam and Eve), and so we are in turn questioning the Word of the Lord. Does not this mean we are questioning God Himself? Is this not the same as "tempting" the Lord? Is this, in effect, us asking "is the Lord among us, or not?"?

Not at all, for clearly the Lord does reveal His Mysteries to us over the ages and we all stand in amazement as our simple Faith has, yet again, been shown correct. Our faith is thus refreshed and renewed, we know we are of the Elect and that sinners will be drawn to His Word and Salvation.

[LyingDingDong]

Re: Proof of Adam and Eve

But what if God's worst isn't true.

This is how I see it: I don't believe in God's word (the Bible) because there is little evidence to support it. You do believe in God's word even though there is little evidence to support it. You believe because you were indoctrinated. Done.