I know you said that you should be wary of "private interpretations", but I would then ask; What authority do you need to make correct interpretations? Is there a correct interpretation? And why does 35 000 Christian denominations claim they have the correct interpretation? And finally, which one of them is right?Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Your "God made many humans beside Adam and Eve out of dust" is not Biblical and is perhaps a private interpretation or a workaround on the question of how the human race came from Adam and Eve and their incestuous children?
That link had some interesting points. The lactose intolerance point especially. Is it true that the common trait for Homo Sapiens is to be lactose intolerant? Does that mean we in the north are a separate species? If so what to call us: Homo Sapien lactivorous ?
I did read it, but couldn't find anything that refutes my point on the hundred year old practice of using physical similarities as proof of descent.
The DNA thing is becoming more promising as they are doing advances in that area. But they aren't there yet. You know I am an agnostic and like to jump of the fence now and then to stir the pot so to speak, especially on topics like these. The Cars, in case anyone still wonders, can't have offspring and are all created by a creator. I am not saying that I discard evolution and uphold the Creationist view. I made the analogy to illustrate my point of similarity does not prove descent.
A debate between me and ATPG would result in walls of text and me crying : Argumentum Verbosium, Argumentum ad Plurium interrogationum and Argumentum ad Nauseam before my head exploded.![]()
Bookmarks