Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,824 Year: 4,081/9,624 Month: 952/974 Week: 279/286 Day: 0/40 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Genesis and Evolution - Tom Larkin
Tom Larkin
Junior Member (Idle past 2179 days)
Posts: 25
From: Attleboro MA US
Joined: 07-09-2017


Message 1 of 15 (814935)
07-13-2017 6:48 PM


I have just written this short book that I feel align scripture and evolution, and I would like to get comments from this team. I am more interested in getting the information out and improving it with comments than I am interested in selling books (although it is available on Amazon). If you request a copy I will e-mail the manuscript (it is a short book)
Edited by Tom Larkin, : No reason given.
Edited by Tom Larkin, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-14-2017 10:07 AM Tom Larkin has replied

  
Tom Larkin
Junior Member (Idle past 2179 days)
Posts: 25
From: Attleboro MA US
Joined: 07-09-2017


Message 3 of 15 (815120)
07-16-2017 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by New Cat's Eye
07-14-2017 10:07 AM


No, no smooshing. I am just presenting a simple Biblical argument that states the events that occur in Genesis 1 happen before the events of Chapter 2. Men and women were created in Chapter 1 and Adam and Eve were created in chapter 2. If you accept this simple biblical logic, this coincides with recent findings that all men alive are genetically descended from a single man, and all women are descended from a single women. Other men and women were existing at the time of this common descendant (Y chrome Adam and Mitochondrial Eve), which is what the Bible says.
Men and women, I believe through natural mens lived prior to Adam and Eve. This eliminate the conflict between evolution and Genesis.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-14-2017 10:07 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-16-2017 10:45 PM Tom Larkin has replied
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2017 12:16 AM Tom Larkin has replied

  
Tom Larkin
Junior Member (Idle past 2179 days)
Posts: 25
From: Attleboro MA US
Joined: 07-09-2017


Message 6 of 15 (815234)
07-17-2017 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by PaulK
07-17-2017 12:16 AM


The dates associated with the MRCA's is not important, what is important is that a Most Recent Common Ancestor existed while other men and women existed. This is only a coincidental argument and not my primary argument.
The dates for the MRCA have changed significantly over the last 5 years and they will continue to do so in the near future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2017 12:16 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 5:24 PM Tom Larkin has replied
 Message 8 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2017 5:26 PM Tom Larkin has replied

  
Tom Larkin
Junior Member (Idle past 2179 days)
Posts: 25
From: Attleboro MA US
Joined: 07-09-2017


Message 9 of 15 (815238)
07-17-2017 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by New Cat's Eye
07-16-2017 10:45 PM


My main argument is Biblical. If you don't accept the Bible and Adam and Eve than you already have no conflict with evolution, then you don't need to read further.
My Biblical argument is men and women were created in Chapter 1, Adam, Eve and the garden were created in Chapter 2. The earth and the rest of the universe already existing prior to the events of Chapter 2. The descendants of Adam and Eve were described as the "Sons of God" in Chapter 6 (see Luke 3:38 among many other passages), the descendent of the men and women in Chapter 1 are described as the "daughters of men". It was important that Noah was "perfect in his generation" which said he was a direct descendent of Adam and Eve.
Throughout Genesis, in all genealogies, the line not leading to Jesus is always given first, every time. This is a continuation of that pattern.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-16-2017 10:45 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 5:40 PM Tom Larkin has not replied
 Message 14 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-18-2017 8:52 AM Tom Larkin has not replied

  
Tom Larkin
Junior Member (Idle past 2179 days)
Posts: 25
From: Attleboro MA US
Joined: 07-09-2017


Message 11 of 15 (815240)
07-17-2017 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by PaulK
07-17-2017 5:26 PM


It is impossible to prove MRCA to an individual, all that is part of my "coincidental" argument is that MRCA exist when other men and women existed. Ancestry.com only goes back to Methuselah.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2017 5:26 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by PaulK, posted 07-18-2017 12:21 AM Tom Larkin has not replied

  
Tom Larkin
Junior Member (Idle past 2179 days)
Posts: 25
From: Attleboro MA US
Joined: 07-09-2017


Message 12 of 15 (815241)
07-17-2017 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Taq
07-17-2017 5:24 PM


Do you have a valid scientific source that links pedigree collapse to MRCA?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 5:24 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Taq, posted 07-18-2017 11:31 AM Tom Larkin has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024