Adam and Eve

[Rosy]

So last night, during AWANA, out leader made a very good point, that Adam and Eve were probably the most beautiful and smart people ever, because God created them perfectly. Their genetics were perfect, because there was no sickness, nothing bad at all. They were God's finest creations.
So what are you guy's thoughts on the first humans?

[Eleventh Doctor]

I'm not sure about that, my main question then is are you then saying that people are getting dumber and uglier as time goes on? Also what do you mean by smarter? Do you mean they were able to comprehend more than we can today? And by beauty do you mean there certain universal physical traits that there are universally appealing to everyone?

[Renae]

To your questions, Eleventh Doctor (:
1) That's not at all what she said, however: Second law of thermodynamics (also known as the Law of Entropy). Look it up.
2) Smart- having or showing a quick-witted intelligence (NOT: "able to comprehend more than the average human being can [today]")
3) The golden ratio. Check it out.

[Eleventh Doctor]

1. I wasn't aware entropy applied to looks or intelligence, do you have any sources that this is the case?
2. Again, do you have any sources for the claim that people were more intelligent than they are today?
3. I am aware of the golden ratio, I don't see what that has to do with our discussion. Are you saying that the golden ratio is affected by the entropy? Because I don't think that's the case.

[NateVONgreat]

I completely agree with you underseasie, at least with the speaker
Also don't forget that then they defiantly WERE the smartest and most beautiful people, because they were the only ones!

) The golden ratio. Check it out.

my computer teacher would love you! he is crazy about the golden ratio, every lesson ends with him wandering off subject to talk about that and the beauty in the universe.
11th, Earth and people as they are now are like a totaled car wreck compared to how God intended Earth to be, Man in his fall and sinful nature is making things get worse, and is getting worse.
God says in Revelation that during Jesus' 1000 year reign on earth, he will restore earth to how it was before the flood, to how he wanted it to be. Do you think God is going to make earth be A) Better than it is now, or B) Worse because we are so proud and great and wise and perfect. That is the lie Satan is choking into the humans.

[Eleventh Doctor]

None of what you're saying answers any of my questions. I agree that earth is not how it was meant to be but you're throwing around a lot of mathematical and physic terms that I don't think are suppose to interact like you're saying. For example, the golden ratio, there are still golden ratios in the world I'm pretty sure they aren't affected by entropy. Also I don't think entropy means what you think it means, for example entropy effects closed system, physical objects that don't exchange matter with it's surroundings. That doesn't apply to us as humans or our intelligence or physical looks.

I'm not saying we as humans are perfect right now, I'm just saying I don't think humankind was one perfect golden ratio that has been getting worse and worse because of entropy; mostly because you're just pushing together terms you don't fully understand and don't apply to each other. Show me sources that say this is happening or even that entropy and the golden ratio interact like this at all.

[Renae]

1. I wasn't aware entropy applied to looks or intelligence, do you have any sources that this is the case?
2. Again, do you have any sources for the claim that people were more intelligent than they are today?
3. I am aware of the golden ratio, I don't see what that has to do with our discussion. Are you saying that the golden ratio is affected by the entropy? Because I don't think that's the case.

1) I DID NOT say entropy had anything to do with intelligence. But I do believe it has to do with looks. I believe people are becoming less and less attractive. However, I will admit that this might not have anything to do with their actual genetics but with the way they treat their own bodies (piercings, tattoos, drugs,..etc.) And this all leads back to sin. Because Adam and Eve lived in a sinless place (until The Fall), their outer appearance did not show any of the affects of sin, therefore they were more attractive.
2) I DID NOT SAY (again...) that people back then were more intelligent than the people today, and neither did Seasie. What she said was that Adam and Eve might have been THE SMARTEST people to ever live. This is not making any claims about the average intelligence of people that lived during their time or of the people living during our time. Not wishing to be rude or anything, I seriously suggest that you read carefully through people's posts.
3) The golden ratio has a lot to do with your third question. Which was:

And by beauty do you mean there certain universal physical traits that there are universally appealing to everyone?

YES. The golden ration proves this. If you don't understand the golden ratio or don't know about it, check it out. Its very interesting.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Again...I REALLY think you should reread what Rosy said. The biggest claim she made was that "Adam and Eve were God's finest creations." Your questions are as such. "So you think people are getting dumber and uglier as time goes by?" "Your saying that people were able to comprehend more back then?"
Rosy NEVER made any generalities about the people in those times, yet your questions ask about the people. This topic she made was about Adam and Eve and about the belief that the were God's finest creations. We should really be discussing that.

[Eleventh Doctor]

Sorry for the confusion. Nate and I are having a conversation in another thread that is similar to this and he is making such claims. I should clarify who I am responding to though.

1) You say that entropy has to do with looks. I find this an interesting claim, are you basing this on anecdotal evidence or do you have a source?
2) I just wanted you to clarify, as you did, that intelligence is not affected by entropy.
3) I concede this point.

I don't know if Adam and Eve, if they were actual historical figures, were the finest creations. I'm not sure finest creation means the most beautiful and smartest though, or most beautiful or smartest by todays standards even.

[Renae]

That's fine! I completely understand!

As to point one: I do not have a source. However, I would have to say that my eyes are more reliable than ANY source. I will repeat something I said before. I do NOT AT ALL believe that entropy has to do with looks in a genetic sense. In fact...I'm starting to think that entropy might not be the right word for it at all. I'll have to think some more on that.
My main point though is that, I believe sin has greatly affected the way most people look today. What is your opinion on this?

I would like to know what you mean by "Adam and Eve, if they were actual historical figures." Do you have doubts as to this?

[Eleventh Doctor]

I don't think that your eyes are more reliable than any source. Why in the world would that be true? Anecdotal evidence from your lifetime is in no way a reliable source of information. Sorry but I'd say the same about my personal experiences too.

I think that since the fall there has always been sin and I don't think the world is more evil today than it has been in the past. You talk about piercings, tattoos, and drugs, those aren't new things.

I'm on the fence about them being actual historical figures. I don't think it matters in the long run though.

[Renae]

I beg to differ. What if you saw with your own eyes that the sky was blue but a certain source on the internet told you that it was green...which would you go with??
I would also like to mention that I did not say my experiences...I said MY EYES.

I did not say that those things are new, however they had to have started somewhere and they most definitely happened after The Fall. As well..they are in much more common use today then back then.

It matters A LOT. I'm not even sure why you posting in this topic if you are not even convinced that they ever existed.

[Eleventh Doctor]

If your eyes told you a light was brown and then your doctor told you that you were colorblind and the light was green would you trust your eyes? I of course wouldn't trust just any source on the internet, that's a facetious claim. But your eyes have only been around for a couple years, why are your eyes better than sources that take data from hundreds of eyes over many decades? Anecdotal evidence is not reliable.

Sin is more common today than it was back when? Is there some golden age where people didn't sin as much? I think after the Garden it was pretty much sin.

Why does it matter a lot that they were historical figures?

[Stella C.]

Why does it matter a lot that they were historical figures?

Alright, so I don't normally post in debates and such, but I just couldn't help myself when I read this.

I would have to beg to differ, Eleventh Doctor. I believe it matters greatly whether Adam and Eve really existed or not. For starters, if Adam and Eve were not actual historic figures, how do you suppose we came about?

Now, most evolutionists propose that we evolved from tiny little amebae which resulted from the "big bang". From a Christian perspective, if this were true, then of course, it doesn't matter at all. Eve obviously wouldn't have ever eaten the fruit in the garden on the earth that God designed, causing all of human kind to sin, thus meaning that Jesus Christ would have no reason to come down and die for us. (I am in no way indicating that this is your belief, of course)

Then there is the fact that the Bible would have been lying when it described, in detail the creation of both Adam and Eve (Genesis 2:4-20), thus nullifying the rest of the Bible.

[Samantha14]

15:22<Sam>: Question: Would you say that Adam and Eve were perfect before they sinned?
15:22 <Dan_in_Trank_Tank>: perfect meaning what?
15:23 <Sam>: As in like, faultless. I guess. I dunno how to explain it. Would they have been perfect before they did wrong? Like, I've heard the argument that Christ was the only perfect person to walk the earth. But some think Adam and Eve were too, before they sinned.
15:24 <Dan_in_Trank_Tank>: depends if by "perfect person" you mean somebody who was perfect their entire life or just for a portion
15:24 <Dan_in_Trank_Tank>: we may be possibly perfect for very miniscule portions of time
15:26 <Sam>: Well, Adam and Eve weren't "born in sin" as they say. And they didn't sin before the snake. So, for that small portion of time, do you think they were perfect?
15:26 <Dan_in_Trank_Tank>: I guess
15:26 <Sam>: hmm.
15:26 <Dan_in_Trank_Tank>: what do you think?
15:26 <Sam>: That's what I'm debating with myself.
15:26 <Sam>: If they were indeed perfect or not.
15:27 <Sam>: On one hand, as I said, they had never sinned. And they weren't "born in sin" (I've heard that argument too many times to count. I'm not even sure I know what to believe about "original sin" )
15:27 <Sam>: On the other, they still had the capability TO sin. Christ didn't have that.
15:28 <Dan_in_Trank_Tank>: Jesus was tempted
15:28 <Sam>: So, if they had that capability in the first place, wouldn't that be a fault?
15:28 <Sam>: Jesus was tempted, but he could do no wrong.
15:28 <Sam>: That's the main thing.

Basically my question on the matter. I've been debating with myself for a while now. (That and the fact that God created the ability to sin in the first place...) What do you guys think?

[Eleventh Doctor]

I lean toward the belief that God created multiple people, as stated in Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." So is the Bible lying when God created male and female at the same time in chapter 1 or when he created them separately in chapter 2? Or another option, Genesis was never meant to serve as a historical or scientific text and we read it as the poetry it was written as.

[Stella C.]

I lean toward the belief that God created multiple people, as stated in Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." So is the Bible lying when God created male and female at the same time in chapter 1 or when he created them separately in chapter 2? Or another option, Genesis was never meant to serve as a historical or scientific text and we read it as the poetry it was written as.

I actually asked that same question, concerning the confusion in chapters 1 and 2 a couple weeks ago. I came to the conclusion that while Chapter one is a summary of Creation, chapter two basically goes into more details concerning the creation of Adam and Eve( I mean God just created the whole UNIVERSE, I'd think maybe another chapter would be in order just to expound on some things).

Something else that I would like to point out, is that there were only seven days of Creation. In the beginning of chapter two, God states that He rested on the seventh day. That was it. There were no more days of Creation. There was no eighth day. After the seventh day, the Bible does not say, "And on the eighth day God created..." The seventh day as the end of Creation. God specifically states in verse two of chapter two, that "on the seventh God finished the work He had done." That signaled the end of Creation.

About your next question, well, Genesis just explained the whole Creation of our world... Why shouldn't we use it as a historical text..?

[Eleventh Doctor]

That is one interpretation, and a good one, I'm just not fully convinced.

Why shouldn't we use it as a historical text? Because it wasn't written as a historical text. Shakespeare has some plays that contain truth and beauty, doesn't mean I would use them as historical texts. Now yes Genesis is Holy and Inspired by God, but that does not automatically mean historical.

[Renae]

If your eyes told you a light was brown and then your doctor told you that you were colorblind and the light was green would you trust your eyes? I of course wouldn't trust just any source on the internet, that's a facetious claim. But your eyes have only been around for a couple years, why are your eyes better than sources that take data from hundreds of eyes over many decades? Anecdotal evidence is not reliable.

Sin is more common today than it was back when? Is there some golden age where people didn't sin as much? I think after the Garden it was pretty much sin.

My eyes are also taking data from hundreds of years ago: things I have learned from history books and and records of people who lived back then. As well, my eyes are perfectly capable of viewing the state in which the world is now found. I need no source for this, and am sorry if you do.

Some sin is found in more abundance now and more widely accepted now then it was back then. Drugs for instance were not as widely developed back then. As well, homosexuality is MUCH more acceptable in our day and age.

[Eleventh Doctor]

Those history books and records are sources. What do you think I mean by sources? Also unless you can view a significant portion of the world today then your eyes alone do not give an accurate picture of the world today.

You think homosexuality is new? You may be right that there is more cultural acceptance these days but its hardly new. In any case if you think there is more sin today than in the past then very well, I'm not sure how we would quantify the numbers for that.

[Renae]

Those history books and records are sources. What do you think I mean by sources? Also unless you can view a significant portion of the world today then your eyes alone do not give an accurate picture of the world today.

You think homosexuality is new? You may be right that there is more cultural acceptance these days but its hardly new. In any case if you think there is more sin today than in the past then very well, I'm not sure how we would quantify the numbers for that.

I'm sorry. I thought it was understood (and also naturally assumed) that the point that I was trying to make >>

"I DID NOT say entropy had anything to do with intelligence. But I do believe it has to do with looks. I believe people are becoming less and less attractive. However, I will admit that this might not have anything to do with their actual genetics but with the way they treat their own bodies (piercings, tattoos, drugs,..etc.) And this all leads back to sin. Because Adam and Eve lived in a sinless place (until The Fall), their outer appearance did not show any of the affects of sin, therefore they were more attractive."

could only be made with knowledge from the sources I mentioned. I'm sorry for the confusion, and for assuming that you would naturally assume that.
Also...I'm a little confused by what you meant when you said, "unless you can view a significant portion of the world today then your eyes alone do not give an accurate picture of the world today." Would you mind explaining?

Did I say that homosexuality was new?? Seriously...PLEASE read my posts carefully. I was very careful not say say any such thing because it would have been very very faulty. I also NEVER EVER said that I "think there is more sin today than in the past." Again, I made special care not to say that. What I said was that certain sins are in more abundance today then they were back then (ex. drugs), and certain sins are more widely accepted today then they were back then (ex. homosexuality.)
[It is also good to note that I believe certain sins were more common back then they are today.]