Evidence for God from Science

These new findings, again, dredge up the question of what does it truly mean to be human - despite what Hugh Ross might think?

https://www.foxnews.com/science/neander ... -seashells

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 12:59 pm These new findings, again, dredge up the question of what does it truly mean to be human - despite what Hugh Ross might think?

https://www.foxnews.com/science/neander ... -seashells

I'm pretty sure I've given my .02 on this topic elsewhere, but I think both the biological and scriptural criteria for 'humans' are pretty straightforward.

From a biological perspective, all humans on this planet are species homo sapiens sapiens, and all humans are descended from species homo sapiens sapiens who lived in Africa 150,000 - 200,000 years ago. There may (or may not) have been some interbreeding between humans and Neanderthals at some time in the past, but Neanderthals are not common ancestors of all humans on the planet.
Even though Homo sapiens sapiens and Neanderthals are both hominid species they are still different hominid species.

From a biblical perspective, all humans are image bearers of God.
Genesis 9:6 specifically identifies Noah and his family as 'image bearers of God'. By the time of Noah (and Adam for that matter), Neanderthals had been extinct for over 20,000 years. So species homo sapiens sapiens is the only hominid species that Scripture identifies as an image bearer of God. And Neanderthals were completely unknown to any authors of the Bible.

So even though there may be some behavioral similarities between Neanderthals and pre-Adamic humans (species homo sapiens sapiens), I do not consider Neanderthals to be 'human' from either a biological or Scriptural perspective.

What about - and I"m only throwing it out for discussion - but if God created humans prior to Adam (per the view of many Christians) - and those humans were created far prior to an independent of the Adam to Christ lineage, then how do we KNOW that God didn't also created multiple lines of these pre-Adam men?

Philip wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:13 am What about - and I"m only throwing it out for discussion - but if God created humans prior to Adam (per the view of many Christians) - and those humans were created far prior to an independent of the Adam to Christ lineage, then how do we KNOW that God didn't also created multiple lines of these pre-Adam men?

I happen to believe that God was the Creator of all the various hominid species. He created species homo sapiens sapiens and he created Neanderthals too.

But I keep coming back to 2 basic questions:
1. Are Neanderthals species homo sapiens sapiens?
No
2. Are Neanderthals image bearers of God?
Again, the one and only species that Scripture ever refers to as 'image bearers of God' is species homo sapiens sapiens.

I think it is also significant that Neanderthals went extinct over 20,000 years before God established personal relationship with his image bearers and God's image bearers came to 'know good and evil'.
So from a Scriptural perspective, species homo sapiens sapiens is the only hominid species that Scripture refers to as 'image bearers of God' and they are the only species that God established personal relationship with.

DB, what approximate date are you giving for Adam?

Philip wrote: ↑Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:16 pm DB, what approximate date are you giving for Adam?

Somewhere between 5000 and 6000 BC.

The Scriptural and archeological basis for this timeframe is:
1. The Septuagint version of the Genesis 5 and Genesis 11 genealogies.
2. In Genesis 4:17 Cain builds the city of Enoch (Uruk). Archeologists date the founding of the Mesopotamian city of Enoch/Uruk to around 5000 BC, which lines up with the time frame established by the Genesis 5 and Genesis 11 genealogies.

DBowling wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2020 7:27 am

Philip wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 12:59 pm These new findings, again, dredge up the question of what does it truly mean to be human - despite what Hugh Ross might think?

https://www.foxnews.com/science/neander ... -seashells

I'm pretty sure I've given my .02 on this topic elsewhere, but I think both the biological and scriptural criteria for 'humans' are pretty straightforward.

From a biological perspective, all humans on this planet are species homo sapiens sapiens, and all humans are descended from species homo sapiens sapiens who lived in Africa 150,000 - 200,000 years ago. There may (or may not) have been some interbreeding between humans and Neanderthals at some time in the past, but Neanderthals are not common ancestors of all humans on the planet.
Even though Homo sapiens sapiens and Neanderthals are both hominid species they are still different hominid species.

From a biblical perspective, all humans are image bearers of God.
Genesis 9:6 specifically identifies Noah and his family as 'image bearers of God'. By the time of Noah (and Adam for that matter), Neanderthals had been extinct for over 20,000 years. So species homo sapiens sapiens is the only hominid species that Scripture identifies as an image bearer of God. And Neanderthals were completely unknown to any authors of the Bible.

So even though there may be some behavioral similarities between Neanderthals and pre-Adamic humans (species homo sapiens sapiens), I do not consider Neanderthals to be 'human' from either a biological or Scriptural perspective.

I agree with much of what you think however I don't see how you can go back 150,000 - 200,000 years ago as far as when God created man and woman in Genesis 1 on day 6 from a biblical perspective just because of science. I agree that humans and neanderthals are different species. I still think when it comes to the hominids and the fossil record a pre-Adamite world makes the most sense,both from a biblical and scientific view point.All we have to do is place neanderthals in the pre-Adamite world with all of the other pre-Adamite hominids and then after that world perished God made this world and created man in his image in Genesis chapter 1 on day 6 and we can even go back 6-10,000 years ago and hold on to Ussher's chronology. And it gets the job done for us both biblically and from a scientific perspective. This is one reason I like the Gap Theory over YEC,Theistic Evolution and Day Age.Two different worlds makes the most sense and I believe the fossil recorcd proves there was a pre-Adamite world that was a different kind of world than this world that perished before God made this world and not Evolution. So that we take the fossil record and prove two different worlds,not evolution.We would totally destroy evolution in its tracks using its own evidence and be able to teach from a biblical perspective the true history of the earth that is not evolution or secular. Imagine a debate like this - The fossil record proves a Pre-Adamite world or Evolution?

Abel: "I agree that humans and neanderthals are different species. I still think when it comes to the hominids and the fossil record a pre-Adamite world makes the most sense,both from a biblical and scientific view point.All we have to do is place neanderthals in the pre-Adamite world with all of the other pre-Adamite hominids and then after that world perished God made this world and created man in his image..."

Abe, are you saying that, in your proposed former, pre-Adamite world, there were NO humans, but only hominids?

Philip wrote: ↑Tue Feb 25, 2020 6:24 am

Abel: "I agree that humans and neanderthals are different species. I still think when it comes to the hominids and the fossil record a pre-Adamite world makes the most sense,both from a biblical and scientific view point.All we have to do is place neanderthals in the pre-Adamite world with all of the other pre-Adamite hominids and then after that world perished God made this world and created man in his image..."

Abe, are you saying that, in your proposed former, pre-Adamite world, there were NO humans, but only hominids?

Yes,Pre-Adamite races.Humans were not created in God's image until God made this world.

So, Abe, God creates a supposed former world - you insist was before ANY humans. So, if there were no humans in this former world, then there obviously was no sin in it - so any corruption in it would have been both God-caused and FORESEEN / foreknown by Him. So, why did He supposedly create it - apparently flawed - only to subsequently require destruction? Why would it have been corrupt, without man?

Other thing that is crazy about GAP theory is that Scripture would introduce this supposed GAP with only one sentence and zero explanation to clarify it wasn't instead merely the beginning of the explanation of the conditions THIS earth started out under.

abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Mon Feb 24, 2020 9:06 pm I agree with much of what you think however I don't see how you can go back 150,000 - 200,000 years ago as far as when God created man and woman in Genesis 1 on day 6 from a biblical perspective just because of science.

Some quick comments...

Two distinct fields of science indicate that biologically modern humans (species homo sapiens sapiens) first appeared around 150,000-200,000 years ago.
- Archaeology has discovered fossilized remains of biologically modern humans dating back to 150,000-200,000 years ago.
- Genetics has also discovered that the most recent common ancestors of all humans on the planet today also date to approximately the same time frame.

From a Scriptural perspective, the Biblical clock starts ticking with the appearance of Adam in Genesis 2. And we can use the Biblical genealogies (and Mesopotamian history) to place the historical Adam in the 5000-6000 BC time frame.
However, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate when the creation of mankind in Genesis 1:26-27 took place.

Once we understand that day/yom in Genesis 1 does not refer to 24 hours (see Genesis 2:4) then the amount of time that passed between the creation of mankind in Genesis 1:26-27 and the appearance of Adam in Genesis 2 is not defined by Scripture.
So there is no Scriptural conflict with the scientific evidence that God created mankind (Genesis 1:26-27) around 150,000-200,000 years ago.

DB: But I keep coming back to 2 basic questions:
1. Are Neanderthals species homo sapiens sapiens?
No
2. Are Neanderthals image bearers of God?
Again, the one and only species that Scripture ever refers to as 'image bearers of God' is species homo sapiens sapiens.

What about the Neanderthal DNA discovered in human DNA? Is the distinction between this hominid and man so clear?

From humanorigins.si.edu:

Neanderthals have contributed approximately 1-4% of the genomes of non-African modern humans, although a modern human who lived about 40,000 years ago has been found to have between 6-9% Neanderthal DNA (Fu et al 2015).

For many years, the only evidence of human-Neanderthal hybridization existed within modern human genes. However, in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa (Kuhlwilm et al 2016). Their findings are the first to show human gene flow into the Neanderthal genome as opposed to Neanderthal DNA into the human genome. This data tells us that not only were human-Neanderthal interbreeding events more frequent than previously thought, but also that an early migration of humans did in fact leave Africa before the population that survived and gave rise to all contemporary non-African modern humans.

If human DNA includes as much as 9 % Neanderthal DNA, then there were offspring from such interbreedings. And if true, how do you separate out the Image of God intermingled with such human / neanderthal couplings? Of course, the more recent that DNA mix was created, the more prevalent the human DNA containing the Image of God.

Philip wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 8:35 am

DB: But I keep coming back to 2 basic questions:
1. Are Neanderthals species homo sapiens sapiens?
No
2. Are Neanderthals image bearers of God?
Again, the one and only species that Scripture ever refers to as 'image bearers of God' is species homo sapiens sapiens.

What about the Neanderthal DNA discovered in human DNA? Is the distinction between this hominid and man so clear?

From humanorigins.si.edu:

Neanderthals have contributed approximately 1-4% of the genomes of non-African modern humans, although a modern human who lived about 40,000 years ago has been found to have between 6-9% Neanderthal DNA (Fu et al 2015).

For many years, the only evidence of human-Neanderthal hybridization existed within modern human genes. However, in 2016 researchers published a new set of Neanderthal DNA sequences from Altai Cave in Siberia, as well as from Spain and Croatia, that show evidence of human-Neanderthal interbreeding as far back as 100,000 years ago -- farther back than many previous estimates of humans’ migration out of Africa (Kuhlwilm et al 2016). Their findings are the first to show human gene flow into the Neanderthal genome as opposed to Neanderthal DNA into the human genome. This data tells us that not only were human-Neanderthal interbreeding events more frequent than previously thought, but also that an early migration of humans did in fact leave Africa before the population that survived and gave rise to all contemporary non-African modern humans.

If human DNA includes as much as 9 % Neanderthal DNA, then there were offspring from such interbreedings. And if true, how do you separate out the Image of God intermingled with such human / neanderthal couplings? Of course, the more recent that DNA mix was created, the more prevalent the human DNA containing the Image of God.

I am dubious that human DNA includes as much as 9% Neanderthal DNA, but for me the potential percentage of Neanderthal DNA in humans today or the amount of interbreeding that may (or may not) have occurred between Neanderthals and species homo sapiens sapiens is kind of irrelevant.

Here's why...
Neanderthals went extinct around 40,000 years ago.
Neanderthals were extinct for over 30,000 years before mankind came to know good and evil.
Neanderthals were extinct for over 30,000 years before the first human became spiritually alive (ie became a "living soul").
Neanderthals were extinct for over 30,000 years before God established personal relationship with his "image bearers".
Neanderthals were extinct for over 30,000 years before mankind began their spiritual journey with their Creator.

So Neanderthals are so far removed from the time of Adam (5000-6000 BC) that IMHO they are totally irrelevant regarding God's personal spiritual relationship with mankind.

DB, Genesis 1:26 tells us that after completing the animal kingdom God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” And according to your view, this would refer to mankind FAR before Adam's creation - and yet the text clearly says those first men were created in God's image. So, you're questioning whether they were spiritual beings - as they were definitely around during the Neanderthal era.

Also, considering Romans 1, what level of right and wrong would pre-Adamic men have known?

ROMANS 1:18 For the wrath of God lis revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be mknown about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, nhave been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking.

Paul states that, "ever since the creation of the world," these first men knew what they were doing to be wrong because they had "clearly perceived" such things and thus were "without excuse." Noting the timeframe reference, "ever since the creation of the world," would seem to indicate an awareness of right and wrong well before Adam's creation, according to the pre-Adamic men theory - unless Paul's time reference didn't refer to men pre-Adam? Adam and Eve's great sin was they wanted to be like God / to elevate themselves over God.

Philip wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 7:04 pm DB, Genesis 1:26 tells us that after completing the animal kingdom God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” And according to your view, this would refer to mankind FAR before Adam's creation - and yet the text clearly says those first men were created in God's image. So, you're questioning whether they were spiritual beings - as they were definitely around during the Neanderthal era.

I guess the key question here is what does it mean to be an image bearer of God?
My opinion is that one aspect of being an image bearer of God is that humans have a spirit.

Now not every person who has a spirit is spiritually "alive".
The only way for a person to become spiritually "alive" is for our spirit to be in relationship with the Spirit of God.

A new born infant has a spirit, and it is an image bearer of God.
But a new born infant does not know good and evil, and it does not have a personal relationship with God and is therefore not spiritually "alive".

I've said before that I personally believe the spiritual state of pre-Adamic humans is comparable to the spiritual state of an infant or any human who does not have the knowledge of good and evil.

Also, considering Romans 1, what level of right and wrong would pre-Adamic men have known?

I believe Genesis 3 tells us that prior to the Fall, human "eyes were not yet open" to know good and evil.
And Paul explicitly tells us in Romans 5:12 that "sin entered into the world" of mankind through Adam.

Regarding the spiritual state of pre-Adamic humans,I keep coming back to what Paul says in Romans 5:13
"sin is not imputed when there is no law"