Questions
A Question Each for Getting Started
- as suggested by Prue, to work out our routine for building a Q&A
- NOTE: Index numbers are generated automatically. Use them temporarily only, during this experiment. Bruce (talk)
a single male ancestor?
There is a body of scientific evidence that people are not descended from a single male ancestor. Acts 17:26 includes the statement that God “made from one [man/source/stock(?)], every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth”. Can these be reconciled? Prue (talk)
See Critical appraisal: "a single male ancestor?" followed by Discussion here; also at Acts 17:26 and "from one man".
Does the earth move?
- (I'm replacing my original practice question with this. The first one (Prue's) is heavier going than I expected, mine was already going in circles and isn't strictly a "reconciliation" issue; so I think this will be easier and more beneficial. The old one is at Are creation and design different? Bruce (talk) )
There is a body of scientific evidence that the earth is spinning on its axis and rotating around the sun. However the Bible clearly states that God "set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved." (Psalm 104:5, ESV) and the experience of Joshua and Hezekiah back this up. Can these be reconciled?
See Critical appraisal: "Does the earth move?" followed by Discussion here and at Psalm 104:5
Based on scientific evidence, can it be said that all of the current human species for the last 6,000 years are related genetically etc? Paul (talk) 02:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC) Discussion...
- Paul — This question probably folds under Prue's test question so I will discontinue this one.
Scientific evidence for human evolution
Is “Evolution”, as the basis for the commencement of the current human species, truly provable in the minds of “genuine” Scientists? Paul (talk) 02:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC) Discussion...
Critical appraisal: Critical appraisal of the question "Is Evolution truly provable in the minds of genuine Scientists?"
- Paul — I have agreed that this question is very close to Prue's "Reconciliation challenge: a literal single male ancestor, or modern science? (Acts 17:26)" So I agree to discontinue this Question and Reconciliation Challenge.
Colin's questions
Colin has listed 18 questions on his personal page. Kerry's answers are here. Bruce (talk) 20:27, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
2 specific questions now follow:
- Do you believe Adam was the first man of the entire human race that God created?
- Who do you believe Cain married?
follow what?
How do these questions relate to what we are supposed to be doing?
This is the Questions page! Your list of eighteen questions is on your personal page User:Colin and I copied them with formatting on your User_talk:Colin page. I asked Kerry to look at them, and copied her answers in on the page ColinQ1-18-KerryA. I see you've also given answers to some of them. I'll put some in too.
As for their relevance to The task in hand, yes, some are and we may come to them; but the process that we have agreed to, I think, is to offer one question each that we can work through. That will clarify that we're not setting up a series of questions with an argument about the Unity Basis at the end of it, we're doing something else:
The ecclesia has resolved that we:
"acknowledge that problems undoubtedly exist within our community in reconciling our various understandings of Scripture with the discoveries of science, and we accept the responsibility to give attention to solving these difficulties ..." and we have been appointed as "a small group of suitable members willing and able to undertake this task ... based on the scope provided by the Ecclesia, and report back ..."
If it proves to be impossible, then so be it, but we're here to make the attempt.
How can the punishment on Adam (the man) be reconciled with science that all creatures are mortal?
User:Paul Paul (talk) 03:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
In Genesis 1:31 all of God’s creation was described as “very good”. It has been said that the “very good” state meant that humans (as part of God’s creation) were neither immortal and not yet dying. After sin had entered the world and God’s judgements had been pronounced, the man Adam was altered so that he would return to the dust. And it is said (or implied) that this had nothing to do with his environment (being in the garden of Eden) but was a punishment on Adam and his body. Putting aside the fact that the same punishment was not also applied to the woman, nor to any other creature (even the Serpent) how is it that all humans and creatures have the same propensity to degenerate and die as science would conclude. Can this be reconciled?
User:Paul Paul (talk) 03:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
How can it be reconciled with science that the humans “very good” state meant that they were neither immortal and also not yet dying?
User:Paul Paul (talk) 03:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
In Genesis 1:31 all of God’s creation was described as “very good”. It has been said that the “very good” state meant that humans (as part of God’s creation) were neither immortal nor mortal. After sin had entered the world and God’s judgements had been pronounced, the man Adam was altered so that he would return to the dust. And it is said (or implied) that this had nothing to do with his environment (being in the garden of Eden) but was a punishment on Adam and his body. Why then did Adam and the woman have to be removed from the garden of Eden to which according to Genesis 3:22-24 the humans (Strongs 0120) were expelled because if they remained in the garden then they could have lived forever (the argument of the Serpent).
Genesis 3:22-24 ESV 22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever-- " 23 therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. 24 He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the tree of life.
Doesn’t the fact that the humans no longer had access to the tree of life imply that the “very good” nature that they had was effectively mortal unless sustained by the tree of life. This would be in accord with science. How can it be reconciled with science that the humans “very good” state meant that they were neither not immortal and not yet dying?
User:Paul Paul (talk) 03:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
It is said or implied that any humans or creatures before seven thousand years ago (if they existed) would have been immortal. How can this be reconciled with science that all humans and creatures are mortal?
User:Paul Paul (talk) 03:27, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Based on Romans 5:12 it is said that mortality and death commenced with Adam about seven thousand years ago.
Romans 5:12 ESV Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— Romans 5:17 ESV For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man … Romans 5:18 ESV Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men … Romans 5:19 ESV For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners …
If humans (and other creatures) existed before Adam (who lived seven thousand years ago) as science would suggest, then they must have also been immortal. Can this be reconciled as science would say that any humans or creatures before seven thousand years ago would have been mortal?
