If man originated from one source, Adam and Eve, how come we have white and blac

1. 48

   Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years ago

   If man originated from one source, Adam and Eve, how come we have white and black people?
   
   Adam and Eve were either black or white. And if they really had the same skin color, where do other skin colors originate from. And also, why do we have different races? What really happened to us?

   replyreport
2. 61

   Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years ago

   
   
   Lawal Skin shade is governed by multiple genes and is quite complex, but for the sake of simplicity, assume for a moment that there are only two. Genes come in pairs of pairs. During reproduction, half of the genes passed on to the offspring come from each parent. For this discussion, let’s assign the letters “A” and “B” to the genes that code for large amounts of melanin—the brown-colored pigment in everyone’s skin. We’ll also use the letters “a” and “b” to designate the genes for small amounts of melanin.
   
   In very dark-skinned people groups, individuals carry AABB genes and only produce dark-skinned offspring. In very light-skinned people groups, individuals carry aabb genes and only produce light-skinned offspring.
   
   If a male and female from each group mate and produce a child, the combination of their AABB and aabb genes would give rise to a child who carries the AaBb genes for melanin and would be “middle brown” in skin shade. Now, if two people carrying the AaBb genes got married and reproduced, their children could have a wide rage of skin colors.
   
   If Adam and Eve were both middle brown (AaBb), they would have produced children with a wide range of tones. Suddenly, all of us being one race doesn’t seem so complicated.
   
   Okay, so that explains the different skin tones, but how did different people groups come to be divided as they are now? Again, we can find the answer in the Bible.
   
   In Genesis 11, our ancestors refused to obey God’s command to spread out and fill the earth. Instead, they started building a monument to their insolence—you probably know it as the Tower of Babel. God judged our ancestor’s disobedience by imposing different languages on them by their family groups. This language confusion forced them to scatter over the earth as God intended.
   
   Eventually they congregated with others who shared a common language, and instantaneous barriers were set up in the gene pool. Not only would people tend not to marry someone they couldn’t understand, but entire groups that spoke the same language would have difficulty relating to and trusting those they did not understand. These people groups then moved away or were forced away from each other into different parts of the world.
   
   The dispersion at Babel broke the large interbreeding group of humanity into smaller groups with less genetic variability. Each group had different mixes of genes for various physical features. All sorts of factors modified the frequency of certain combinations of genes, causing a tendency for specific characteristics to dominate. In other words, kids and grandkids shared the same basic genes their ancestors took with them from Babel.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The is just as explicit as I wanted it to be. Well explained and indeed convincing. My knowledge about genes are now refreshed. Good thing you are a Christian; referring to the Tower of Babel explains everything. Now the Ocean is calm. Thanks DTMB.

      replyreport
   2. 92

      Sam Shepardsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I would add would focus a little more on mutation, variance, environment and bottlenecks and leave out the Bible for this... Overall a good answer though

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      People may look different,but there's virtually no difference in genetic makeup.Scientists posit all people r 99.5% genetically identical,people of the same"race"have more distinctions in their DNA than people of different races.No mutation

      replyreport
3. 91

   cam8510posted 7 years ago

   The question was phrased "If man originated from one source, Adam and Eve..."  If we use the Bible as our primary source then there are three places where races could have begun.
   
   Evolution teaches that races came from the adaptation of our early ancestors to different environments.  This could have happened with the descendants of Adam and Eve as well if enough time were allowed.  If a person believes that Adam and Eve were created 6,000 years ago, there may not have been enough time for this adaptation to have occurred.
   
   After the flood, Noah's sons, Ham, Shem and Japhath, spread out to different regions where different languages developed, Genesis 10:1-5 (although the confusion of languages by God wouldn't occur until chapter 11).  This could be another place for the beginning of the adaptation of man to different environments leading to the various races.
   
   According to the Bible in Genesis 11, up to the time of the Tower of Babel, the population of Earth existed in one group (although in chapter 10:1-5 the sons of Noah spread out into different languages and nations) in the Levant.  The single language of man (although in the previous chapter, Genesis 10:5 states there were already multiple languages) was divided into multiple languages in one divine act when men attempted to build a tower in the area known as Babel.  After this, men grouped together according to language and spread out to different locations.  At this point, adaptation to new environments could account for the races if enough time is allowed.
   
   This is a bit confusing, I agree.  But this is my attempt to answer the question as it was asked, with man beginning with Adam and Eve.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      cheaptrickposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      .

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Dr CHE Sadaphalposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Valid point on language. The two declarations are compatible in that having regional dialects is inclusive of a universal tongue. Proof? Note that language in 11:1 is qualified by the phrase "and the same words" a note missing in 10:5 (dialect).

      replyreport
4. 73

   cheaptrickposted 7 years ago

   Let's see now...hmm...wasn't it the fifth(?)day that "God created man;male and female he created them etc"...then he must have forgotten cause the next thing ya know he creates Adam and Eve (we wont bring Lilith into this) and the significant thing about them is for the first time since we met God he didn't just issue a proclamation for it to be...like light or all the other stuff laying around...no,he made Adam Out Of Something Else!...and Eve Out Of A Part Of Adam! (wonder if he asked first...Adam,do you like ribs?). The point is he never creates anything again,he always makes it from something else...like maybe he got tired or something.The REAL reason for races and nationalities is to test our faith and belief like how he planted all those dinosaur bones all over the planet that SEEM to be millions of years old but are really only six thousand...and THAT'S the TRUTH!!!
   or it could have been the aliens that were watching all this go down...you know how they love their Probes...

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I believe this is an impractical joke. Your words are paradoxical. It makes sense, but the sense comes out of 'nonsense.' Sir/Ma, you are indirectly disrespecting God, by saying he planted dinosaur bones, and . . . Thanks and may God forgive you.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Well said Lawal, this is nonsense, and I suspect he knows it for his name, cheap trick, is so applicable and appropriate!

      replyreport
   3. 73

      cheaptrickposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You guys sure are harshing me here just for injecting a little levity into your self righteous religiosity.The great thing about HP is we can do that ya know....and BTW cheaptrick is one word and should we assume from your name DTMB that your a thug!

      replyreport
   4. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I thought that this comment lent a great deal to the discussion. Some people really do think that way.

      replyreport
   5. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, If my comments confirmed that I'm a thug I'd say that's fair. Like I already said your comment confirmed you area cheap trickster. Why are you getting so hot under the collar? you picked the name, not me. lol

      replyreport
   6. 92

      Sam Shepardsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Actualy this comment was no worse than trying to literally explain the world and how people evolve starting from the bible. I a sense I wish people were past that, the other sense is that the internet is the underbelly of the world....

      replyreport
   7. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Keep wishing Sam, you are in a small minority of closed minded prejudiced people who criticize and condemn things they no absolutely nothing about.

      replyreport
   8. 73

      cheaptrickposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Actually,If you grab a bible,you'll find everything I said(except for the Dino pun) in it...I dare ya!
      OH! and DTMB,I'm not hot,I love cheaptrick,Really! Ya big thug you

      replyreport
   9. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Another cheap trick!Nothing you said that wasn't a quote from the Bible(in other words your conclusions)is found in the Bible and are perversions of the Bible,which you just used as a cheap trick to claim you said nothing not in the Bible.

      replyreport
   10. 48

       Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       It actually hurts me when I see people argue, in the name of prejudice. I believe you guys are grownups (me being a kid). Now you are using your names to tackle yourselves. C'mon.

       replyreport
   11. 73

       cheaptrickposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Genesis,fifth day:creates male and female,read bible.Sixth day,makes Adam from dust,read bible.Makes Eve from Adams rib,read bible.Never thinks anything into being again,read bible or you can keep on with the personal attacks...Ya ignorant thug you:)

       replyreport
   12. 61

       Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       Lawal I can understand why that hurts you.It hurts me to stand by& not point out the ignorance of people who with no study or knowledge of the Bible try to twist the Word of God into nonsense.That is a cheaptrick.Nothing I've said is thugish

       replyreport
   13. 73

       cheaptrickposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       So you keep ignoring the subject and continue attacking anyone who disagrees with you huh thug?That's how you religionists act when you have no scripture to quote or is it that your a Sunday Christian who doesn't even read the bible hmmm,I bet

       replyreport
5. 59

   roselinsojanposted 7 years ago

   I think it is because of the different country climates.I mean different continents.people live where ever they like and thus it occur.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Climate? Can climate really change one's DNA, and thereby change the skin color. Hmmm... This is controversial.

      replyreport
   2. 91

      cam8510posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Lawal, First line of an article I just found..true? not true?  Sharing for your consideration. "For the first time, wild mammals have been seen responding to higher temperatures by altering chemical structures on their DNA." https://goo.gl/ZEGV1p

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Chris if you read it all & more likely if you actually read the study no conclusion that climate change can change any animals DNA to the extent of eg changing skin color.It even says these epigenetic responses don’t affect the DNA sequence

      replyreport
   4. 91

      cam8510posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      DTMB, I simple presented an interesting article. I drew no conclusions of my own.

      replyreport
   5. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Thought u posted it in answer to Lawal's question can climate really change one's DNA to the extent of skin color which the article,interesting as it is,doesn't address.Granted u drew no conclusions,I didn't mean to say u did but article didn't.

      replyreport
6. 67

   wrenchBiscuitposted 7 years ago

   White people came after black people. Adam and Eve, if you want to use the Biblical account as a reference, were certainly not white, nor were they brown skinned people. Adam and Eve were black. If you study a variety of sources that have not been tainted with a white racist interpretation, you reach the same conclusion. Here is what one source says:
   
   "As long as Mendel’s Law is in effect Whites can never be the first humans. This is the law of biology that asserts that White skin is recessive and Black skin is dominant, which means that two Whites cannot produce anything darker than themselves. This is why ALL those seeking the origin of human beings start and end in Africa. Recent genetic tests by researchers at the University of Chicago have proven that a major genetic alteration occurred exactly 6,600 years—exactly when Elijah Muhammad taught of the birth of the White race.
   
   The scientists say that “the selected genes, which affect skin color, hair texture and bone structure,” were drastically affected at that very moment in time. Neanderthal DNA is far more often found in Europeans and Asians than in Africans. If Neanderthals predated ALL humans, their DNA would be MOST prevalent in Africans.(But it's not!) But not only were they first chronologically, Blacks were also the first builders of Civilization. The black-skinned Egyptians had reached a high state of civilization long before the Neanderthal—whose offspring yet wonders how and why the pyramids were built—emerged from cave life."
   
   http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish … 9564.shtml

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Explicitly amazing! I learnt about this in school today, and its indeed a coincidence receiving such info from you. Thanks Biscuit

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      "sources that have not been tainted with a white racist interpretation"oh racist conspiracy theory again?Is there nothing you think isn't a conspiracy?Paranoia in all you say!University of Chicago genetic test results?Where can I see them?

      replyreport
   3. 67

      wrenchBiscuitposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Must I take you by the hand? Click the link and ask the people on the other end. Also do a web search. If that's too much trouble then get a mirror and bend over.

      replyreport
   4. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I did a search for"University of Chicago major genetic alteration 6,600 years"and got no study,tests or proof,only the mention in that website.U r gullible to believe everything you read,if u have a source for the test results let me see it

      replyreport
   5. 50

      Norine Williamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Ronnie: Boy, you're ON IT AGAIN!  I love you!  You tell TRUTH!  Love "the mirror & bend over part!" lol
      Law: Not "a coincidence" BUT GOD!

      replyreport
   6. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You Williams, just like WB,are a sucker for misinformation. When an article claims some university has proven something & doesn't source the information you can bet it is an inaccurate distortion for sensationalizing some wacko opinion.

      replyreport
7. 60

   quakefinderposted 7 years ago

   We should also think as why water on same earth - but different in sea , river, rains, etc. Why same species of insects, animals, herbs different in different parts of the earth?
   Human race migrated to different regions and parts of the earth-- and came under effect of climate of these regions and hence adapted their complexion to these climatic effects-- but inwardly they all are alike -- regarding  feelings, emotions, rights, demands, etc-----very simple !!!

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      This is similar to what someone said earlier, but it is still uncertain if this hypothesis can be termed as realism. By the way, I respect your comment. Thanks

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Dont Taze Me Broposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Shahid, everything you mention is easily explained by Genesis of the Bible. Don't believe the Bible? Then explain this. https://youtu.be/YjGUC9GNqfE

      replyreport
8. 78

   MickeyBattleposted 7 years ago

   Life began in the Middle East. The Bible speaks of Jesus having skin of brass (a golden tan color) and hair of wool (soft and dark, not rough). Then, there were eventually 12 tribes of Judah who spread throughout the world. These tribes most likely adapted to their surroundings giving us the races we have now. So Adam and Eve were not white or black, although both races like to think they were. I hope that helps. You can also turn to the Bible for answers.

   replyreport
   1. 50

      Norine Williamsposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I agree, but can't associate A SPIRIT with a race (although that description is closer to a Black) especially with "eyes as balls of fire" (lol)! I'm being silly!
      My Bible says "his hairs were "white" as wool" (Rev 1:14) not "look/felt like wool!"

      replyreport
   2. 48

      Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks Michelle, exactly the kind of answers I want (all related to the bible).
      I've missed you Norine, it's nice seeing you here.

      replyreport
9. 68

   Ronyaeposted 7 years ago

   That's a very good question - and one I've asked (not about race, tho'). If I had to give an educated guess - multi-racial genes in the parent(s) seems acceptable.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Pacesetter Abbeyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Insightful, but that doesn't answer the question.
      How exactly did 'multiracialism' come to being? That's the question

      replyreport