The first post includes as it’s main image a fingerpost – that is, one of those signs that point in the direction of other places, in this case countries – that I’m reasonably certain could not exist. Heres a different signpost from Bluff that illustrates the principle, but more importantly does actually exist:
But fingerposts and other navigational aides are irrelevant to the topic at hand. The post begins:
One of my favorite holidays is Thanksgiving. Not so much for the turkey or the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, but because I have such fond memories of learning about Native Americans during elementary school. My grandmother was part Cherokee Indian, so the intrigue was doubly high for me!
I have always been fascinated with learning about different ethnic groups. Although my upbringing in a small, rural town did not provide much exposure to people of lots of different ethnicities, I vowed to learn all I could when I became an adult and to make sure that my own children would not have the limited experience I had growing up.
There’s nothing much to comment on here, as usual in these beginning of the week posts. I will say that it reminds me of those posts screenshotted for the October Acts & ‘Facts’ magazine which apparently never made it onto the wider web. But that’s a topic for another day.
Everyone—regardless of language, physical features, or skin tone—is classified as belonging to the one species Homo sapiens. And even though the accepted definition of a human “race” is a group of people who “categorize themselves in terms of race or ethnicity, sometimes on the basis of differences in appearance” (Wikipedia, accessed November 10, 2011), the biblical basis of one human race is developed from the first couple, Adam and Eve (Genesis 3:20).
The quote is from this revision of liberally biased Wikipedia’s Human article. Notably, that statement isn’t actually being presented as the definition of race, and that two sentences later it says “Most current genetic and archaeological evidence supports a recent single origin of modern humans in East Africa with first migrations placed at 60,000 years ago.” This may be why the article is not given as a hyperlink, but I’m probably over-analysing.
You’ll note that the idea of the bible saying that there is only “one race” is nonsensical. For one thing, there’s all this genocide in the bible – who were the Amalekites mentioned at the beginning of 2 Samuel if they weren’t a race?
Now it came to pass after the death of Saul, when David was returned from the slaughter of the Amalekites, and David had abode two days in Ziklag;
As an aside, it’s worth noting that Saul had already killed the Amalekites. I need to get back to the Biblical Predictions thing.
The next couple of months are particularly important educational times filled with discussions of celebrations based on students’ ethnicities. When teaching your students the basic premises of the origin of the races, remember to include the following:
1) All persons are descendants of the first man, Adam, and first woman, Eve (Genesis 3:20).
2) All races have developed from the lineage of Noah, his sons, and their wives (Genesis 9:1).
The Bible makes a clear case for each racial group and ethnicity being a part of one human race. After all, we are all made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27).
That doesn’t follow, that if we are all descended from the one pair we must be all of the same race. The creationist pseudoscience of baraminology holds that single pairs from the ark have since divereged into seperate species, for goodnessake. Why am I nitpicking? This is just a particularly boring post, nothing more.
The post concludes with the One Blood quote this is all an allusion to:
Acts 17:26: And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings.
There are two comments on this post.
- Mark Hollinsworth says: “From as soon as my 3 kids have been able to understand such things I have consistently taught them that Noah, his wife, 3 sons and their wives, are decended from Adam and Eve, and that every human being conceived could trace their lineage back to Noah and his family. We have never had to, and will never need to, change our teaching because the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and Jesus is God made man. Jesus accepted a literal Genesis account of the origins of Man, so should we. There is no evidence to contradict the Bible. Praise God.”
- While a “Ryan” writes: “I probably don’t quite fit in with what you’re saying, but what I can say is Jesus is Lord and he lives in me. It is by his Spirit that he changes me and feeds me with his life (eternal in quality and time).
That’s why I don’t believe that Genesis, Exodus, or any book in the Old Testament is written with the purpose of telling us how we were made physically, or any other carnal subject for that matter, but rather it is written with a view to tell us spiritually how we were made, who we are, and who Christ is. The first chapters of Genesis are about Christ and choosing to eat from the Tree of Life (Christ) rather than the tree of knowledge (Independence). It is not about how planet earth was made. If he wanted to, God could tell us how he did it scientifically or physically, but that’s not the purpose of the Bible; it is written to speak to us about Christ and the inward choice we have within us, at each moment, there is the tree of Life, and the tree of Knowledge (knowledge of both good and evil).
Noah’s Ark for example, is a picture of Christ, with God completely wiping out the old creation, but if you are in Christ you are a new creation, created in Christ. The new creation all springing forth from Christ .The first born from the dead. He is the first born of the new creation. If you are in Christ and Christ is in you, you are born again into the new creation. You now have the choice to live by, or set your mind on the Spirit, the new man, or your flesh, the old man.”
Two differing perspectives, neither of them responded to. On to the K-5 post:
The first two activities involve questions about students’ grandparents. If they do not have access to their grandparents or to this information, you can give them the option of researching the same information from the background of a famous person.
I’ll just fill this first task out to the best of my ability…
1) To begin a class lesson on ethnicity, have students discuss the following: What is ethnicity? How is it different from nationality? Assign students to report on the following, while including pictures or drawings of their grandparents, samples of foods, dress, or traditions.
a) Where were your grandparents or great-grandparents born?
New Zealand, except the ones born in Britain.
b) What language did/do your grandparents or great-grandparents speak?
English, and only English, unfortunately. Ah well…
c) Does anyone in your family speak this language now?
d) What ethnic foods did/do they eat?
The thing with that kind of question is that people don’t know what their own ethnic foods are – they just eat them. Fish and Chips, I guess?
f) What special customs did/do they follow?
Same as above. Eating the Fish and Chips is all I can think of at this moment…
g) Does your family continue any of these practices?
It would be pretty terrible if we didn’t, I got to say.
That wasn’t too hard, was it? On to the next task:
2) Have each student choose 1 grandparent from the assignment above to discuss in class. Using a large world map, have each student use a push pin or another identifying marker to signify the country where the chosen grandparent was born. Once completed, divide students into groups of 3. Allow each group to choose a different country represented by someone in the class to complete research on (preferably not the country of anyone in the group).
Should I just skip ahead?
4) Genesis 3:20 states: “And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.” If we are descendants of Adam (1st man) and Eve (1st woman), what is the basis for the belief that all races have developed from the lineage of Noah, his sons, and their wives? Include the reference from the Bible for this belief.
Didn’t she just give it in the last post? Anyway, we want the evidence, not the “basis for the belief.”
Now for the 6-12 post:
1) Download a free copy of the article “No Evolution Found in Human Facial Differences” by ICR scientist Brian Thomas. Compare the content from the article with this abstract found in the journal Evolution.
So B.T. is a scientist now? Or rather, an ICR scientist, which explains why the bar is so low. The DpSU is from May 1, 2009, and is particularly facepalm-worthy:
Studying ancient skulls in Argentina and surrounding areas, researchers discovered that the wide variety of head shapes they found was not generated randomly. And since typical evolutionary processes such as mutation and genetic drift supposedly occur randomly, other possible causes must be considered. The authors of the study proposed that climate and diet were “capable to generate large craniofacial divergence in a short period of time.”
You get the picture – it’s possible even that he has got better with time, considering how bad that is.
The difference between the article and the abstract is that the abstract makes sense and appears to be written by people who know what they’re talking about. Among many other things.
2) When someone who needs an organ transplant is unable to find a suitable donor from his/her family, they are put on a donor list. Organ recipients and their families are often surprised to hear that the most suitable tissue match is often from a donor of a different “race” or ethnic background. Although modern evolutionists recognize the genetic closeness of all humanity, Darwin’s books On the Origin of Speciesand The Descent of Man teach there should be a vast genetic difference between the “races” because of the mechanisms by which evolution is supposed to occur. Have students do the following:
Whoa, whoa! Evolution says no such thing! For one, we would be more looking at a change in gene frequencies, which could easily mean that another ethnicity has a close match. And the whole “more genetic diversity between two chimps in the same forest than all of humanity” thing is no evolutionary conundrum.
a) Research the statistics on finding a match between an organ recipient and a donor.
Where? How? Why? I don’t know how you would do that…
b) Write a 1-page paper on how persons of different ethnic backgrounds should NOT be able to provide organ donations to one another according to the theory of evolution. Use citations from the above Darwin sources.
She wants you to read Darwin? Interesting… Personally, I want you to read the books of Samuel, but you don’t have to if you’re squeamish.
c) Write a 1-page rebuttal paper using recent scientific research, as well as the Bible, as your sources.
I would be interested to see where you could use the bible as a source here – if, for example, it wasn’t true that you could receive organs across ethnic boundaries I’m sure Dr Forlow would have no trouble writing this article from the opposite point of view.
3) Watch the following ABC News broadcast: One Twin’s White, the Other’s Black. Complete a Punnett square to predict a possible outcome for both daughters’ first child, using a father of single-race descent.
Skin colour does not follow simple Mendalian Genetics. Even B.T. realised this in the DpSU above. Sheesh!
There are no comments on this post, same as the K-5 post and this next post, the Discussion Starters.
What skin color do you think Adam and Eve had, and how can you determine that?
Clear and Colourless – if Adam was made in God’s image, and we can’t see God, Adam too must be invisible, if not non-existent.
For the older student: How would it be possible for Adam and Eve, or Noah, his sons, and their wives to give all of the blood types (ABO) present in humans today?
Ah – there are more blood types than that. There are six common alleles for the ABO gene, and numerous other rarer ones. There is also much more to blood types than just ABO. While it may be technically possible for Noah and co to have them all, Adam and Eve certainly could not.
Dinner Table Starters:
How would you explain to a friend of a different ethnic background that you are “physically” related?
Wh-hy? And why is this a “Dinner Table” starter? What does it mean to be “physically related” anyway?
For the older student: The Bible tells us that our need for salvation is based on our descent from Adam and Eve and the sin nature that we inherited from them (Romans 5:12-15). How could you explain this concept to an unsaved friend?
We all know that one – “You’re going to Hell!”
And, as I type this, the first of this weeks posts arrive. What is it with Thanksgiving?
And what’s this from B.T. about Nitrogen?