The Creation of Man

I heard on the radio this morning that some people believe Cain was the offspring of a mating between Eve and the Serpent, and was the first (evil) Jew, while the later offspring of Eve and Adam gave rise to the Christians. That got me to wondering what really happened, assuming that the Bible really contains an accurate description of the creation of the world.

Was Adam white? If he was, and Eve was cloned from his rib, then Eve was also white. So where did the black people come from? Where did the Chinese and all the other east Asian people come from? If they're descended from Adam and Eve, then you can't object to interracial marriage, because we're all one family. If they're not descended from Adam and Eve, where did they come from?

There's no mention of them in the creation story. Are they among the animals that were created before Adam? If so, they would be a different species. But the existence of so many fertile crosses between races suggests that we are all really one species.

Biblical tradition says we are all in fact one species. The human species, in fact every species, was reduced to one mating pair that survived on the Ark during the Flood. Each of the sons of Noah gave rise to a different race. How can that be? Can a white couple give birth to a black man?

Talking about gaps in the theory of evolution, this seemed to me to be a serious gap in the theory of creation. But then I found the answer on Christian Answers.net. Adam and Eve, having been created with the best possible combination of genes, were mixed race, so they had the capability to give rise to offspring of any race. How were the races separated so that each race lived in a different part of the world? Natural selection, of course - a borrowing from the theory of evolution.

Against People of Faith

Senator Bill Frist thinks he's clever. He's joined a group of Christian conservatives for a telecast that says Democrats are "against people of faith" because they're blocking W's nominations for federal judges.

I wonder what he means by "people of faith." There's nothing wrong with people of faith being federal judges. But it would be wrong for a judge to put his faith ahead of the law.

We have a Constitution that says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." Bill Frist and his companions want to sidestep that provision. They won't write religion into the law. They just want activist judges who base their decisions on religious faith instead of on the law.

A flyer advertising the telecast shows a young man apparently trying to balance "public service" against "faith in Christ," with the heading "He should not have to choose." No, he doesn't have to choose. As long as he respects the separation of church and state that's built into our national heritage, he can have both.

The United States is not a Christian nation. It's an inclusive nation. We have Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, atheists, and many others, all hoping to live in peace and harmony under the rule of law. We don't want Iraq to become a fundamentalist Islamic state, we don't want Iran to remain a fundamentalist Islamic state, and we don't want the United States to be a fundamentalist Christian state.

Nobody around here is "against people of faith" except Bill Frist and his friends, who are against people of any faith but theirs.