Have you ever wondered why humans must eat fruit to stay alive, but dogs, cats, cows, squirrels and other mammals don’t? It’s because all mammals need Vitamin C to survive, but simians (including humans) are among the very few mammals that cannot synthesize Vitamin C from their diets. Why? Because humans (along with other apes, monkeys, guinea pigs, fruit-eating bats, and a few other species), carry a genetic defect that disrupts the Vitamin C production process.
Here’s the interesting part. The vast majority of animals and plants are able to synthesize their own Vitamin C through a sequence of four enzyme-driven steps, which convert glucose to Vitamin C. Human metabolism can, and does, perform the first three of these steps, but we have lost the ability to perform the fourth, because our gene that would produce the required fourth enzyme contains a defect and no longer functions. Consequently, we cannot use the resulting proteins to synthesize Vitamin C: our bodies break the proteins back down and reabsorb them.
Why is this important? Well, the Bible tells us that the Garden of Eden contained fruit trees. Fruit trees would have been unnecessary if God had created Adam with a properly functioning gene to synthesize Vitamin C. Why did God not give Adam (whom God supposedly created in His own image) the properly functioning gene that He gave to virtually all other mammals? Also, why did God give Adam the genes for the other three enzyme-driven steps, even though they would be useless without the fourth? Doesn’t it seem…un-godlike…for an infallible God to have designed a “perfect” human who not only had a defective, non-functional gene, but also several functioning, useless ones?
Of course, evolutionary theory easily explains this phenomenon: millions of years ago, our ancestors once had four working genes, but a genetic mutation occurred sometime in our lineage that has been passed down through the subsequent generations. Fortunately for our ancestors (and us), this mutation was not fatal, because our ancestors were able to get Vitamin C from their diet, as we still must do today. True, fruit is not our only source of Vitamin C, but our rare inability to synthesize Vitamin C makes me wonder where the supporters of so-called “intelligent design” get their absurd belief that our design is intelligent, especially when their own holy book suggests that their infallible god created us, from the beginning, with a very obvious genetic defect.
Grumpy: You ask some compelling theo-scientific questions. I'd refer you to Ken Ham, who has all the answers. See this post and comments: http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1318
There are many genetic inferiorities in our species.
F'rinstance, as important as vision is to our sensory system, we don't see as wide or as detailed a spectrum as birds or insects.
We don't have the ability to regrow severed appendages as do many amphibians.
We lost the ability to grow and shed fur as seasons change.
We can't digest many foods on which other animals thrive.
Our spines are neither well designed for horizontal nor vertical locomotion.
Our feet are halfway between hooves and hands, not really good for either purpose (although we wear shoes to improve their hoofiness, and Bonnie Consolo demonstrates that the handiness can be developed).
But for a tiny difference, we would be as God. But, God gave us the means to be as God is, our intellect, such that we might discern what was missing and put that into ourselves. I just had some orange juice and am feeling quite godly! Query whether re-activating that gene would make us over into the same image and likeness of God?
"Fruit trees would have been unnecessary if God had created Adam with a properly functioning gene to synthesize Vitamin C."
Why should he not have something nice, like fruits, as dessert? And actually, there a couple of vegetables with a higher Vitamin C concentration than many fruits, for example, brocoli. And let's not forget sauerkraut and scurvy. 😀
I suppose the obvious Christian response would be that God created man with the gene fully functional, but is now defective as a result of the Fall. Or perhaps because of inbreeding, which I think is the answer as to why people have shorter lifespans than recorded in the bible.
Matt: Inbreeding is no excuse, given a God-given starter stock of only 2 individual genotypes (Adam and Eve, or Noah and his wife). Inbreeding can only be a problem if you accept the precept of evolution: That genes drift and mutate continuously, creating potentially deleterious alleles that are usually only expressed when reinforced.
In Christianity, it's generally considered that God created mankind to live forever. Only after eating fruit from a tree God told the not to eat of did death become an issue. After this event (The Fall of Man), it's thought that the world changed, for the worse. This would allow for things like inbreeding and genetic mutations. I think it's a bit of a false dilemma to say that either God's fallible for making mankind with defects or He doesn't exist. (Apologies if I put words in your mouth there.)
Matt,
Au contraire, mon ami. Gensis 3:22 "See, the man has become like one of us, with his knowledge of good and evil. He must not be allowed to stretch his hand out next and pick from the tree of life also, and eat some and live forever." Obviously, Adam was NOT intended to live forever. There was a special fruit for that (although he had not been expressly forbidden to eat from that tree, only the first one. Hmm.)
(The other thing about that passage is, who is this "we" mentioned? Some say the trinity, others say the angels. Some few suggest a pantheon, like the Greeks etc. )
As for the shorter life spans…Gensis 5 says Adam lived to be 930. Quite a stint. But if you do a little arithmetic, based on the assumption that what was actually being counted were months–which is likely, since most ancient calendars are lunar, and time was counted according to monthly cycles most of the time–then Adam lived to be about 77. Methusaleh would have made it to 80. Enoch was one of the shorter-lived ones, and if the monthly dating is in force he would have been 30 when he kicked off, which is about on par for a good portion of humanity until the modern era. Of course, we know, there are 365 days in a year, so what may be going on here is a muddle on the part of the writer(s) as to how to measure time.
Apparently, after The Flood, ages rationalized down to what we might consider normal. There have always been remarkable individuals who brought the century mark, and would rightly be recorded in such histories as the Old Testament books. Rather than attribute anything mystical to it, more likely than not we're looking at creative embellishment combined with bad calendars. This ought not be seen as a flaw, though. Several ancient cultures recorded time scales vastly different than what we know to be the case. The Sumerians had a list of early kings that totalled over a 100,000 years in their reign–for ten kings. One reigned for 65,000 years. We have no trouble dismissing these claims (pagans, pre-Christians, what have you) but cling to the christian claims in spite of fairly easy solutions to the dilemmas.
Matt's comment raises several issues. First, what does "death" mean in Genesis? When Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge, they did not "die" in the way we do, so why should we assume God created humans to live forever absent said "death?" The word "death" has different meanings in the two situations, but Matt's comment relies on it having the same meaning in both.
Likewise, where does the Bible say the world changed to allow for things like inbreeding and genetic mutations?
Third, regardless of whether or not we accept the Bible's creation story as true, we obviously have no way to prove if Adam carried the defective gene for Vitamin C or not. The planting of fruit trees suggests that perhaps he needed fruit to live, but he could have gotten Vitamin C from other sources. Or, for all we know, Adam and Eve were incorporeal, and did not even need to eat food to live. We just don't know what they were (genetically or otherwise) before the Fall. Nevertheless, I think it is strange that an infallible god would have given humans the same genetic defect that he gave to guinea pigs and fruit bats, and I find no explanation for this in the Bible. Accordingly, I think we are equally justified in concluding that the god-of-the-Bible does not exist as to invent some other non-Biblical explanation — especially when god-less evolution provides a straightforward explanation.
Matt: I think that the point here is not to say that god is fallible or doesn't exist based solely on this one particular oddity, but that here is yet another inexplicable, contradictory piece of information from the bible that must be explained away in order to not have the whole thing start to collapse on you.
As much as I would like to agree with Dan, the examples he lists are technically not defects in human design. Differences, certainly…inadquacies, perhaps, even inferiorities…but not defects, though the examples of spine and feet are highly suggestive of poor design. I think of defects as being like the Vitamin C example: a design that is incapable of performing an essential function. If we focus on such defects in human design, we more seriously undermine creationist nonsense.
For example, another "f’rinstance" we might mention is the rapid degradation of our eyesight that occurs between the ages of 40 and 50 — a function of the eye's lens becoming less elastic. I have always wondered how creationists square this trait with the Bible's description of humans living for many centuries. If we are meant to live for hundreds of years, then why does our eyesight fail so early? Where, I wonder, did Noah (who was 48 when the Flood occurred) get his reading glasses, so he could correctly read the plans for the Ark and make sure he had enough room for all those dinosaurs?
Grumpy. Building the ark to hold two of every species was a logistical nightmare. That's why, in all recorded history, it was only accomplished one time.
Ha! Got 'ya! No, actually, I'm just glad I'm not in the business of trying to explain such absurd things on behalf of fundamentalist religions. People like Ken Ham do revel in acting like know-it-alls in front of impressionable people, including young children. I can't fathom why it doesn't occur to Ham that dinosaurs are much older than humans and that the ark described in the Bible could not have been built and that the flood did not cover the entire planet. I assume that these things DO occur to him, but he's just having too much fun and making too much money spreading ignorance.
Actually, when Ham gets up and pompously argues his points, he gets lots of smiles from the people he helps to keep ignorant and that is probably reward enough to keep him going full tilt.
I'm sure God etched them in stone in large type.
I am experiencing this particular design flaw of late.
Vicki: Are you building an ark? This global warming stuff is making me nervous too.
hee hee :} No I mean the "arms too short" design flaw.
Jason's comment makes a lot of sense to me. Christian apologists are forever swapping months for years when trying to compute the date for the Second Coming of Christ, so why not swap years for months when computing the age of OT characters? It makes sense and nicely rationalizes the unlikely ages reported in the Bible.
gatomjp's comment also nicely addresses the issue. Indeed, this is just another of the many oddities that must be explained away. I've written about this problem before (here, for example: http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=125) — if the god-of-the-Bible wants everyone to avoid sin and go to heaven, then why is his holy book so spectacularly riddled with ambiguous statements and unanswered questions…especially when they are the same sorts of ambiguous statements and unanswered questions that appear in the holy texts of earlier religions?
Jason: I read over that part of Genesis before posting my comment, and I did notice the part about the Tree of Life. I've heard the argument that by not forbidding the Tree of Life, God actually intended Adam and Eve to eat from it. At least, God only kept them from it after they ate the Knowledge fruit. So, humans probably weren't created to live forever, but the means seem like they were availible.
And I hadn't thought about the issue with the calendar or numbering systems in the genealogies. I'm glad you brought that up.
"…by not forbidding the Tree of Life, God actually intended Adam and Eve to eat from it. At least, God only kept them from it after they ate the Knowledge fruit…."
In other words, the god-of-the-Bible intended humans to be immortal, but only if we use our brilliant minds to remain ignorant, unquestioning sycophants. No wonder Christian Fundamentalists condemn science.
I still think the most radical part of the entire scene in the Garden is the phrase "has become like one of us." In other words, a god. Which makes perfect sense if Man was indeed created in god's "image"–incomplete, as most images are, but then on the verge of becoming the real deal. Immortality would have made him, what? Competition? It is such a pregnant phrase, that tantalizing bit of god actually professing that he may have made something that could eventually displace him–or something that he could not then unmake. For potential, it is one of the most loaded passage in the whole bible, and gets really short shrift most of the time.
Erich says:
"Grumpy. Building the ark to hold two of every species was a logistical nightmare. That’s why, in all recorded history, it was only accomplished one time."
Sorry to quibble. The specific details of Noah's escapade aside, the Ark is a remarkably universal legend. Here are a few (yes, I cribbed this from another site):
Africa
Southwest Tanzania
Once upon a time the rivers began to flood. The god told two people to get into a ship. He told them to take lots of seed and to take lots of animals. The water of the flood eventually covered the mountains. Finally the flood stopped. Then one of the men, wanting to know if the water had dried up let a dove loose. The dove returned. Later he let loose a hawk which did not return. Then the men left the boat and took the animals and the seeds with them.
Asia
China
The Chinese classic called the Hihking tells about "the family of Fuhi," that was saved from a great flood. This ancient story tells that the entire land was flooded; the mountains and everything, however one family survived in a boat. The Chinese consider this man the father of their civilization. This record indicates that Fuhi, his wife, three sons, and three daughters were the only people that escaped the great flood. It is claimed, that he and his family were the only people alive on earth, and repopulated the world.
Babylon
Gilgamesh met an old man named Utnapishtim, who told him the following story. The gods came to Utnapishtim to warn him about a terrible flood that was coming. They instructed Utnapishtim to destroy his house and build a large ship. The ship was to be 10 dozen cubits high, wide and long. Utnapishtim was to cover the ship with pitch. He was supposed to take male and female animals of all kinds, his wife and family, provisions, etc. into the ship. Once ship was completed the rain began falling intensely. The rain fell for six days and nights. Finally things calmed and the ship settled on the top of Mount Nisir. After the ship had rested for seven days Utnapishtim let loose a dove. Since the land had not dried the dove returned. Next he sent a swallow which also returned. Later he let loose a raven which never returned since the ground had dried. Utnapishtim then left the ship.
Chaldean
There was a man by the name of Xisuthrus. The god Chronos warned Xisuthrus of a coming flood and told him to build a boat. The boat was to be 5 stadia by 2 stadia. In this boat Xisuthrus was to put his family, friends and two of each animal (male and female). The flood came. When the waters started to recede he let some birds loose. They came back and he noticed they had mud on their feet. He tried again with the same results. When he tried the third time the birds did not return. Assuming the water had dried up the people got out of the boat and offered sacrifices to the gods.
India
A long time ago lived a man named Manu. Manu, while washing himself, saved a small fish from the jaws of a large fish. The fish told Manu, "If you care for me until I am full grown I will save you from terrible things to come". Manu asked what kind of terrible things. The fish told Manu that a great flood would soon come and destroy everything on the earth. The fish told Manu to put him in a clay jar for protection. The fish grew and each time he outgrew the clay jar Manu gave him a larger one. Finally the fish became a ghasha, one of the largest fish in the world. The fish instructed Manu to build a large ship since the flood was going to happen very soon. As the rains started Manu tied a rope from the ship to the ghasha. The fish guided the ship as the waters rose. The whole earth was covered by water. When the waters began subsiding the ghasha led Manu's ship to a mountaintop.
Australia
There is a legend of a flood called the Dreamtime flood. Riding on this flood was the woramba, or the Ark Gumana. In this ark was Noah, Aborigines, and various animals. This ark eventually came to rest in the plain of Djilinbadu where it can still be found. They claim that the white mans story about the ark landing in the middle east is a lie that was started to keep the aborigines in subservience. This legend is undoubtedly the product of aboriginal legends merging with those of visiting missionaries, and there does not appear to be any native flood stories from Australia.
Europe
Greece
A long time ago, perhaps before the golden age was over, humans became proud. This bothered Zeus as they kept getting worse. Finally Zeus decided that he would destroy all humans. Before he did this Prometheus, the creator of humans, warned his human son Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha. Prometheus then placed this couple in a large wooden chest. The rains started and lasted nine days and nights until the whole world was flooded. The only thing that was not flooded was the peaks of Mount Parnassus and Mount Olympus. Mount Olympus is the home of the gods. The wooden chest came to rest on Mount Parnassus. Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha got out and saw that everything was flooded. The lived on provisions from the chest until the waters subsided. At Zeus' instruction they re-populated the earth.
North America
Mexico
The Toltec natives have a legend telling that the original creation lasted for 1716 years, and was destroyed by a flood and only one family survived.
Aztec- A man named Tapi lived a long time ago. Tapi was a very pious man. The creator told Tapi to build a boat that he would live in. He was told that he should take his wife, a pair of every animal that was alive into this boat. Naturally everyone thought he was crazy. Then the rain started and the flood came. The men and animals tried to climb the mountains but the mountains became flooded as well. Finally the rain ended. Tapi decided that the water had dried up when he let a dove loose that did not return.
United States
The Ojibwe natives who have lived in Minnesota USA since approximately 1400AD also have a creation and flood story that closely paralleles the Biblical account. "There came a time when the harmonious way of life did not continue. Men and women disrespected each other, families quarreled and soon villages began arguing back and forth. This saddened Gitchie Manido [the Creator] greatly, but he waited. Finally, when it seemed there was no hope left, Creator decided to purify Mother Earth through the use of water. The water came, flooding the Earth, catching all of creation off guard. All but a few of each living thing survived." Then it tells how Waynaboozhoo survived by floating on a log in the water with various animals.
Ojibwe – Ancient native American creation story tells of world wide flood.
Delaware Indians – In the pristine age, the world lived at peace; but an evil spirit came and caused a great flood. The earth was submerged. A few persons had taken refuge on the back of a turtle, so old that his shell had collected moss. A loon flew over their heads and was entreated to dive beneath the water and bring up land. It found only a bottomless sea. Then the bird flew far away, came back with a small portion of earth in its bill, and guided the tortoise to a place where there was a spot of dry land.
Delaware Indian Legends
South America
Inca
During the period of time called the Pachachama people became very evil. They got so busy coming up with and performing evil deeds they neglected the gods. Only those in the high Andes remained uncorrupted. Two brothers who lived in the highlands noticed their llamas acting strangely. They asked the llamas why and were told that the stars had told the llamas that a great flood was coming. This flood would destroy all the life on earth. The brothers took their families and flocks into a cave on the high mountains. It started to rain and continued for four months. As the water rose the mountain grew keeping its top above the water. Eventually the rain stopped and the waters receded. The mountain returned to its original height. The shepherds repopulated the earth. The llamas remembered the flood and that is why they prefer to live in the highland areas.
Now, Fundies claim all these stories (when they even admit they exist) validate the Bible. To me, it only shows the Bible to be rather unoriginal and derivative. Inundations have happened all over the place. Legends are bound to grow up around them if they're bad enough. Christians tend to claim copyright on the one and only original, but it seems to me more logical to assume it was a local phenomenon that simply, over time, took on global proportions.
Further to Jason's great comment about flood myths, I have a theory about that which Jason also touches on but which I will embellish for the sake of argument.
It should not surprise anyone that most civilizations have flood myths. Floods are one of nature's most terrifying events. Water pours in, seemingly from nowhere, to sweep away everything in its path, including buildings, livestock and people…to say nothing of trees and mountainsides. Floods don't just kill people, they erase them from the earth. Even a war will leave behind bodies, but not floods. Moreover, floodsleave behind a layer of sludge that erases familiar landmarks, too, leaving survivors not just destitute and grieving, but lost and disoriented. When the waters recede, the known "world" is gone. Is it any wonder that so many cultures have myths about them?
What is curious is that so many cultures have similar themes, but perhaps this is also not surprising. What would a sensible person do when faced with a flood? Build a big ship and stock it with family, seeds and animals. And the part about releasing birds to find dry land…well, what would you tell your inquisitive child when she asks tough questions about the gaps in your mythical stories? You make up something that answers the question…and, really, how many likely answers are there to that question that would not feature a bird?
Also, we don't know how much the stories have changed with time, especially in the face of global Christian evangelism. True, some of the stories seem to predate Christian contact, but we really don't know how much influence those early missionaries might have had.
Of course, flood myths are not the only ones found across the planet. Many cultures also have myths about volcanoes, perhaps for the same reasons I mention above. Given what a volcano can do, is it any surprise that the underworld in many cultures is described as a burning pit of fire?
Anyway, as Jason says, far from supporting the Bible's flood myth, the cornucopia of flood myths merely illustrates that humans with similar (i.e., very limited) worldviews will imagine similar answers to similar questions.
I also liked the reading the collection of flood myths that Jason posted, I wonder though if this is really just similar stories of the same theme or the same story with some variations? In all the stories there is only one survivor plus his family – why did not more families survive? People could have invented a story about a chosen people (see Bible) who were destined to be their forefathers. And this bird – would it be really necessary to use a bird to check out if the flood had receded and land was visible again? If you look at the stories that are told in different countries regarding the creation of the world you do have to wonder why this flood story has so many similar parallels. And why does it have to be a flood? Why not a big fire?
By the way, I find it weird that people obviously had no problems with the fact their civilisation was obviously based on incest if the myths were true. The same with the fundamental Christians who take the Bible literally. There's the problem with Adam and Eve, and then later with Noah who had three sons (and no daughter?). I'm especially curious what kind of explanations the Christian fundamentalists have to offer.
Jason's comment about the god-of-the-Bible fearing competition, reminds me of something I recently read which pointed out that the god-of-the-Bible actually does acknowledge the existence of other gods. In Exodus 20:3, the god-of-the-Bible says, "You shall have no other gods before me." Notice that the god-of-the-Bible does not say, "There are no other gods but me;" rather, that we should not put any other gods first. Apparently, it's OK to put them second, third, or whatever. Likewise, we often hear of the god-of-the-Bible referred to as the "Lord of Lords," which makes no sense except in the context of other, lesser gods. So, apparently other gods exist…the Bible says so.
Did it occur to you that perhaps he gave Adam and Eve fully functioning genes, but only put the fruit trees in for their personal enjoyment? Then man lost the last part of the gene process thru mutation later.
sammy wrote, "Did it occur to you that perhaps he gave Adam and Eve fully functioning genes, but only put the fruit trees in for their personal enjoyment? Then man lost the last part of the gene process thru mutation later."
sammy…are you suggesting that humans *evolved*? What an unusual argument to use to defend the Bible's creation myth.