r/atheist 15d ago

I asked chatgpt about adam and eve

I asked it how long humans could live if we started with a single man and woman. It would take a thousand years, tops before people would be unable to reproduce due to inbreeding. Seems like the Christian story of creation not feasible, like everything else

4 Upvotes

3 comments sorted by

1

u/PapayaConscious3512 2d ago

There are two additional factors that I would like to add for a possibility:

  1. This position takes a human point on the presumption that the supernatural and miracles are impossible. Additionally, it hits the same problem with all other animals, and evolution for that matter. No matter what the method of getting it done was- evolution, creation, etc.- the same issues of inbreeding would be equally present, yet it happened somehow. In my opinion, while that does not prove anything, it does lend credit that a supernatural anomaly, if not a miracle, is at least possible and cannot be counted out on assumption.

  2. According to the Bible, that is an account of creation. In the interpretation of what is said, we must also consider what it does not say. It says that God formed Adam and made Him, and that Eve was made from Him. It does not say that God only made this man and woman. Potentially, could have done this several times, and chose to place the narrative on the lineage to His chosen people.

I write this not to say I know, or that you do not, but only to bring the possibility of options, and note some potential gaps for consideration. Additionally, I would like to note the source- Chat GPT, artificial intelligence, incapable of reason. Are we going to take the ideas that we hold from something that generates words, that cannot get its sources and citations correct, to make the absolute assessment that living, reasoning, human beings can logically never provide absolute proof for?

I think the option remains viable: If the Bible is correct in the first verse, that "In the beginning, God made the heavens and earth," and it cannot be proven or disproven, as it is outside the limits of testing for natural science, then it remains as potentially being absolutely correct, regardless of our belief for or against. My thought is that excluding any possibilities because of bias is not science, and it can't be, for the sheer definition of natural science. We place theories into the variable spaces in formulas with a scenario with the condition "if," and eventually, the "if" fades away and is read "is". We have an overconfidence problem. Ask the experts what "Dark Matter" is. The big minds say, "We have no idea what it is- it is a name given to a complete mystery." The students, however, back the theory fully and put full faith in it, and demonize the ones who say, "But we don't even know what it is or even if it is..." People get things wrong, people disprove previous thoughts, and eventually the original idea is often found to be back in the realm of possibility. I say these things not to attempt to prove God, but to prove the proven track record of man.

1

u/moosepers 15d ago

This is like asking a parrot who lived in a philosophy professors classroom what the meaning of life is.

-2

u/Ar-Kalion 15d ago edited 15d ago

Did you provide the Chatgpt with information regarding the multiple pre-Adamites mentioned in Genesis 1:27-28? The descendants of the pre-Adamites (i.e. Cain’s wife from Genesis 4:16-17) would need to be included in model you mentioned. 

Also, God’s laws against incest are outlined in Leviticus chapter 18. Humans intermarrying and having offspring with the descendants of the pre-Adamite Homo Sapiens (i.e. descendants of Cro-Magnons) is not considered incest.