We’ve heard from the evolutionary theory that man came from apes—If so, both would have the same DNA. Why not claim that apes came from man?

The Bible’s answer

“The Bible clearly states that God created humans as well as different “kinds” of animal and plant life. * (Genesis 1:12, 21, 25, 27; Revelation 4:11) It says that the entire human family descended from Adam and Eve, our first parents. (Genesis 3:20; 4:1) The Bible account does not support the theory that God used evolution to bring about the different kinds of life, sometimes called theistic evolution. The fact is, though, that nothing in the Bible conflicts with scientific observations that variations occur within each kind of life. *

 Did God use evolution?

 Is evolution compatible with the Bible?

 What about the ability of plants and animals to adapt?

 Did God use evolution?

The term “theistic evolution” refers to a broad variety of ideas. According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, the term promotes the idea that “natural selection is one of the mechanisms with which God directs the natural world.”

Theistic evolution can also include the following ideas:

All living organisms descended from common ancestors in the distant past.

One kind of life-form can evolve into a completely different kind of life-form, a concept that is sometimes referred to as macroevolution.

God is somehow ultimately responsible for these processes.

 Is evolution compatible with the Bible?

Theistic evolution implies that the Bible’s account of creation in Genesis is not completely accurate. However, Jesus referred to the Genesis account as historical fact. (Genesis 1:26, 27; 2:18-24; Matthew 19:4-6) The Bible says that before coming to earth, Jesus lived in heaven with God and was involved in helping God to bring “all things” into existence. (John 1:3) Therefore, the idea that God used evolution to bring about different life-forms is incompatible with Bible teachings.

 What about the ability of plants and animals to adapt?

The Bible does not explain how much variation can occur within a kind. Neither does it contradict the fact that the different kinds of animals and plants created by God can vary as they breed or adapt to new environments. 

Although some view such adaptations as a form of evolution, no new kind of life is produced.”

🌾

how do you know  he was  TROUBLED   site some  evidence

he went on the search for how  the same type of animal  was  very  different  in different areas ..

when you look at the levels of life you  GO UPWARDS up the tree not down

the HUMAN has  traits of its ancestors 

its  ANCESTORS and the siblings of the ancesters  DO NOT have traits of it ..

If, as the story goes, we and chimps came from a common ancestor ~10 million years ago, then neutral theory (genetic drift) would predict that there could be 1% difference between human and chimps. Indeed at one time it was reported that we were only 1% different but that was always doubtful and modern sequencing puts the difference at about 10%; much greater than can be explained using neutral theory.

The argument for common ancestry based on endogenous retroviruses depends on these being part of functionless junk DNA. After all similarity could be expected in functional DNA due to a common designer. However the ENCODE project showed that 80%+ of our DNA was functional and since then research has confirmed functions in many parts, including "retroviral" sequences, that were once thought to be junk.

Of course there is some similarity in DNA between humans and apes; particularly chimps; but then we have genetic similarity to bananas and fruit flies as well. All life uses substantially the same genetic code and we are ll made from the same 20 amino acids. Such similarity can best be explained by a common designer.

So while there is similarity between the DNA of humans and apes the evidence does not support the story of recent common ancestry.

Re: updateYes he was pushed to publish after receiving a letter from Wallace that contained many ideas similar to Darwin’s.Darwin acknowledged some objections and dealt with them in his book. But he did believe in his theory.Darwin believed in God as a young man. He trained to be an Anglican clergyman but that was mainly because his father thought he was a waster and that would give him a socially acceptable sinecure where he could indulge his hobbies.  His faith was probably pretty superficial. By the time “Origin of Species” was published he was an atheist.

[edit] Richard Buggs* https://discourse.biologos.org/t/human-chimp-genom... in May 2018 estimated the similarity between chimps and humans to be between 84.4 and 93.4%. The mean of these is 88.9% similarity or 11.1% difference.

*Professor of Evolutionary Genomics, Queen Mary University of London

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you have no idea what evolution is and what it is not.

Dude, you seriously need to hit the books!  Your claim that "Darwin did not fully believe at all in his theory" is pure bull-pucky.   Darwin questioned his theory because he was a scientist rather than a religious nutter, but his self-questioning did not amount to disbelief in his own theory.  Later in life, Darwin probably feared that making his atheism public might increase resistance to his theory.  But, anyway, do you really care about facts? 

Because the lines diverged back with a common ancestor.

o Because of fossil dating.  There are ape fossils that are older than human fossils.  You can make a timeline for hominin evolution from "more apelike" to "more manlike."

o Because of endogenous retroviruses.  Shared endogenous retroviruses give us a timeline for how lineages split.

"If so, both would have the same DNA."

no, you don't have the exact same DNA as your greatgrandparent, just 6 chromosomes or so - out of your 46.

"Why not claim that apes came from man?"

Archeological evidence of humans being around before apes in general existed has not been found

DNA says that somehow two pairs of ape/monkey chromosomes merged to one pair of human chromosomes. Human DNA would look different if the monkey-chromosomes were the result of a human chromosome being splot

No you haven't. What evolution says is that apes and man had a common ancestor.

Simply a matter of definition. Modern humans and modern apes have a common ancestor, possibly like Ardeopithecus. Are you going to call Ardeopithecus a human or an ape? The name suggests the latter.