Actually, Lucifer, the angel of the manifested power of God, was the ruler of the first earth. As he and his angels became more self centered and selfish and controling, sin entered and sin eventually brought forth death.
Dudes - I got the answer on this one. Ok...this is what I heard, I heard that when the horned red dude got kicked out of heaven, instead of being kicked out to Mars, Pluto, or another galaxy, he was kicked to Earth (why? I have no clue), anyway, when this happened it destroyed all the dino's. Which makes me paunder on the thought of, evil/death being introduced as a learning experience or something, It's beyond my mug. wow that was deep, too deep for me. I'm outta here, have to catch some drifts. rock out.
I don`t know.....there have many different *die outs* different epochs in world history.
From the trillobites to the great mammals...
Life has been evolving and dying for millions of years....
We have found evidence in our creek bed of the earliest life forms that crawled on the ocean bottoms...different plants, shells .. a crab, our neighbors have trillobites....further up the hill we have found dinosaur tracks and fossils that tell of life and death hundreds of millions of years ago...higher up we have found a three toed horse tooth giving evidence of the life cycle of mammals 25 million years ago....
Finally while digging a pool, we found evidence of old campfires, bones from animals that had been processed, broken flint spears....even a stone hoe...the age of these relics gives evidence to life and death tens of thousands of years before the genesis story of when life and consequently death supposedly arrived on this planet.
I think TWI might have been mistaken in it`s teaching of the chronolgy of life and the arrival of death.
Consider this....that when you have to give an explanation to a young child, you have to give it in terms and concepts that they can grasp.
Think about the mentality of the judean people, ten thousand years ago... or even earlier ... the sumerian people which is where many of the earliest form of the biblical records were found) If God was to give a history....
The accounts of genesis had to be given in terms that goat herders could accept and understand...and as with children, as we grow and mature, our understanding can become more detailed.
Now that we as a race have advanced intelectually....it is not necessary to limit our understanding of planetary history to the understanding in our infancy....I figure maybe all of the evidence of the former history is yet one more adventure in new lessons to be learned beyond the understanding of our ancestorors ten thousand years ago.
This doesn`t negate the scriptures....they still lead up to Jesus and the two *commandments* he brought us. Love God and love your neighbor.
With so much evidence in my back yard, world history is my passion.
So no, I do not think that death came in the garden first...I do not think that the carnivors ignored the herbivors...untill Adam sinned...The evidence in my back yard says that man was killing and dying way before the genesis story.
Why would a subject that affects all of us not get more "face time"? Seems like a pretty simple question - When did death enter the world? Is the Bible silent on such simple questions?
Is the sum total of Bible knowledge actually:
Adam sinned
Man dies
Sin according to the Way is "missing the mark". Weirwille tried to explain life before adam with his convoluted Formed, Made, Created "teaching" which simple research shows these words were interchanged. (Please see the PFAL errors thread Rafael started)
Essentially saying that "soul life" in animals was not created in the 7 days of Genesis it was already in existance.
Has anyone read or heard of a better explanation for the bible's teachings on this subject?
My neighbor (a retired minister) has some great thoughts on this subject.
He believes that the bible is a great historical record of how God delt with a certain group of people during a certain era of history.
It can teach us of his attributes, his love, his willingness to work within the framework that we will allow and can understand....but it is by no means the ending of the story....
Like children, as we grow in our understanding, we are able to understand more....kind of the *seeing through a glass darkly* type of thing.
I think that sometimes we limit ourselves as Christians when we don`t continue our growth and walk beyond the scriptures of two thousand years ago.
In twi we were taught that the bible was the end all be all of Christian existance ...that our lives and growth had to be molded into the cultural norm of judean times. I think that can be extremely limiting....being governed solely by the cultural norms and the methods that God addressed the culture and people of two thousand plus years ago....to attempt to fit the interpretations of genesis into the facts of today will take a lot of torturing and twisting of the scriptures.
I see us as ever growing evolving in our walk and understanding....as long as what I am learning is never at cross purposes of the two *new* commmandments that Jesus said were important.
If you are truly interested in a deeper understanding.....you might consider researching cuniform sumarian texts....
The story of the flood, the story of the tower of babel, and many others are found there....many thousands of years older than any of the judean texts....a few of the names and facts vary, but essentially the same ...
I have read that the Judean prisoners were highly valued as scholars and were put to work translating these texts, and that this is where they supposedly got much of their history that was subsequently to be recorded as biblical history.
Their translations were limited to their understanding at the time.....reread those same records with todays understanding is fascinating.
It changes nothing of our knowledge, just increases our understanding of what could have world/universal history.
Def, I didn`t say that the bible WASN`T true....not by a long shot.....I was just saying that there appears that there might be to be more to the story than we were led to believe in twi.
1. God created a perfect man in a perfect world without death and sin - he did this about 4000 bc according to the geneaology of the bible.
Just in a cursory view there seems to be some questions that need answering. Whatever was left over from a prior time would have had to been "perfect" or all life forms would have had to have been destroyed and God started "fresh". If sin is "in the bloodstream" then why when adam sinned did animals blood get corrupted?
How could God's plan of perfect animals and man living in harmony ever have worked if animals reproduced and never died? -hey at some point that formula is UNSUSTAINABLE. Unless, someone out there is suggesting man was to care for every living thing and "cull" their numbers or that animals have a "smart sensor" that overides their instinct to breed...
I don't know... I for one am getting tired of trying to "unlock" something extra. Putting aside self-delusion, am I really supposed to find something some countless millions haven't seen??? How about the thousands upon thousands of scholars who have taught, wrote, studied their whole lives... I guess I am supposed to put 1 solid weekend into Genesis 1 and walk away with the truth? You are supposed to tell me that we are to understand those hebrew written words BETTER than they did when they were written??? That there is some extra insight that no one over the last 4000+ years found? Or better yet, that Jesus, with a perfect understanding, unlocked the secrets to these questions with perfect understanding, but didn't bother to tell any of his followers? I mean, is there really some secret understanding right in front of us we can't see? Surely something as sought after as the origins of man is not the kind of knowledge to be ....ed away and forgotten.
And just to throw the way in there - they claim that they don't put research into book form unless they know for sure. Well what does that tell you about what they know on Genesis? they don't know. they don't know. THEY DON'T REALLY KNOW.
Isn't it possible that man - even if created by God according to Genesis, could not handle even the simplest scientific explanations? What else was God supposed to say?
To me, it is getting harder and harder to accept the premises as given to me by TWI. If anyone can point me toward further info it would be appreciated.
Look right here Horse. Answers in Genesis is a Christian apologetics ministry that equips the church to uphold the authority of the Bible from the very first verse. The thousands of articles and media programs on this site answer questions about creation/evolution, dinosaurs, and much more.
I've seen their presentations, I've looked at their website and when their museum opens I'll make many regular trips there with my children.
Answers in Genesis is everything that TWI in its most highest of ideals ever aspired to be. They give simple, Bible based answers to basically every question a person has about life on this planet.
They combine the sciences, biology, palentology, archeology, chemestry, history and every other "ology" one can think of with a non-denominal, non sectarian view of the Bible, ancient texts, languages, etc al. with a $20. mil/year budget in effort to study the Bible and not PROVE, but UPHOLD its authority from the very first verse to the very last verse.
They believe:
- There was no death before Adam.
- "Dinosaurs" lived on the earth the same time as man. Genesis 1:21 -26 tells that all animal life and man was created on the fith and sixth days.
- Dinosuars are no different than any other species of animal that has become extinct in the past 6000 years.
- There are still "dinosaurs" living on earth today.
- Every skull type listed on Darwin's evolutionary chart can be found on living humans today. They have pictures and will even point out people in the audience who have "Neanderthal" or "Australopithecine," etc. skulls.
- There is no "missing link" between humans and "evolutionary ancestors."
quote:
So the conversation gets intersting now: how and why was death in the world? Was death introduced to the earth because the devil "sinned" against God?
No. There was not death prior to Adam's disobedience. "...for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Gen 2:17B
(please remember there were no scripture verses nor punctuation...they [the verse designations & punctuation themselves] carry no Godly authority.)
"Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee;" Genesis 3:18 Thorns, etc. was a result of Adam's sin, no thorns prior.
It was Adam's sin that brought forth death via Lucifer, the father of lies, & author of death. The entry of Lucifers angels
quote:
As he and his angels became more self centered and selfish and controling, sin entered and sin eventually brought forth...
...the flood of Genesis 6. The Satanic influence, more specifically when they decided to mate with human women. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. " (Genesis 6:2) Led to )V:4) "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
(v:5) And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
... which led to the flood.
- Therefore, Dinosaurs were on the Ark with the other animals. Yes; It was big enough.
- Adam had no navel, he was never connected with a mother in the womb. A navel is a scar from a nutrionary connection between a babe in the womb & the mother. Adam had no mother, he was FIRST. The mother of mankind (the rest of us) came from him. Man has one less rib....
- Carbon dating and other "accurate" dating methodology has been increasingly debunked by other equally proficient scientists.
- There are dinosaur & other fossilized remains in sedementary layers in the grand canyon.
- There are scientifically authenticated cave drawings in the US depicting men along with animals that bear resemblance to animals that look like the T-Rex and others with bird-like creatures that look like teradactyls. The drawings are post-flood, as evidenced by artifacts, & other scientific eveidence. The conclusion supports dinosaurs surviving the flood.
- There are recent discoveries of dinosaur DNA found in bones that more accurately allows for aging and also matches animals living today.
- There are plants listed in books as extinct and they have fossilzed remains of that they have found living today. Not extince.
- It doesn't take millenia to make fossils, it takes only like, weeks or months, (check their website. They have step by step experiments, you can make your own.)
- Lucy is a hoax.
- There is NO evidence that the earth has existed for millions of years. The recent independant, unreligious scientifically "approved" theory is that the Earth is aproximately 6000 years old. A careful study of biblical geanologies puts Adam living about 6000 years ago. (The Earth is a few days older than Adam.)
quote:
We have found evidence in our creek bed of the earliest life forms that crawled on the ocean bottoms...different plants, shells .. a crab, our neighbors have trillobites....further up the hill we have found dinosaur tracks and fossils that tell of life and death hundreds of millions of years ago...higher up we have found a three toed horse tooth giving evidence of the life cycle of mammals
The entire planet was the ocean bottom during the flood. That stuff was you mentioned, Rascal, has been more recently found to support the flood and debunks the 25 million years ago thing.
TWI was in fact mistaken. God did give an very detailed history. The Bible. We have not advanced intelectually as the human race. We have deteriorated. Humans once could read the entire word of God in the Stars. The Zoarostrians were good enough at it that they were able to come look at the stars and come to where & when the messiah was born.
Answers in Genesis' website shold be a really fum playground for you Rascal. There is tons of stuff, new discoveries, revised older thinking on all of this stuff. More & more & more scientists are "finding" stuff that only fits with what was written in the Bible.
It is so simple.
You can read the truths from Genesis in English and get a LOT further with it than TWI led us to believe. Answers in Genesis actually covers TWI's Genesis belief in their seminars although not referring to any specific group. They speak of beliefs , belief systems, and simpley put all this stuf together and compare it with what the Bible says. They do get in to ancient languages some. but the eveindence is IVERWHELIMINGLY in FAVOR of the Bible.
Check out their website for a time & place near you where you can take in their seminars, lectures, discussion groups, etc. Its FREE.
They give answers to questions like;
When did the dinosaurs die? - - When they died.
They get into it and give you about six HOURS over two consecutive days of proof, historical, scientific, visual, and Biblical. ALL of it fits.
Sorry for the length, but I get really jazzed by this stuff.
I'm wondering if life can exist independant of death anyway. How can our biological systems function if cells never died? Even the food we eat has to be a product of something that died.
Just taking this to its logical conclusion if we are going to accept that there was a time when death was not present due to no sin.
If you are defining "blind denial" as denying the truth of something in the face of evidense to the contrary they're both bad.
Not believing something for which there is no objective evidense is different.
How do you define objective evidence? Science proposes the theory of evolution then offers any evidence as proof. When a contrary theory is developed, it is shot down as unscientific.
Mostly, I grow weary of George Aar's reflexive denials and condemnations of anyone who believes. His basic argument is ridicule and regret, he offers no substantive arguments.
I might ask him when he was in church, did he live thinking God was working for him or was he genuinely striving to give God glory?
That which can be measured and quantified, and can be detected outside of an individuals perceptions.
For example, something that would not be objective evidence: If I perceived that fairies were communicating with me, but their words were not audible to anyone but me, and they were not visible to anyone but me, there is no objective evidence for thyeir existance. There is also no proof that they DON'T exist either. For that matter, if in addition to me, you, Raf, and pawtucket, and twenty other people communicated with these fairies, then there still would be no objective evidence, because there would be no way to show those who didn't communicate with the fairies that we had.
quote:
Science proposes the theory of evolution then offers any evidence as proof. When a contrary theory is developed, it is shot down as unscientific.
I doubt either of us is fully conversant in what evolutionary theory claims in its entirety (I don't anyway :D-->), but what evolutionary scientists claim is that the theory fits the evidence, as new evidence becomes known, the theory is modified to fit the new evidence. Maybe we'll disagree on this, but "contrary theories", which by which I assume you mean "creation", don't fit the evidence. Doesn't mean that they're not true, but there isn't much beyond scripture to back them up.
quote:
Mostly, I grow weary of George Aar's reflexive denials and condemnations of anyone who believes. His basic argument is ridicule and regret, he offers no substantive arguments.
I can see where, as a believer, you might feel this way, but could you offer a "substantive argument" as to why I don't communicate with fairies?
If you want a detailed deconstruction of the theory of evolution, read "Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution" by Michael J. Behe. Behe is a biochemist who methodically points out how the complexities of biochemistry make the Darwinian theory impluasible if not impossible.
As for the idea that scientists will readily discard a theory that doesn't fit the facts; I think that's true unless such action gives credence to the Bible. I have seen documentaries that touch on this, and of course, the Answers in Genesis people can give you quotes by Harvard professors that state it plainly. There is an antiCreationist camp deeply entrenched in the fields of science and education that supresses the objective reevaluation of Darwinian thinking.
...and remember that one of the world's most prominent atheists just renounced Atheism based on scientific evidence. He said his thorough investigation of the facts that are now known and accepted about our world and universe make it illogical to continue to deny the existence of an intelligent Creator.
I know this thread isn't about atheism, but I think that's relevant.
Thanks for the book recommendation...I'll look it up.
There's scientists who are atheists, and there are scientists who are believers, you get religious beliefs (or anti-religious beliefs) mixed in with what either group says.
We haven't interacted much Jerry, but just so you know, I'm not an atheist, but neither do I accept the bible as necessarily true either.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
22
39
27
33
Popular Days
Apr 11
31
Apr 8
24
Apr 9
19
Apr 13
18
Top Posters In This Topic
Jbarrax 22 posts
TheSongRemainsTheSame 39 posts
LG 27 posts
HCW 33 posts
Popular Days
Apr 11 2005
31 posts
Apr 8 2005
24 posts
Apr 9 2005
19 posts
Apr 13 2005
18 posts
Ham
Very interesting question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dabobbada
Actually, Lucifer, the angel of the manifested power of God, was the ruler of the first earth. As he and his angels became more self centered and selfish and controling, sin entered and sin eventually brought forth death.
So Lucifer became death and is death.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
InternationalSkiier
Dudes - I got the answer on this one. Ok...this is what I heard, I heard that when the horned red dude got kicked out of heaven, instead of being kicked out to Mars, Pluto, or another galaxy, he was kicked to Earth (why? I have no clue), anyway, when this happened it destroyed all the dino's. Which makes me paunder on the thought of, evil/death being introduced as a learning experience or something, It's beyond my mug. wow that was deep, too deep for me. I'm outta here, have to catch some drifts. rock out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
dude, that was way beyond (the) deep
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tomtuttle
Way deep dude, somewhere over the rainbow, in the waters outside of the heavens as it were ...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I don`t know.....there have many different *die outs* different epochs in world history.
From the trillobites to the great mammals...
Life has been evolving and dying for millions of years....
We have found evidence in our creek bed of the earliest life forms that crawled on the ocean bottoms...different plants, shells .. a crab, our neighbors have trillobites....further up the hill we have found dinosaur tracks and fossils that tell of life and death hundreds of millions of years ago...higher up we have found a three toed horse tooth giving evidence of the life cycle of mammals 25 million years ago....
Finally while digging a pool, we found evidence of old campfires, bones from animals that had been processed, broken flint spears....even a stone hoe...the age of these relics gives evidence to life and death tens of thousands of years before the genesis story of when life and consequently death supposedly arrived on this planet.
I think TWI might have been mistaken in it`s teaching of the chronolgy of life and the arrival of death.
Consider this....that when you have to give an explanation to a young child, you have to give it in terms and concepts that they can grasp.
Think about the mentality of the judean people, ten thousand years ago... or even earlier ... the sumerian people which is where many of the earliest form of the biblical records were found) If God was to give a history....
The accounts of genesis had to be given in terms that goat herders could accept and understand...and as with children, as we grow and mature, our understanding can become more detailed.
Now that we as a race have advanced intelectually....it is not necessary to limit our understanding of planetary history to the understanding in our infancy....I figure maybe all of the evidence of the former history is yet one more adventure in new lessons to be learned beyond the understanding of our ancestorors ten thousand years ago.
This doesn`t negate the scriptures....they still lead up to Jesus and the two *commandments* he brought us. Love God and love your neighbor.
With so much evidence in my back yard, world history is my passion.
So no, I do not think that death came in the garden first...I do not think that the carnivors ignored the herbivors...untill Adam sinned...The evidence in my back yard says that man was killing and dying way before the genesis story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horse Called War
Rascal - great comments -
Why would a subject that affects all of us not get more "face time"? Seems like a pretty simple question - When did death enter the world? Is the Bible silent on such simple questions?
Is the sum total of Bible knowledge actually:
Adam sinned
Man dies
Sin according to the Way is "missing the mark". Weirwille tried to explain life before adam with his convoluted Formed, Made, Created "teaching" which simple research shows these words were interchanged. (Please see the PFAL errors thread Rafael started)
Essentially saying that "soul life" in animals was not created in the 7 days of Genesis it was already in existance.
Has anyone read or heard of a better explanation for the bible's teachings on this subject?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
My neighbor (a retired minister) has some great thoughts on this subject.
He believes that the bible is a great historical record of how God delt with a certain group of people during a certain era of history.
It can teach us of his attributes, his love, his willingness to work within the framework that we will allow and can understand....but it is by no means the ending of the story....
Like children, as we grow in our understanding, we are able to understand more....kind of the *seeing through a glass darkly* type of thing.
I think that sometimes we limit ourselves as Christians when we don`t continue our growth and walk beyond the scriptures of two thousand years ago.
In twi we were taught that the bible was the end all be all of Christian existance ...that our lives and growth had to be molded into the cultural norm of judean times. I think that can be extremely limiting....being governed solely by the cultural norms and the methods that God addressed the culture and people of two thousand plus years ago....to attempt to fit the interpretations of genesis into the facts of today will take a lot of torturing and twisting of the scriptures.
I see us as ever growing evolving in our walk and understanding....as long as what I am learning is never at cross purposes of the two *new* commmandments that Jesus said were important.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
If you are truly interested in a deeper understanding.....you might consider researching cuniform sumarian texts....
The story of the flood, the story of the tower of babel, and many others are found there....many thousands of years older than any of the judean texts....a few of the names and facts vary, but essentially the same ...
I have read that the Judean prisoners were highly valued as scholars and were put to work translating these texts, and that this is where they supposedly got much of their history that was subsequently to be recorded as biblical history.
Their translations were limited to their understanding at the time.....reread those same records with todays understanding is fascinating.
It changes nothing of our knowledge, just increases our understanding of what could have world/universal history.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Of course it could be that the Bible is true. The flood is a common theme among ancient cultures, why can't it be true.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Def, I didn`t say that the bible WASN`T true....not by a long shot.....I was just saying that there appears that there might be to be more to the story than we were led to believe in twi.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horse Called War
Ok, so... don't we only have so many choices?
1. God created a perfect man in a perfect world without death and sin - he did this about 4000 bc according to the geneaology of the bible.
Just in a cursory view there seems to be some questions that need answering. Whatever was left over from a prior time would have had to been "perfect" or all life forms would have had to have been destroyed and God started "fresh". If sin is "in the bloodstream" then why when adam sinned did animals blood get corrupted?
How could God's plan of perfect animals and man living in harmony ever have worked if animals reproduced and never died? -hey at some point that formula is UNSUSTAINABLE. Unless, someone out there is suggesting man was to care for every living thing and "cull" their numbers or that animals have a "smart sensor" that overides their instinct to breed...
I don't know... I for one am getting tired of trying to "unlock" something extra. Putting aside self-delusion, am I really supposed to find something some countless millions haven't seen??? How about the thousands upon thousands of scholars who have taught, wrote, studied their whole lives... I guess I am supposed to put 1 solid weekend into Genesis 1 and walk away with the truth? You are supposed to tell me that we are to understand those hebrew written words BETTER than they did when they were written??? That there is some extra insight that no one over the last 4000+ years found? Or better yet, that Jesus, with a perfect understanding, unlocked the secrets to these questions with perfect understanding, but didn't bother to tell any of his followers? I mean, is there really some secret understanding right in front of us we can't see? Surely something as sought after as the origins of man is not the kind of knowledge to be ....ed away and forgotten.
And just to throw the way in there - they claim that they don't put research into book form unless they know for sure. Well what does that tell you about what they know on Genesis? they don't know. they don't know. THEY DON'T REALLY KNOW.
Isn't it possible that man - even if created by God according to Genesis, could not handle even the simplest scientific explanations? What else was God supposed to say?
To me, it is getting harder and harder to accept the premises as given to me by TWI. If anyone can point me toward further info it would be appreciated.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Look right here Horse. Answers in Genesis is a Christian apologetics ministry that equips the church to uphold the authority of the Bible from the very first verse. The thousands of articles and media programs on this site answer questions about creation/evolution, dinosaurs, and much more.
I've seen their presentations, I've looked at their website and when their museum opens I'll make many regular trips there with my children.
Answers in Genesis is everything that TWI in its most highest of ideals ever aspired to be. They give simple, Bible based answers to basically every question a person has about life on this planet.
They combine the sciences, biology, palentology, archeology, chemestry, history and every other "ology" one can think of with a non-denominal, non sectarian view of the Bible, ancient texts, languages, etc al. with a $20. mil/year budget in effort to study the Bible and not PROVE, but UPHOLD its authority from the very first verse to the very last verse.
They believe:
- There was no death before Adam.
- "Dinosaurs" lived on the earth the same time as man. Genesis 1:21 -26 tells that all animal life and man was created on the fith and sixth days.
- Dinosuars are no different than any other species of animal that has become extinct in the past 6000 years.
- There are still "dinosaurs" living on earth today.
- Every skull type listed on Darwin's evolutionary chart can be found on living humans today. They have pictures and will even point out people in the audience who have "Neanderthal" or "Australopithecine," etc. skulls.
- There is no "missing link" between humans and "evolutionary ancestors."
No. There was not death prior to Adam's disobedience. "...for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Gen 2:17B
(please remember there were no scripture verses nor punctuation...they [the verse designations & punctuation themselves] carry no Godly authority.)
"Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee;" Genesis 3:18 Thorns, etc. was a result of Adam's sin, no thorns prior.
It was Adam's sin that brought forth death via Lucifer, the father of lies, & author of death. The entry of Lucifers angels
...the flood of Genesis 6. The Satanic influence, more specifically when they decided to mate with human women. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. " (Genesis 6:2) Led to )V:4) "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
(v:5) And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
... which led to the flood.
- Therefore, Dinosaurs were on the Ark with the other animals. Yes; It was big enough.
- Adam had no navel, he was never connected with a mother in the womb. A navel is a scar from a nutrionary connection between a babe in the womb & the mother. Adam had no mother, he was FIRST. The mother of mankind (the rest of us) came from him. Man has one less rib....
- Carbon dating and other "accurate" dating methodology has been increasingly debunked by other equally proficient scientists.
- There are dinosaur & other fossilized remains in sedementary layers in the grand canyon.
- There are scientifically authenticated cave drawings in the US depicting men along with animals that bear resemblance to animals that look like the T-Rex and others with bird-like creatures that look like teradactyls. The drawings are post-flood, as evidenced by artifacts, & other scientific eveidence. The conclusion supports dinosaurs surviving the flood.
- There are recent discoveries of dinosaur DNA found in bones that more accurately allows for aging and also matches animals living today.
- There are plants listed in books as extinct and they have fossilzed remains of that they have found living today. Not extince.
- It doesn't take millenia to make fossils, it takes only like, weeks or months, (check their website. They have step by step experiments, you can make your own.)
- Lucy is a hoax.
- There is NO evidence that the earth has existed for millions of years. The recent independant, unreligious scientifically "approved" theory is that the Earth is aproximately 6000 years old. A careful study of biblical geanologies puts Adam living about 6000 years ago. (The Earth is a few days older than Adam.)
The entire planet was the ocean bottom during the flood. That stuff was you mentioned, Rascal, has been more recently found to support the flood and debunks the 25 million years ago thing.
TWI was in fact mistaken. God did give an very detailed history. The Bible. We have not advanced intelectually as the human race. We have deteriorated. Humans once could read the entire word of God in the Stars. The Zoarostrians were good enough at it that they were able to come look at the stars and come to where & when the messiah was born.
Answers in Genesis' website shold be a really fum playground for you Rascal. There is tons of stuff, new discoveries, revised older thinking on all of this stuff. More & more & more scientists are "finding" stuff that only fits with what was written in the Bible.
It is so simple.
You can read the truths from Genesis in English and get a LOT further with it than TWI led us to believe. Answers in Genesis actually covers TWI's Genesis belief in their seminars although not referring to any specific group. They speak of beliefs , belief systems, and simpley put all this stuf together and compare it with what the Bible says. They do get in to ancient languages some. but the eveindence is IVERWHELIMINGLY in FAVOR of the Bible.
Check out their website for a time & place near you where you can take in their seminars, lectures, discussion groups, etc. Its FREE.
They give answers to questions like;
When did the dinosaurs die? - - When they died.
They get into it and give you about six HOURS over two consecutive days of proof, historical, scientific, visual, and Biblical. ALL of it fits.
Sorry for the length, but I get really jazzed by this stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Horse, you've committed a terrible blunder. You're not supposed to think!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
And of course there is a companion site to "Answers in Genesis":
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/default.htm
You tell me which one makes more sense, or, at least, fewer appeals to blind acceptance...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CM
--
Edited by CMLink to comment
Share on other sites
def59
Which is worse, blind acceptance or blind denial?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
How about a false dilemma?
If you are defining "blind denial" as denying the truth of something in the face of evidense to the contrary they're both bad.
Not believing something for which there is no objective evidense is different.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrtyDzn
I'm wondering if life can exist independant of death anyway. How can our biological systems function if cells never died? Even the food we eat has to be a product of something that died.
Just taking this to its logical conclusion if we are going to accept that there was a time when death was not present due to no sin.
Jerry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
def59
How do you define objective evidence? Science proposes the theory of evolution then offers any evidence as proof. When a contrary theory is developed, it is shot down as unscientific.
Mostly, I grow weary of George Aar's reflexive denials and condemnations of anyone who believes. His basic argument is ridicule and regret, he offers no substantive arguments.
I might ask him when he was in church, did he live thinking God was working for him or was he genuinely striving to give God glory?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
For example, something that would not be objective evidence: If I perceived that fairies were communicating with me, but their words were not audible to anyone but me, and they were not visible to anyone but me, there is no objective evidence for thyeir existance. There is also no proof that they DON'T exist either. For that matter, if in addition to me, you, Raf, and pawtucket, and twenty other people communicated with these fairies, then there still would be no objective evidence, because there would be no way to show those who didn't communicate with the fairies that we had.
I doubt either of us is fully conversant in what evolutionary theory claims in its entirety (I don't anywayLink to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
If you want a detailed deconstruction of the theory of evolution, read "Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution" by Michael J. Behe. Behe is a biochemist who methodically points out how the complexities of biochemistry make the Darwinian theory impluasible if not impossible.
As for the idea that scientists will readily discard a theory that doesn't fit the facts; I think that's true unless such action gives credence to the Bible. I have seen documentaries that touch on this, and of course, the Answers in Genesis people can give you quotes by Harvard professors that state it plainly. There is an antiCreationist camp deeply entrenched in the fields of science and education that supresses the objective reevaluation of Darwinian thinking.
imho
Peace
JerryB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jbarrax
...and remember that one of the world's most prominent atheists just renounced Atheism based on scientific evidence. He said his thorough investigation of the facts that are now known and accepted about our world and universe make it illogical to continue to deny the existence of an intelligent Creator.
I know this thread isn't about atheism, but I think that's relevant.
Peace
JerryB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Thanks for the book recommendation...I'll look it up.
There's scientists who are atheists, and there are scientists who are believers, you get religious beliefs (or anti-religious beliefs) mixed in with what either group says.
We haven't interacted much Jerry, but just so you know, I'm not an atheist, but neither do I accept the bible as necessarily true either.
and "I do believe in fairies, I do I do"
:P-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.