Creationists False on Key Point

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,183
1,229
71
Sebring, FL
✟666,487.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Darwin was not the inventor of evolutionism. A person like Lamarck who published his ideas in 1800, was more likely to be, even though some ideas had already been there before that. What was Darwin? The author of a very popular book. The person that popularized the ideas.

I think that christianity weakened itself. It slowly gave way to liberalism and humanism and other stuff. Jesus Christ is the world ruler, and he has given his government to the church. When the church fails to be in authority, they cannot blame anyone but themselves for the situation.

Darwin's theory of evolution is very different from Lamarck's. Lamarck imagined that an animal wanted to change, had a desire to change. Darwin's theory doesn't depend on an animal having the intelligence or will to want anything.

It is true that the fact of species change was known before Charles Darwin. What Darwin did was propose a theory to account for the known fact that species appear to change. The many species that have become extinct have been replaced by species that are still around.
 
Upvote 0

PeterDona

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2010
742
181
Denmark
✟348,585.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
When did Jesus give the government to the church exactly.
Look up the word "Kingdom"
example,
Fear not little flock, for it is the Fathers good pleasure to give you the kingdom
You are Peter, and on that rock I will build my church (Kingdom again), and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,183
1,229
71
Sebring, FL
✟666,487.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Or one could ask why science is being used on evolution when clearly it's a faith with no empirical evidence
Science and evolution just don't mix

Don't blame religion for hating science when it's evolution being masqueraded as a science that's corrupting science

Evolution was being pushed long before Darwin wrote his book


What evidence would you accept?

Do you accept skeletons of animals as evidence?

Creationists keep telling me that there can't be a new species. In plants, new species have been observed.
 
Upvote 0

Raggedyman

The book of straw 2:26
May 14, 2016
135
33
57
Au
✟8,225.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Single
Look up the word "Kingdom"
example,
Fear not little flock, for it is the Fathers good pleasure to give you the kingdom
You are Peter, and on that rock I will build my church (Kingdom again), and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

So you have established the church as Gods kingdom, not the earth
The earth is not the kingdom, its a broken place of sin, thats patently obvious
Jesus is the rock, chief corner stone Mathew 16, was what Jesus was referring to in context, Peters words to Jesus; Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

Ephesians 2:20
"of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. ....

Matthew 21:42

'The stone that the builders rejected has now become the cornerstone. ...

Its all about Jesus, Jesus also said to Peter Matthew 16:23
But turning and seeing his disciples,
he rebuked Peter and said, “Get behind me, Satan!
Peter is no rock, a flawed sinner is all


Anyway we disagree, i think you are wrong, just have to accept we disagree
 
Upvote 0

Raggedyman

The book of straw 2:26
May 14, 2016
135
33
57
Au
✟8,225.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Single
What evidence would you accept?

Do you accept skeletons of animals as evidence?

Creationists keep telling me that there can't be a new species. In plants, new species have been observed.


As evidence of what, dead animals?

Yeah, skeletons are dead animals, no arguments there

What new species of plants are there, genetic manipulated plants, I think that proves intelligent design
 
Upvote 0

PeterDona

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2010
742
181
Denmark
✟348,585.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Anyway we disagree, i think you are wrong, just have to accept we disagree
It is a side discussion from the main theme of this thread yes.
Other (confirming) passages that spring to my mind are:
"Thy kingdom come"
"He has put us far above all principality and power" (Eph 1:21)
I think the understanding of the dominion of christians to rule over everything in prayers, and according to the working of Gods power in us, is not a widespread teaching. Some churches practise it, some dont. For my part, I draw on Curry Blake. See a little here if youre intrigued.

 
Upvote 0

Raggedyman

The book of straw 2:26
May 14, 2016
135
33
57
Au
✟8,225.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Single
It is a side discussion from the main theme of this thread yes.
Other (confirming) passages that spring to my mind are:
"Thy kingdom come"
"He has put us far above all principality and power" (Eph 1:21)
I think the understanding of the dominion of christians to rule over everything in prayers, and according to the working of Gods power in us, is not a widespread teaching. Some churches practise it, some dont. For my part, I draw on Curry Blake. See a little here if youre intrigued.



Thy kingdom come
Meaning
Your kingdom come, please send your kingdom to us as it's not here yet
Thy will be done, Gods will is something we want to come, why, because His will is not done on earth
Want to grow spiritually, closer to God, have more power in the Spirit, in healings, in wealth, in holiness
Stop sinning, read the blessings in the sermon on the mount and ask for them, grow your fruit of the Spirit.
God has called the sick and broken, not the healthy, we beg God to come and do His will

He has put us above principality and powers yet we are sinners who fail and are broken, it's a promise of the future rest. We as Christians are promised struggle against these principalities and powers of this dark world, as described. The greatest blessings described in the bible are explained in the sermon on the mount, it's not the blessings the prosperity gospel preaches, wealth of relationship in Christ of s greater than finances
As Jesus said to pilot, I am not a kin of this place.

If this planet was Gods Kingdom, why send Christ back on a white horse with a sword as described in revelation if not to take back His people from here

This earth is not Gods, God is in heaven.

Again, we disagree, just accept we disagree and try and accept why I disagree, try and understand my viewpoint

Oh your mate preaching, he missed the part where Christ was sinless and was close to the father, hence Christs amazing powers. Want power, stop sinning, want your prayers to work, stop sinning, want spiritual strength, pray for God to unleash the blessing of the sermon on the mount.
This world is going to suffer because of sin, that's a promise, the bible says so
 
Upvote 0

PeterDona

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 13, 2010
742
181
Denmark
✟348,585.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
If this planet was Gods Kingdom, why send Christ back on a white horse with a sword as described in revelation if not to take back His people from here

When Jesus says, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence."
it does not necessarily mean, that his kingdom will not rule OVER this world. It could mean only, that his kingdom is not OF this world, meaning e.g. that Jesus kingdom is not rooted in earthly matters, but comes from above. (a good government) But still, Jesus does use a strong word, "kingdom". So it must imply government, and a powerful government.

Concerning the sinless position, that is granted us when we enter into Christ, which is what we do at the baptism. Christ gives us his righteousness.

I am not much into what will happen at the end at Christs return. So I can not answer that part of your thoughts.
 
Upvote 0

Raggedyman

The book of straw 2:26
May 14, 2016
135
33
57
Au
✟8,225.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Single
When Jesus says, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence."
it does not necessarily mean, that his kingdom will not rule OVER this world. It could mean only, that his kingdom is not OF this world, meaning e.g. that Jesus kingdom is not rooted in earthly matters, but comes from above. (a good government) But still, Jesus does use a strong word, "kingdom". So it must imply government, and a powerful government.

Concerning the sinless position, that is granted us when we enter into Christ, which is what we do at the baptism. Christ gives us his righteousness.

I am not much into what will happen at the end at Christs return. So I can not answer that part of your thoughts.

Totally agree
Christs kingdom is spiritual
Christ will need to return to take back the physical and set up His new kingdom.
That is the promise and why we pray thr Lord's Prayer as discussed
 
Upvote 0

classicalhero

Junior Member
Jun 9, 2013
1,631
399
Perth,Western Australia
✟11,338.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Liberals
When I saw that the OP stated about "two creation accounts" I knew this person hasn't seriously studied the Bible, otherwise he wouldn't come up with that conclusion.
http://creation.com/genesis-contradictions
The question also stems from the wrong assumption that the second chapter of Genesis is just a different account of creation to that in chapter 1. It should be evident that chapter 2 is not just ‘another’ account of creation because chapter 2 says nothing about the creation of the heavens and the earth, the atmosphere, the seas, the land, the sun, the stars, the moon, the sea creatures, etc. Chapter 2 mentions only things directly relevant to the creation of Adam and Eve and their life in the garden God prepared specially for them. Chapter 1 may be understood as creation from God’s perspective; it is ‘the big picture’, an overview of the whole. Chapter 2 views the more important aspects from man’s perspective
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,183
1,229
71
Sebring, FL
✟666,487.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
When I saw that the OP stated about "two creation accounts" I knew this person hasn't seriously studied the Bible, otherwise he wouldn't come up with that conclusion.
http://creation.com/genesis-contradictions



“In addition to the two stories of Creation found in Gen. 1 and 2, there are accounts in Ps. 104 ...”


--Harper's Bible Dictionary under Creation
NY: Harper & Row, 1973
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,183
1,229
71
Sebring, FL
✟666,487.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
When I saw that the OP stated about "two creation accounts" I knew this person hasn't seriously studied the Bible, otherwise he wouldn't come up with that conclusion.
http://creation.com/genesis-contradictions


On two creatons accounts in Genesis, see the following.

Differing Conceptions of the
Divine Creator


Prof. Marc Zvi Brettler


“I begin with a simple question: According to Genesis, in what order were the land animals, man, and women created? This “simple” question has two different answers. According to Genesis 1:24-27, God creates the land animals (vv. 24-25), and then man and woman (vv. 26-27). However, in Genesis 2:7, God creates man, and then in v. 19 creates animals, and in v. 22 creates woman. Thus, the commonly heard idea that Genesis 2 is an elaboration upon Genesis 1, filling in various details, does not work—the two accounts tell different stories.”




Link:
http://thetorah.com/conceptions-of-the-divine-creator/
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,183
1,229
71
Sebring, FL
✟666,487.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
When I saw that the OP stated about "two creation accounts" I knew this person hasn't seriously studied the Bible, otherwise he wouldn't come up with that conclusion.
http://creation.com/genesis-contradictions


On two creation stories in Genesis, see the following chart.

upload_2016-10-15_22-58-2.png



Link:

http://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/genesis_texts.html
 
Upvote 0

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,766
991
Columbus, Ohio
✟50,619.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Another problem with Creationists is that they interpret the Bible but they don't realize that they are interpreting it. They read the Bible thinking that their interpretation is the Bible itself.

This partly explains how the Creationists blundered into claiming that Eden was removed by God. Their interpretation is that Eden was either destroyed or removed from the earth. Creationists assume that their interpretation is what the Bible says. It doesn't occur to them to check the text.

When we read something written thousands of years ago in an ancient language, there is no such thing as reading without interpretation, if there ever is.

The Creationist notion that Eden was removed does fit with the fact that we hear no more about it later in the Old Testament. On the other hand, hearing no more about it also fits with the possibility that it was never a physical reality at all.

Dr Gerald Schroeder is spot on when he says that people who debate creation almost always either do not understand the science or the bible or both.
 
Upvote 0

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,766
991
Columbus, Ohio
✟50,619.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
In the story of Noah and the Flood, the Ark lands on Mt. Ararat. Ararat is actually a range of mountains, now in Turkey. There is no doubt why Noah wound up on Mt. Ararat. The ancient Hebrews thought that Mt. Ararat was the tallest mountain in the world. The idea is that as the waters recede, the tallest mountain would be the first to be exposed. When the story of Noah was composed, Israelites thought Ararat was the tallest mountain, so it would be the first to be uncovered.

The story of Noah is about obedience, the kind of obedience that God wants. God favors the man who keeps His ways when the entire world is going the wrong way. The story ends with God laying down basic laws of morality and giving a promise for the future.

As a parable about obedience and morality the story of Noah is excellent. As a guide to geography or history it bogs down. If the Israelites had known that Mt. Everest is the tallest mountain, Noah would have landed on Everest instead of on Ararat.

A lot of assumptions going on there with no basis in fact to support those suppositions.

Scripture does not say Mt Ararat rather it says the ark came to rest on the mountains (plural) of Ararat.

Your suggestion that the mountains of Ararat were "picked" because they were the tallest that the Israelite's knew about its pure, unsubstantiated speculation.

The flood was about G-d eradicating corrupted DNA out of mankind's gene-pool to thwart Satan's attempt to prevent the Messiah from ever being born! Were told that ALL flesh had corrupted its way. Its why not only man, but everything that had the breath of life was destroyed.

Noah was a real person who lived it is NOT a parable.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: pat34lee
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,766
991
Columbus, Ohio
✟50,619.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Thanks for your interest, but I have a few problems here. You say that “nonsense,” apparently evolution wasn't discussed until the last 200 years. Yet in the last fifty years Creationists have invented all manner of nonsense no one ever heard of before, and most of it is more recent than Darwin's concept of evolution.




For instance, I have heard one Creationist speak who claimed that the waters of the Flood were kept in orbit around the earth until God willed them to come crashing down. All of this water was held in place by an invisible force field. Don't tell me this is in the Bible.
Then that person was not reading from or familiar with what scripture tells us. There is a growing body of evidence that there are VAST amounts of water below the earths crust. Recent discoveries tell us that there is more water below the earths surface than in all of the oceans combined. It is in the flood start we see where all the water came from and it was NOT from space.
Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. The flood was caused by the water below the earths surface being released and covering it.



If you believe that “all natural laws” “operate unchanged since creation,” then not all Creationists agree. Some Creationists have told me that there was no entropy before the Fall. If so, the laws of physics changed beyond recognition. All this leaves us with some basic questions which few Christians have even tried to answer. Genesis says that God created the world and said, “It is good.” Is the world still good after the Fall? Hmm.




In the same vein, some say that there were no predators before the Fall. No lions, tigers, wolves, alligators or sharks. Yet virtually all the animals we know seem to have evolved as part of a predator-prey relationship. Wolves evolved chasing deer and deer evolved running from wolves. If there were no predators before the Fall, then the animals Adam named in Eden have little resemblance to the ones we have around today.

Pure speculation without any shred of fact to back up these absurd assertions. No where in scripture does it indicate that there were not predatory animals. NO WHERE.

Just because "some" crackpots who say they are creationists hold to a particular view does not mean that creation science holds those same views.
 
Upvote 0

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,766
991
Columbus, Ohio
✟50,619.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Hello Brother in Christ, here is the funny thing, I actually figured this out Six months ago, For real, LOL. Check it out and let me know what you think, we can kick it around. You were right, God did have secrets, but the end times opened up some secrets just like Daniel said would happen. I wrote this a few months back.

"yom" is a period of time, not always a day. I have done an in depth study, of science and Religion, then I tried to merge the two together using logic. For starters, God confused us at Babel, so He doesn't necessarily want us to know all that He knows. If the Universe is 13.7 billion years old and the Earth only 4.5 billion years old, why would anyone assume the First Day was 24 Hours ? My theory is below, I am not stating it is a fact, just my deductive reasoning.

God Created the Universe in His own time frame. (There is no time in Gods realm.) Looking to the (Above) WMAP/NASA the way the Universe is Mapped by the Microwaves, then reading the Creation Story, it all fits. Anyone that thinks God was speaking of Earth Rotations (Days) seems off kilter, the Earth was not even around until the Universe was 9.2 billion years old !!

God has no time in His Realm. Causation came about with the Creation of our universe. My "TIME THEORY" is based on study not just guess work. Since the Universe was created, and Earth was Formed 9.2 billion years latter, then the first day had to be 9.2 billion years Old.................................BECAUSE

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and Darkness was on he face of the deep. (See Map above) And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

{{ Notice, the Earth was void and without form, that is because God only Spoke it into Creation, it actuality it took 9.2 Billion years to form. Notice it says there was darkness on the face of the deep ? Well the WMAP/NASA Project, which has mapped out the Universe with Microwaves, says there was darkness on the face of the deep. (Big Bang, followed by Inflation, followed by Cosmic Microwave background where after 380,000 years loose electrons cool enough to combine with protons. The Universe becomes Transparent to Light. The Microwave background begins to shine. Then the dark ages/clouds of dark hydrogen gas cool and coalesce. }}

{{ The first stars appear..........Gas Clouds collapse, the fusion of Stars begin, the first of which appears at about 400 million years after the Big Bang. SO............When the Bible says Darkness was on the face of the deep, God knew exactly what was happening in the very beginning !! }}

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. {{ The First day was Darkness and Light. People have often confused this, but God is saying there was Darkness, then Light (Stars formed at 400 million years).......That was the first day. It lasted 9.2 Billion years, give or take a few million years....LOL. }}

6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. {{ How does a firmament (Heaven/Air) divide the waters from the waters ? Well, God placed waters on the Earth, and the Sky has water in the Air, that's why it Rains !! This was the Second Day, so it couldn't have Started any sooner than 4.5 Billion years ago. And the Grasses and Herbs began to appear at about 900 Million years B.C. according to my study of Science books, so the Second Day lasted from 4.5 Billion years B.C. until about 900 Million years B.C. And as God stated, that was the 2ND DAY. }}

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

{{ So, since the Grasses and herb yielding fruits came about around 900 Million Years B.C. to 800 Million years B.C. that becomes the 3RD DAY. }}

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light (SUN) to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the (MOON) night: he made the stars also. ( Which were, are and will still be created in the future, since it mentions the Stars, we know the LESSER LIGHT is the Moon, The Moon has more "Light" than all the stars combined in reality ) 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

{Seems God set the Seasons the Axis created the perfect Seasons, and that was the fourth day. Probably happened at about the same time as the 3rd day, fairly close imho. And the Sun, Moon and Stars started lighting the Earth over time when their light reached the Earth.}

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

{{ Through a study of Science books and such it is determined that the Sea Creatures have been around much longer than the Land Creatures, and that jibes with Gods account here..............About 500 Million years ago the Sea Creatures and fowl came along, and that was the 5TH DAY. It lasted until about 250 million years B.C. }}

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

{{{ Through studying Science again the land animals/creatures started showing up around 250 million years ago. So this was the 6TH day........From 250 million years B.C. until 6000 years B.C. when God created man and rested from His creation. }}}

We are now in Gods day of rest or the 7TH DAY............

This actually all fits together in Gods timeline. It can not be perfect by the numbers of course, but it is an approximation that makes more sense than an earth that is only 6000 years old. Or in believing a universe that magically appeared from nothing.

Many seem to think that man is much older than 6000 years old, I ask, why is it nor recorded in history ? Secondly, Man became man when God imparted him with a Soul, and put His Spirit in us. Any Animal created before this impartation that made us into human beings (or made us in the image of God) , was not a Human Being as we are known today. They would just be another animal, nothing more, nothing less.

Again, this is only my theory from studying both science and the bible. But I believe this to be the truth.


More importantly there is absolutely no conflict with our OBSERVED age of the universe and a literal 6 day creation!

Because time is relative based upon where it is observed.

If one is serious about creation science then one of the place to read up on this topics IRC.org Articles posted here are published by scientists. In other words, an article about TIME and Space and creation would be written by a PhD with a degree in physics
 
Upvote 0

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,766
991
Columbus, Ohio
✟50,619.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,

2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

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.

--Genesis 6:1-4 KJV




For literalists, the beginning of the sixth chapter of Genesis can be one of the most baffling chapters in the Bible. Some choose to spend time wandering in endless speculation about humans having sexual relations with bad angels but for most of us this is obviously a dead end.

There is actually a rather simple non-supernatural explanation for this passage. At one time in the past, there were those who had knowledge of the one true God. They understood God's ways. This group can understandably be called the Sons of God. There were others who did not understand God's ways. Perhaps the Sons of God were monotheists while the “daughters of men” were pagans, although Genesis doesn't spell this out.

A problem arose when members of the first group weren't careful about who they married. Men in this group married women who didn't share their religious beliefs, or whose consent to them was nominal. Or women in this group married men who didn't share their religion. In short, those who understood God's ways intermarried with those who did not. We can assume that along with intermarriage, those with the heritage of the Sons of God didn't pay enough attention to the education of their children. With every generation this knowledge of God's ways was diluted, watered down, and gradually lost.

One way that this passage is confusing is that it says that the children of these unions were “men of renown.” For literalists this sounds like Genesis is saying that there were those who had angelic blood, even though they were the product of a forbidden union. Yet it may mean simply that although the original heritage of the Sons of God was being diluted, it had not yet vanished. The “men of renown” lived at a time when morals hadn't deteriorated as much as they did later.


The Jewish people have always had a concern about intermarriage. They had this concern when the Old Testament was composed and devout Jews still share that concern today. Is it so surprising that this concern is found in Genesis?


By you sure paint things with ALL and EVERY

I am a literal and could not disagree more with your assertions.

99.99% have bought into the LIE and frankly are even unaware of it. The lie is that pre-antediluvian man was little more than caveman.

Quite the opposite is true. Adam and Eve were geniuses who produced geniuses. Eve would have been the intellectual equal of DaVinci and Einstien and would have made today's most beautiful super model look like plain Jane.

Case in point.... 2 brothers Jubal and Tubal-Cain. All Jubal did was invent music along with all of the stringed instruments along with wind instruments upon which it was played. Yeah, you've got to be insanely brilliant to come up with that. His brother Tubal-Cain somehow figured out that by heating up certain rocks they would melt and then you could produce tools made of Bronze and Iron....

We get a small glimpse of just how smart these people were. So why did the flood come? It came because G-d said that "all flesh had corrupted its way."

Now think about that..... at what point in mankinds history of being fallen has man NOT been corrupted in its way???? Answer:Man has ALWAYS been corrupted in his natural state. That being true, then the Father MUST be speaking about something OTHER than mans fallen state....

We get a second hint when Yeshua tells us that ""For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be."

Seems pretty ordinary life as usual... except that in the days of Noah "all flesh had corrupted its way."

So something more is going on here. First off, the theory that Angels left their station and slept with women is almost certainly not true. Again Yeshua states plainly that Angles are unable to procreate. We know this because when asked about who the woman would be married too after having several husbands who preceded her in death he tells them that they do not understand... and that when we are raised we like the angels will not give or be given to marriage.

The Sethian line (son born to Adam and eve after Able is murdered) is a righteous line that produces Noah. I believe that pre-flood man was manipulating both human and animal DNA and were producing corrupted beings G-d never intended exists.... as a result the human gene pool was corrupted. Satan did this in an effort to PREVENT Messiah from ever coming to man.

This was so common place (altered DNA or genetically modified humans and animals) that if you weren't you were an oddity.

All of this was orchestrated by Satan to prevent Messiah from ever coming to earth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pat34lee
Upvote 0

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,766
991
Columbus, Ohio
✟50,619.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Reply to Mark Kennedy in Post #206:

Mark Kennedy:

<< Creationists are not fighting science, that's a gross misnomer. >>


On the contrary, they do nothing else. I wish they would defend Christianity, instead they attack science. I'll give another example. Where I live, a few years ago I bought a book sold, probably at cost, by a local church, a Pentecostal church. This book is The Evolution Cruncher by Vance Ferrell. It is over a thousand pages and the Pentecostals apparently think it is the last word in the struggle against science, I mean evolution.


Instead of being the last word on the subject, Vance Ferrell sets a world record for how many mistakes can be made in one book. He leaves you wondering if he could pass sixth grade science.


As an example of the endless blunders made by Ferrell, try zebras and hummingbirds.

Ferrell says that a zebra is a type of horse.
Science says that there is one species of horse and three species of zebra.
Ferrell says that there is one species of hummingbird.
Science says that there are over three hundred species of hummingbird.


In other words, Ferrell makes incredible blunders even in matters that can be very easily checked. It's not so much that he's wrong as that he doesn't care. When you deal with creationists, you are dealing with people who put their guesses above the conclusions reached by the recognized experts. Even worse, they do this even for subjects where they have no knowledge, no experience, things they haven't spent any time on. They simply don't care what the experts think.


Mark Kennedy goes on to say that my story of a judge who says “Evolution is stupid” is an anecdote. Actually, I was able to do a refutation of the judge's absurd views that was printed in two newspapers, who considered it of general interest.


I completely disagree and when I read articles on IRC.org I certainly do NOT see what you suggests.

You are trying to lump crack pots who neither understand scripture or science with scientists who are believers and are presenting ACADEMIC arguments for creation
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,766
991
Columbus, Ohio
✟50,619.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
If the world is about 6,000 years old today then it was about 4,000 years old in New Testament times. Is that too much arithmetic for a creationist?
There are MOUNTAINS of scientific evidence that support a young universe theory.

For example, the Cassini space probe just discovered lakes and ponds of methane near the equator of one of Saturn's moons. This is impossible with a universe that is billions of years old as these methane lakes should have dried up billions of years ago.

Yet another example from Cassini, discovered frozen carbon dioxide on Iapetus, another of Saturn's moons, even though sixty-trillion tons of the carbon dioxide are lost to space during each orbit. To explain this, researchers proposed that it is replenished from below the surface or from impacts, but neither explanation has supporting evidence.

Or how about this gem....
Moving on to cosmic scales, the Hubble Space Telescope team announced in February a new record for the oldest galaxy.7 Despite being nearly as old as the Big Bang in the consensus timescale, it appeared bright and active. A member of the research team said, "We certainly were surprised to find such a bright young galaxy 13 billion years in the past."
 
Upvote 0