Mutation gives mouse poison resistance

[AV1611VET]

One further point here. It appears that, even when Mark was written (around 70 CE), Jesus was regarded as simply a man. The "son of God" reference in Mark 1:1 was not added until after the 3rd Century - the earliest manuscripts don't have it. Mark mentions nothing about Virgin birth, etc. These things are all added in later 'revisions'.....

Mark targets his Gospel to the Romans, and depicts Jesus as a servant.

Thus "straightway" is found 19 times; "immediately" is found 17 times; and "anon" is found 1 time.

Words indicative of a servant responding immediately.

 

[biggles53]

QV please:
The order of events, combining the four narratives, is as follows: Three women, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, start for the sepulchre, (wrong...John clearly indicates Mary only)followed by other women bearing spices. The three find the stone rolled away,(wrong...Matthew claims that an earthquake occurred at that time to roll the stone away) and Mary Magdalene goes to tell the disciples (wrong....Mark claims that they said "nothing to any man")(Lk. 23:55; 24:9; John 20:1,2). Mary, the mother of James and Joses, draws nearer the tomb and sees the angel of the Lord (Ahem....how many angels..?? And are you sure it was angels and not simply a "young man" as claimed in Mark..?)(Mt. 28:2). She goes back to meet the other women following with the spices. Meanwhile Peter and John, warned by Mary Magdalene, arrive, look in,and go away (John 20:3-10). Mary Magdalene returns weeping, sees the two angels (so, now it's TWO....?)and then Jesus (John 20:11-18), and goes as He bade her to tell the disciples. Mary (mother of James and Joses), meanwhile, has met the women with the spices and, returning with them, they see the two angels (Lk. 24:4,5; Mk. 16:5). They also receive the angelic message, and, going to seek the disciples, are met by Jesus (Mt. 28:8-10).
[/LIST]

Failing grade I'm afraid......despite the Olympian gymnastics, it still leaks like a sieve.....

 

[biggles53]

Neat, isn't it?

Why do I say "neat"?

It's interesting that, after the resurrection, Jesus' half-brother, James, wrote a book of the Bible, detailing how one should be able to spot a Christian a mile away.

The before-and-after change of attitude toward Jesus by His own family served as a powerful testimony of the Resurrection.

Matthew 27:54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

Gobbledygook.........so even his mother just simply lost track of the fact that she had supposedly given birth to the son of a god....? That he must have been mad to think that he could perform miracles...?

Early onset Alzheimer's for poor Mary perhaps...?

 

[AV1611VET]

Failing grade I'm afraid......despite the Olympian gymnastics, it still leaks like a sieve.....

I'm not going to address each one of these individually, especially since you didn't provide any references, and your very first "wrong" is wrong.

You said John clearly indicates Mary only, and I don't see any such thing.

Here's what John said:

John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

Show me where you get the idea: "Mary only."

 

[biggles53]

Mark targets his Gospel to the Romans, and depicts Jesus as a servant.

Thus "straightway" is found 19 times; "immediately" is found 17 times; and "anon" is found 1 time.

Words indicative of a servant responding immediately.

So, Mark uses a little 'creative licence' in appealing to a particular audience...? He shades the story in such a way as to not affront the Romans...?

Tell me again about how the Bible is supposed to be the 'Truth'.........

 

[AV1611VET]

Gobbledygook.........

Supercalifragilisticexpealidocious.

so even his mother just simply lost track of the fact that she had supposedly given birth to the son of a god....?

You been talking to Jehovah's Witnesses or something?

It's Son of God, not "son of a god."

That he must have been mad to think that he could perform miracles...?

And yet, when He performed His first miracle at Cana, Mary had this to say to those around Him ...

John 2:5 His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.

Advice you need to heed as well.

Early onset Alzheimer's for poor Mary perhaps...?

More like early onset of wisdom.

Some of us learn wisdom, the rest just consider themselves "wise man" from birth.

 

[biggles53]

I'm not going to address each one of these individually, especially since you didn't provide any references, and your very first "wrong" is wrong.

You said John clearly indicates Mary only, and I don't see any such thing.

Here's what John said:

John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

Show me where you get the idea: "Mary only."

What a joke...! So, despite the fact that all the other gospel writers, supposedly inspired by the same god to write what they did, mention MM being accompanied when she visits the tomb, we are supposed to simply 'fill in' the missing details on Mark's behalf...? The others were there, but he just didn't think it important to mention them...? And this, supposedly THE most important event in the story which defines Christianity......!?

 

[AV1611VET]

So, Mark uses a little 'creative licence' in appealing to a particular audience...?

It's called verbal plenary inspiration.

He shades the story in such a way as to not affront the Romans...?

He died for what he wrote.

The Evangelist, John Mark, was martyred in Alexandria, on March 30th, the day after Easter Sunday, in the spring of Nero's 11th year as emperor.

SOURCE

Tell me again about how the Bible is supposed to be the 'Truth'.........

John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

 

[AV1611VET]

we are supposed to simply 'fill in' the missing details on Mark's behalf...?

[The late] C. I. Scofield did it for you; and I'm sure he enjoyed every minute of it and was blessed for his work.

Serious scholars use his work for apologetics.

Atheists in high-chairs sit and whine about it.

 

[dad]

Hahahahaha....!

Ok, perhaps you can give a "stunningly accurate" answer to these couple of questions....

How many women were present when the 'empty tomb' was discovered..?
1...?....2...?.....3...?.....more...?

Why does Matthew have to correct the glaring error in Mark 1:2 if this document is "stunningly accurate"...?

That is easy. It depends on what time you mean! They did not all arrive at once.

Why, in Mark, does Jesus' family think that he is going mad when he begins preaching, driving out demons, healing, etc...? Had they just forgotten about his supposedly divine origins...!.

The same reason that it says He came unto His Own and His Own received Him not. The same reason it says a man's foes will be of his own household. The same reason a prophet has no honor in his own country.

Jesus was the eldest, so none of the other kids were even there at the events of Bethlehem.

 

[bhsmte]

One further point here. It appears that, even when Mark was written (around 70 CE), Jesus was regarded as simply a man. The "son of God" reference in Mark 1:1 was not added until after the 3rd Century - the earliest manuscripts don't have it. Mark mentions nothing about Virgin birth, etc. These things are all added in later 'revisions'.....

A lot of stuff was not in the oldest copies of the NT and were added later. The story of the adulteress, the last 10 or so verses of Mark and a variety of other things.

 

[dad]

One further point here. It appears that, even when Mark was written (around 70 CE), Jesus was regarded as simply a man. The "son of God" reference in Mark 1:1 was not added until after the 3rd Century - the earliest manuscripts don't have it. Mark mentions nothing about Virgin birth, etc. These things are all added in later 'revisions'.....

For your info, the son of man is a Messianic title from the old testament. It denotes how God would also be a man one day, born as a man. That was Jesus.


A mouse can adapt because Jesus created the first mouse kind, whatever it was, with the ability to adapt. He adapted to a human body, then adapted to an eternal raised body, as we will.

Evolution can be a scriptural thing!

 

[CabVet]

For your info, the son of man is a Messianic title from the old testament. It denotes how God would also be a man one day, born as a man. That was Jesus.

Good try, but the early text describes Jesus as a man, not the son of man.

A mouse can adapt because Jesus created the first mouse kind, whatever it was, with the ability to adapt. He adapted to a human body, then adapted to an eternal raised body, as we will.

Evolution can be a scriptural thing!

You seem to know as much about evolution as Gottservant does (which is to say less than nothing), and no, it cannot be a scriptural "thing". But again, I am glad to see that you accept the existence of beneficial mutations, something most creationists don't.

 

[biggles53]

The same reason that it says He came unto His Own and His Own received Him not. The same reason it says a man's foes will be of his own household. The same reason a prophet has no honor in his own country.

Jesus was the eldest, so none of the other kids were even there at the events of Bethlehem.

Ummmmm.........including his MOTHER......!?

You know, the one that was supposedly told by an angel that she was being impregnated with the son of a god.......she somehow just forgot all that and thought that her son was mad when he began his preaching....!?

 

[AV1611VET]

Ummmmm.........including his MOTHER......!?

You know, the one that was supposedly told by an angel that she was being impregnated with the son of a god.......she somehow just forgot all that and thought that her son was mad when he began his preaching....!?

Egypt (the world in Bible typology) can do that to you.

Matthew 2:14 When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt:

 

[biggles53]

For your info, the son of man is a Messianic title from the old testament. It denotes how God would also be a man one day, born as a man. That was Jesus.

You need to go and study that book that you say guides your life......

The original manuscripts of Mark (well, the earliest ones that we have...) make no reference to Jesus being anything other than a man. The "son of God" reference was added to Mark 1:1 centuries later....! There is no mention of a virgin birth either......this is also added later by Matthew et al. The best explanation for the addition is to cover for Jesus' failed prediction that he would reappear to his disciples "before their generation had passed away".....

 

[AV1611VET]

You need to go and study that book that you say guides your life......

So do you.

The original manuscripts of Mark (well, the earliest ones that we have...) make no reference to Jesus being anything other than a man.

You tell him he needs to study "that book," then you start yakking about "original manuscripts"?

The "son of God" reference was added to Mark 1:1 centuries later....!

Snuck all these in, did they?

Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

Mark 3:11 And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God.

Mark 5:7 And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not.

Mark 15:39 And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.

 

[dad]

A lot of stuff was not in the oldest copies of the NT and were added later. The story of the adulteress, the last 10 or so verses of Mark and a variety of other things.

So? Either they had inspired stuff that took a little longer to get in the collection we call the bible, or not! You thought God didn't allow that?

 

[dad]

The before-and-after change of attitude toward Jesus by His own family served as a powerful testimony of the Resurrection.
.

Excellent point.

 

[bhsmte]

So? Either they had inspired stuff that took a little longer to get in the collection we call the bible, or not! You thought God didn't allow that?

Time delayed inspiration of nearly 1000 years, I like that.

Nice try dad, but it was in essence, a marketing decision.