- Jan 17, 2005
- 44,905
- 1,259
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sorry you think your math really had anyone stumped.Sorry, you can't take baby steps yet.
I am very worried about your failing memory. I will remind you that you could not answer what 2 + 2 was equal to. Until we go over that idea that you ran away from there is no point in trying to answer this foolish question of yours.
No. Adam and Eve really lived. Whatever debunked them in your head is a delusion.
Ha. Well, genetics could not have been the same in the former nature. Adam and Eve had kids...the kids must have had more children with each other, where else could they come from? That means genetics were different. God knew that. He later made special laws prohibiting such a thing! The evidence mounts. There was also the fast evolving, long life spans and etc that strong suggest a different former nature.Technically speaking, there had to have been a sort of "first generation" of what would be considered modern humans, but whether or not there were only two, seeing as it takes at least 50 humans to have enough genetic variation to support a viable population, 2 wouldn't have been enough, but many people state that there were other humans around and that Adam and Eve were just special in some way.
Btw, liking your new avatar dad, it suits you.
Ha. Well, genetics could not have been the same in the former nature. Adam and Eve had kids...the kids must have had more children with each other, where else could they come from? That means genetics were different. God knew that. He later made special laws prohibiting such a thing! The evidence mounts. There was also the fast evolving, long life spans and etc that strong suggest a different former nature.
One cannot use present state genetics to trace life back to former state folks.
The whole resulting model from such an exercise would be fiction...such as the primordial utterances of science so called on Adam and Eve!
I would today. But I don't in a different nature if God planned it that way.You don't find the idea of constant inbreeding disturbing?
I would today. But I don't in a different nature if God planned it that way.
I would today. But I don't in a different nature if God planned it that way.
By the way when I hear the phrase constant inbreeding I think right away of the claims of so called science. In box..inbred..circular fantasies.
God tells us stuff by His word. He already lowered the gavel on that, thankfully. In this state it is a bad thing.So if you were told by god to have intercourse with your sister, you wouldn't be bothered by it (I assume, considering it is god telling you to do it, that you would) a little?
Right, science assumes present state laws, then makes models based on those and round we go.Circular fantasies? What?
God tells us stuff by His word. He already lowered the gavel on that, thankfully. In this state it is a bad thing.
Right, science assumes present state laws, then makes models based on those and round we go.
Ha. Well, genetics could not have been the same in the former nature. Adam and Eve had kids...the kids must have had more children with each other, where else could they come from? That means genetics were different. God knew that. He later made special laws prohibiting such a thing! The evidence mounts. There was also the fast evolving, long life spans and etc that strong suggest a different former nature.
One cannot use present state genetics to trace life back to former state folks.
The whole resulting model from such an exercise would be fiction...such as the primordial utterances of science so called on Adam and Eve!
I look at it more as God knowing what is good and what is harmful, and making rules for men accordingly.I don't recall a biblical verse that condemns inbreeding. Considering the practice only ended relatively recently, I can't imagine there is one (the practice as a normal thing, that is).
No, why assume God is a liar? The future is different too! Ho humEvolutionary rates were faster, genetics were different? And from other creationists I hear radioactive decay rates were different as were tectonic plate movements, the heights of mountains and carnivores diets etc. Would it not be more parsimonious to assume the Genesis story is not historical?
They are hooped! If all they use is the present they cannot go back accurately beyond this state, and even to some degree near the years after the change.If those models could, say, make a prediction about something in the past correctly, so far back that it would have to be in what you consider to be the prior state, would that validate consistency in state?
I look at it more as God knowing what is good and what is harmful, and making rules for men accordingly.
Le 18:11 -The nakedness of thy father's wife's daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.
Le 18:12 -Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy father's sister: she is thy father's near kinswoman.
Le 18:13 -Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy mother's sister: for she is thy mother's near kinswoman.
Le 18:18 - Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her life time.
Le 20:17 -And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing;
They are hooped! If all they use is the present they cannot go back accurately beyond this state, and even to some degree near the years after the change.
Those were just some fast googled examples of relatives and the no sex thing.I am concerned, those only state two siblings can't marry or a child can't marry its aunt or uncle. It doesn't say that parents can't take their own children as wives, nor does it say anything about cousins. Physically speaking, the closest you can be as far as by blood to a person without most of the risks of inbreeding is second cousin. And even that is pushing it.
Those were just some fast googled examples of relatives and the no sex thing.
You have to be a bit more specific. The "dust" of the Earth is not what life arose from.
And the dust of the Earth may not react strongly, but it is far from inert.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?