Does believing Genesis is wrong make me a bad Christian?

A nice read on Lucy:

Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds — Donald Prothero on the Oldest Human Skeleton

Hawkins said:

Thanks Stephen.

My advocate on the frozen sun is that our earth doesn't follow the orbit inside our space, it may have gone off the space orbit that it follows a path outside of our current space which gives an effect of a frozen sun. We are in another space which makes us as if we are stopped in our current space, sort of.

Even our science requires a god to justify an explanation on how we come to existence. We need a multiverse model (which is imaginary and not falsifiable) in order to produce our this universe to facilitate life to exist, including the 50 billion years window inside which life can exist in this universe with its different kind of field forces held within. With our current scientific concepts, we can only know of 5% of matters supposedly existing inside our universe. Our knowledge is in the minority in this case. Dark matters and dark energy which we cannot speculate by far is in a dominating status.

Click to expand...

True.. According to the SloMoGuys, we can see light, theres a camera in the U.S. that has a shutter speed of one quadrillionth of a seconds ie a Femtosecond.
So what about the 2 Peter 3:8 "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."
Well if Shroeder is correct, then God is at the centre of the universe, his day = 1000 of our days, and if God decided to visit Earth as Jesus did then 1000 years = 1 day. So that Biblical quote may also be correct.

NBB said:

Sure things change over time, but i don't think evolution can build brains or whatever, that stretching things too far, actually we christians shuold know that God made man, not man made man.

Click to expand...

I understand completely.. I grew up in a Church that was Fire and Brimstone.. Totally irrelevant and taught the family that God was an Evil Tyrant that Hated Sin and therefore Sinners..
I also had the same thing with everyone; God made man so don't question it.
Now at 52 years old I'm still not questioning that God made man.
What I'm trying to do is find out HOW God made man.
Especially remembering my encounter with Richard Dawkins at 6 years old.
Dawkins didn't mean to, but he confirmed that God was there in Evolution.
I keep going on about Shroeder, but that was the first since Dawkins that I saw that there could be a possible bridge between Religion and Science in Human Evolution, and Science in Earth Evolution.
I believe it could be very possible to have the flood, and only start the rainbow after the flood. One supports the other.
I have looked at When the Fall happened, what was the causes? Increased Knowledge, Death, Birth Pains, Harder Farming, Reliance on family. I think it could be possible.
Have a look at the atmosphere compared to the other neighbouring Planets, have a look at "Earth the making of a Planet" where they think we had an Snowball Earth AND a Fireball earth, where only sea creatures survived.
I think OK so Genesis say XYZ, so can I see XYZ in the Video?
Have a look at Luke 19:40 .. "39But some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Him, “Teacher, rebuke Your disciples!” 40“I tell you,” He answered, “if they remain silent, the very stones will cry out.” "
God is saying, if Christians stay silent, the rocks will shout about God.
To me, He is not saying shut up, I'll tell you when you can speak. As an 1/2 English 1/2 Aussie, I feel that being told to not question everything is very Middle Ages. Note: I said told, if you Choose not to question thats perfectly OK.
So I personally feel it is OK to question everything, and also to see if we can prove to non-Christians that the Bible "Myths" are not myths. Also Jesus said treat the Bible as like a Child. ie "Ok it says this, so it must have happened this way" - the only difference is I'm going OK so can I find proof?
I'm not an academic.. What I came here for is for people to look at what I've done with the Genesis Zigsaw and see if they can get more pieces, or tell me I didn't have the right piece
I'll post the rainbow dot point study Today.
I'm looking at summarising Genesis to Science comparison of the Flood.
I'm also looking at summarising Genesis to Science comparison of the Fall.
All may be suppositoin - All may be wrong. BUT to some people that cuts out or includes areas that can focus on the real answers.
BTW on brain development :-https://www.brainwaves.com/brain_basics.html (Note: Frontal Lobe - was the LAST to Evolve and handles - Strategy, Behaivour **** ie Knowledge of Good and Evil **** now where in the Bible does it say was gained LAST ???? Knowledge.)
I just picked this website at random, but it also backs up the Birth pains (bigger brains = harder to bear children)
I personally do think that God wants us to question everything; else God would have dumped only 10 + Commandments on us and punished us every time we failed instead of going to all the trouble of having multiple author history of the world according to God.
I want to finish my genesis jigsaw puzzle.
Cheers
Stephen

Brightmoon said:

Here’s a H neanderthalensis and a H sapiens . For a layman the obvious differences are the shape of the pelvis and the xmas tree shaped ribs of H neanderthalensis . Then there are the skulls which don’t show up well in this pictureView attachment 278347

Click to expand...

Thanks for this. Neanderthal is Right and Sapien is left? or vice versa.
NOTE: birth pains started when ape/mankind stood up and got more intelligent. "The obstetrical dilemma is a hypothesis to explain why humans often require assistance from ... needed wider hips to give birth, that these wider hips made women inherently less able to walk ... In contrast to the narrow shoulders of monkeys and higher primates, which are able to pass through the birth canal without any ..."
Also note that Sapiens have a larger % Skull and the babies are NOT self sufficient, they cannot even feed by themselves, which to me confirms the importance of Man leaving his Family and joining with wife in another family in Genesis - the kids have to be raised with constant supervision.

Andrewn said:

In Gen 6 there are "sons of god" and "daughters of people." I previously considered that Homo sapiens could be sons of God (the wise species) and that daughters of people were Neanderthals. Interesting but no proof .

Click to expand...

Andrewn
Who Are the Sons of God in Genesis 6?
Seems to present one view fairly clearly
Another view was that they are the 70 "Gods" of earth.
"The Old Testament says that the nation Israel is God's son."
But my question is: If these are called Sons of God, then What is the Son Of God (Jesus)? God says; this is my Son. So I always thought the other Sons of God were angels (because they came "down") and so there were Mighty Men. I guess they all got swept away in the Flood, apart from those that intermarried with Noah's family.

Stephen P said:

Thanks for this. Neanderthal is Right and Sapien is left? or vice versa.
NOTE: birth pains started when ape/mankind stood up and got more intelligent. "The obstetrical dilemma is a hypothesis to explain why humans often require assistance from ... needed wider hips to give birth, that these wider hips made women inherently less able to walk ... In contrast to the narrow shoulders of monkeys and higher primates, which are able to pass through the birth canal without any ..."
Also note that Sapiens have a larger % Skull and the babies are NOT self sufficient, they cannot even feed by themselves, which to me confirms the importance of Man leaving his Family and joining with wife in another family in Genesis - the kids have to be raised with constant supervision.

Click to expand...

look at the ribs . H sapiens has a squarish ribcage . H neanderthalensis has a sort of cone shaped xmas tree shaped one. If that photo was better you’d see the pronounced H neanderthalensis brow ridges on the face

Andrewn said:

In Gen 6 there are "sons of god" and "daughters of people." I previously considered that Homo sapiens could be sons of God (the wise species) and that daughters of people were Neanderthals. Interesting but no proof .

Click to expand...

I also wonder this: there were people who were bronze smiths before the flood.
Genesis 4:22 says that Tubal-cain was the "forger of all instruments of bronze and iron"
So the bronze age as we see it was BEFORE the flood.
And how the 3 fried heckles did these below appear in Egypt and South America without pre knowledge from some other civilisation?
Airplane Evidence Found in Ancient Egyptian and South American Artifacts - Guardian Liberty Voice
I'm fine with the planes resembling flying fish HOWEVER, how could they have a "vertical stabilizer" when no fish have that?
How did Noah build an Ark when Ship building was seemingly not a Shipwright?
Fantastic Voyage: How Could Noah Build the Ark?
To me, that points towards a society of engineers etc, before the Flood.
The Flood wipes out MOST evidence - but not all, and obviously Noah's family would know a bit of techo, considering they build the ark.
[Edit] Oh and by the way, the Pyramids may have been built with internal ramps and unfilled corners.
Monumental Shift | Science | Smithsonian Magazine
Cheers
Stephen

Stephen P said:

I also wonder this: there were people who were bronze smiths before the flood.
Genesis 4:22 says that Tubal-cain was the "forger of all instruments of bronze and iron"
So the bronze age as we see it was BEFORE the flood.
And how the 3 fried heckles did these below appear in Egypt and South America without pre knowledge from some other civilisation?
Airplane Evidence Found in Ancient Egyptian and South American Artifacts - Guardian Liberty Voice
I'm fine with the planes resembling flying fish HOWEVER, how could they have a "vertical stabilizer" when no fish have that?
How did Noah build an Ark when Ship building was seemingly not a Shipwright?
Fantastic Voyage: How Could Noah Build the Ark?
To me, that points towards a society of engineers etc, before the Flood.
The Flood wipes out MOST evidence - but not all, and obviously Noah's family would know a bit of techo, considering they build the ark.
[Edit] Oh and by the way, the Pyramids may have been built with internal ramps and unfilled corners.
Monumental Shift | Science | Smithsonian Magazine
Cheers
Stephen

Click to expand...

Noting: The dimensions are the perfect ratio for passenger liners. Liners only change shape to compensate for speed or engine size.
Noah only needed to build a floating, unpowered box.. With a door, and a window.
[Sigh - Edit]
How Could Noah Have Built the Ark All by Himself?

It’s not possible to build a wooden boat that size . They’ve tried . They got a boat about half that size and it sank because they couldn’t stop leaking from the boat continually flexing . Even Ken Ham’s boat-shaped building Ark was built with modern construction techniques because it would have been unsafe using Bronze or iron Age tools and techniques.

Brightmoon said:

It’s not possible to build a wooden boat that size . They’ve tried . They got a boat about half that size and it sank because they couldn’t stop leaking from the boat continually flexing . Even Ken Ham’s boat-shaped building Ark was built with modern construction techniques because it would have been unsafe using Bronze or iron Age tools and techniques.

Click to expand...

Thanks for this!
The article quotes that Noah was given 120 years to do the task. To build the ark Noah would probably have used his sons and may have subcontracted meaning that he may have been fairly rich to stop working. Just because people thought he was mad, doesn't mean they they didn't take his money..
If the golden aeroplanes are an indication IF they are valid history, then there could have been some very special engineers in those days - enough to make God want to wipe them for trying to be God.
Remember also that people, directly after the Flood built a massive skyscraper tower, so Noah's family was carrying some severe engineering skills in that ark..
Cheers
Stephen

Stephen P said:

Andrewn
Who Are the Sons of God in Genesis 6?
Seems to present one view fairly clearly
Another view was that they are the 70 "Gods" of earth.
"The Old Testament says that the nation Israel is God's son."
But my question is: If these are called Sons of God, then What is the Son Of God (Jesus)? God says; this is my Son. So I always thought the other Sons of God were angels (because they came "down") and so there were Mighty Men. I guess they all got swept away in the Flood, apart from those that intermarried with Noah's family.

Click to expand...

There is another thread about this subject, so, I'm not going to hijack this thread .

[MOVED] The Nephilim Anchor Yale

If interested, you can respond in the other thread.

coffee4u said:

Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Click to expand...

I'm a creationist (as every Christian must be) and have read some of Creation Ministries books and magazines. I think these give great evidence about the wonderful creation of God and the supreme intelligence He showed in designing every detail in every creature. I highly recommend their publications but I cannot believe in a 6000 year old earth. From my understanding, objections to Evolution are as follows:

1) The world could not have started on its own. I agree and believe God created the universe. Why couldn't He have created the universe 14 billion years ago?

2) Life could not have evolved on its own and progressed from one species to another. I agree and believe that God created different kinds of life. Amoeba did not progress to humans. Horses were created as horses, cows as cows, kangaroos were created as kangaroos, apes as apes, and humans as humans, etc.

3) The 24 hour periods mentioned in Genesis. They cannot be 24 hour periods because the 6th day in which animal and human life is created and in which we still live has been going on for 6000 years so far, according to the Bible.

4) The problem of death before Adam's Fall. This is a relatively big theological issue but I think some saints like Thomas Aquinas believed there was animal death in the Garden. So, it doesn't have to be a deal breaker.

5) Adding up ages of Adam's descendants. There are conceivably huge gaps between one generation and the next.

So, why do Bible believers have to believe in a 6000 or 15,000 year earth? I'm posting this in 2 threads. You may choose to respond in either one.

Andrewn said:

I'm a creationist (as every Christian must be) and have read some of Creation Ministries books and magazines. I think these give great evidence about the wonderful creation of God and the supreme intelligence He showed in designing every detail in every creature. I highly recommend their publications but I cannot believe in a 6000 year old earth. From my understanding, objections to Evolution are as follows:

1) The world could not have started on its own. I agree and believe God created the universe. Why couldn't He have created the universe 14 billion years ago?

2) Life could not have evolved on its own and progressed from one species to another. I agree and believe that God created different kinds of life. Amoeba did not progress to humans. Horses were created as horses, cows as cows, kangaroos were created as kangaroos, apes as apes, and humans as humans, etc.

3) The 24 hour periods mentioned in Genesis. They cannot be 24 hour periods because the 6th day in which animal and human life is created and in which we still live has been going on for 6000 years so far, according to the Bible.

4) The problem of death before Adam's Fall. This is a relatively big theological issue but I think some saints like Thomas Aquinas believed there was animal death in the Garden. So, it doesn't have to be a deal breaker.

5) Adding up ages of Adam's descendants. There are conceivably huge gaps between one generation and the next.

So, why do Bible believers have to believe in a 6000 or 15,000 year earth? I'm posting this in 2 threads. You may choose to respond in either one.

Click to expand...

. Number 1 is the Big Bang and has nothing to do with evolution

#2 scientists have evidence that common descent happened and they’ve had it for over a century with NO refuting evidence whatsoever. We even use the fact of common descent in medical research. Creationist organizations lie and obfuscate continually about this . I’m just glad my church is honest about common descent and accepts it.

Brightmoon said:

. Number 1 is the Big Bang and has nothing to do with evolution

Click to expand...

You believe the Big Bang was initiated by God. We agree about this.

Brightmoon said:

#2 scientists have evidence that common descent happened and they’ve had it for over a century with NO refuting evidence whatsoever.

Click to expand...

Common descent is an effect of speciation, in which multiple species derive from a single ancestral population. I believe one species can evolve from another species. Humans even share 60% of their DNA with corn. But I doubt the evidence that one family can evolve into another family without God's creative design. I think interbreeding experiments are informative and there is a distinction between producing a sterile offspring and producing an offspring that can mate successfully.

Andrewn said:

You believe the Big Bang was initiated by God. We agree about this.


Common descent is an effect of speciation, in which multiple species derive from a single ancestral population. I believe one species can evolve from another species. Humans even share 60% of their DNA with corn. But I doubt the evidence that one family can evolve into another family without God's creative design. I think interbreeding experiments are informative and there is a distinction between producing a sterile offspring and producing an offspring that can mate successfully.

Click to expand...

. That’s a serious misunderstanding of how species become clades . Pictures say it better that words . Animals basically start as Multicellular balls and then form tubes . The tubes grow bells and whistles like limbs and mouth parts. You see this during fetal development and in looking at the fossil record from the Precambrian this an accurate lineage of how elephants are related to pine trees. All eucaryotic organisms are related

Brightmoon said:

this an accurate lineage of how elephants are related to pine trees. All eucaryotic organisms are related

Click to expand...

Of course they are related. As I said, even humans share 60% of DNA with corn. But you cannot prove that diversification happens without God's design and you would not accept the proof from the Bible and from Intelligent design that God created different kinds / families of plants and animals. We'll have to disagree until more evidence is available.

Andrewn said:

Of course they are related. As I said, even humans share 60% of DNA with corn. But you cannot prove that diversification happens without God's design and you would not accept the proof from the Bible and from Intelligent design that God created different kinds / families of plants and animals. We'll have to disagree until more evidence is available.

Click to expand...

. I’m not an Intelligent Design advocate as I thinks it’s pseudoscience and doesn’t belong in science. as a Christian I believe that God created the universe. As someone scientifically literate, Intelligent Design is pseudoscience and has about as much validity as astrology. I guess I think of religion and science as oil and water. They don’t mix

ChristianForCats said:

Nobody can disprove what has been proven, obviously. Proof is everywhere that the whole world and all of nature evolved over billions of years, not less than a week. Mass extinctions including the biggest flood in world history are known to have occurred hundreds of millions of years prior to the existence of humans, especially homo sapiens - the last remaining species. I simply cannot for the life of me believe what the Bible says about the Creation and timing of the Great Flood, at least in terms of being the worst ever, is more accurate than what scientists discover. But in my heart I believe the Bible is God's Word and believe in miracles, so I don't want to feel like I am betraying Him in favor of sinners. Am I screwed up about my religion?

Click to expand...

No, not believing Genesis doesn't make you a bad Christian, at all, it just makes you someone who doesn't believe the word of God, period.