• 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.

First born

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,834
7,858
65
Massachusetts
✟393,972.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
maybe they were speed up before they get solidified into a solid rock. who know?
It doesn't matter what happened before they became solid rock. Radiometric dating measures the time since the rock solidified. During that time, the rock was not at a high enough temperature to turn it into an ionized gas.
and what about the DNA example?
What DNA example?
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
maybe they were speed up before they get solidified into a solid rock. who know? and what about the DNA example?

Let's use K/Ar dating as our example. No matter how fast K was decaying into Ar in the past in melted rock, it doesn't matter since all of that Ar is outgassed before the rock solidifies. When the rock solidifies it is free, or nearly free, of all Ar, and any resulting Ar captured in the rock is due to the decay of K as part of a solidified rock.
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
Sorry aman, but I really have no idea what you are saying.
Your comment strikes me as downright bizar.

I have no idea what you are talking about and I especially have no idea how it relates to the post you are responding to....

What I'm saying is that NO one can explain HOW the superior intelligence of God got inside prehistoric people and changed them into Humans (descendants of Adam) the common ancestor of ALL Humans, who was made with an intelligence like God's. Gen 3:22 Those who CLAIM another way CANNOT explain. They hide because they don't know ANY other way, except by Sex, in a population over time, to change Humans. God did and explained it in these verses:

Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, (Hebrew-Adam) for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Adam was made like prehistoric mankind in a body of FLESH when he sinned. The LORD is saying that Adam is also FLESH, just as prehistoric man was FLESH. Like today's Humans, the maximum lifespan is about 10% of what it was on Adam's Earth.

Gen 6:4 There were (intellectual) giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God (prehistoric man) came in unto the daughters of men, (Heb-Adam) and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

This happened FIRST on Adam's Earth "and also after that" on Planet Earth. You only get ONE time per planet to repeat this event. IOW, Noah's descendants (Humans) had sex with prehistoric women (descendants of sons of God) after the Ark arrived in the mountains of Ararat 11k years ago, according to empirical (testable) historic and scientific evidence.

Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

Human civilization on this Earth began in the Cradle of Civilization after the Ark arrived bringing the FIRST Humans (descendants of Adam) to this planet of people who descended from the common ancestor of Apes. Amen?
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
What I'm saying is that NO one can explain HOW the superior intelligence of God got inside prehistoric people and changed them into Humans . . .

I had to only go this far. You already lost the argument Aman. If you want to claim that there is a "superior intelligence of God inside prehistoric people" you need to prove that that supposed intelligence exists. You need to prove that our intelligence is special. And the fact that we may be more intelligent than other species does not "prove" that it came from God.

Once you do that we can discuss your other errors.
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
There were (intellectual) giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God

I say, a bit careless of the biblical authors to miss out that all imporatant adjective, wasn't it? It's a good job you came along to correct their sloppy error, otherwise where would the rest of us been?
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
I had to only go this far. You already lost the argument Aman. If you want to claim that there is a "superior intelligence of God inside prehistoric people" you need to prove that that supposed intelligence exists. You need to prove that our intelligence is special. And the fact that we may be more intelligent than other species does not "prove" that it came from God.

Once you do that we can discuss your other errors.

Sure it comes from God, since ONLY those who descended from Adam, who was made with an intelligence like God's Gen 3:22 are Humans. That is WHY Human intelligence is the highest form of intelligence on this Earth. IF you are really interested in seeing where it came from read Gen 4:17-22 about the technology on Adam's Earth BEFORE it happened on our planet. It's the record of Cain's descendants who had modern technology with little or NO evolution:

Gen 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. Gen 4:18 And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.
Gen 4:19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. Gen 4:20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. Gen 4:21 And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ. Gen 4:22 And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.

Human technology is a result of Adam's (mankind's) higher intelligence than ANY other living creature. No evolution required.
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
I say, a bit careless of the biblical authors to miss out that all imporatant adjective, wasn't it? It's a good job you came along to correct their sloppy error, otherwise where would the rest of us been?

I added that to show the context of the verse.

Gen 6:4 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.

Today's Humans are the intellectual giants or children of the sons of God (prehistoric people) and daughters of men (Adam). We are intellectual, instead of physical giants, except to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] ants and other really small creatures, UNLESS you can provide another meaning but I won't hold my breath. God Bless you
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,144
✟349,292.00
Faith
Atheist
So, physicists absolutely know for a fact that there are no external sources of weak force interacting with isotopes that could influence their lifetimes? Is this the case even though neutrinos have a mean free path of one light-year in lead, and are the fundamental particles for weak force (radiation/decay)?
The weak force is only effective at very short (sub-atomic) range. W and Z bosons are the force carriers, not neutrinos. Neutrinos interact through the weak force.

So no.
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
I added that to show the context of the verse.

Gen 6:4 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.

Today's Humans are the intellectual giants or children of the sons of God (prehistoric people) and daughters of men (Adam). We are intellectual, instead of physical giants, except to [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] ants and other really small creatures, UNLESS you can provide another meaning but I won't hold my breath. God Bless you

Meaning? Well, in every modern translation, instead of "giants" it reads "Nethilim", so with your emendation it would read "intellectual Nethilim". Furthermore, although "intellectual giants" may be idiomatic English, it is far from clear that it would be idiomatic Hebrew.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,405
8,144
✟349,292.00
Faith
Atheist
What I'm saying is that NO one can explain HOW the superior intelligence of God got inside prehistoric people and changed them into Humans (descendants of Adam) the common ancestor of ALL Humans, who was made with an intelligence like God's. Gen 3:22 Those who CLAIM another way CANNOT explain.
They can't explain it because there's no evidence that such a thing ever happened. The evidence indicates that intelligence evolved slowly over a long period.

They hide because they don't know ANY other way, except by Sex, in a population over time, to change Humans.
You mean evolution? Yes, that would do it.
 
Upvote 0

JoeP222w

Well-Known Member
Nov 5, 2015
3,360
1,748
57
✟92,175.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Can anyone provide physical evidence of the first mammal that was born? What was the mother (species) and what was the father (species) Not interested in speculation, conjecture, beliefs, I am looking for something that can stand up to a challenge?

Up front, I do not believe anyone can provide such evidence but I have been wrong before and this may be one of those times, time will tell.

The Bible is silent on this, so any answer would be pure speculation. Any other source of information would likewise be pure speculation.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Sure it comes from God,

I stopped here. If you want to claim this you need evidence for this. The Bible is not evidence for God any more than the Koran is evidence for Allah. Or the Hindu writings are evidence for Brahma.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,665
29,270
Pacific Northwest
✟817,966.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Meaning? Well, in every modern translation, instead of "giants" it reads "Nethilim", so with your emendation it would read "intellectual Nethilim". Furthermore, although "intellectual giants" may be idiomatic English, it is far from clear that it would be idiomatic Hebrew.

Minor correction, nephilim not nethilim;

Added info: From the root naphal, a verb meaning "to fall", by extension, "to bring down", "to lie", as in to be driven downward, thus can refer to collapsing, falling down, laying down, or figuratively to bring down, to destroy, etc. Thus nephilim means something like "fallen ones", who are identified as "the mighty ones which were of old, people of renown", hence these weren't "giants" (even though the LXX translates it as gigantes), rather these "fallen ones" are (or rather were) some legendary mighty people. The word is used again to describe the people of Ai, and later the Philistine champion, Goliath of Gath (both are described for being impressive, with Goliath measuring around 6'9" or a little over 2 meters, standing well above the average male height for the time/location).

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,522
2,609
✟102,963.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Who else could they marry and have children with since there were NO other Humans for Noah's grandsons to marry when the Ark arrived? Like Cain, on Adam's Earth, they married and had children with the prehistoric people who descended from Water on the 5th Day. Gen 1:21 Science AGREES and the bones of these people are found all over our Earth for Millions of years BEFORE the Ark arrived, 11,000 years ago...and they could have children with Humans (descendants of Adam). Gen 6:1-4
-_- the DNA of people thousands of years farther in the past than you claim the arrival of the Ark is recognizably DNA belonging to our species. By your claims of interbreeding at about 11 thousand years ago between "true humans" and "prehistoric peoples", DNA prior to and after that key time period should be notably different. Furthermore, DNA of "true humans" should have been discovered by now, and it hasn't.

However, the truth of the matter is, even if you tripled the number of "true humans" on the ark, and all of them maintained lineages, the resulting interbreeding would have been entirely inconsequential to the genetics of the "prehistoric people" population. The number is too few to actually impact their evolution at all. So, even if Noah and the rest of his family were extremely prolific, by this point, their genetic contribution would be so watered down that modern humans would essentially be these "prehistoric peoples", not Noah's species or even a defined hybrid species.



Every living creature on planet Earth came from L.U.C.A. or the Last universal common ancestor, which was created from Water exactly as Gen 1:21 states. It's proof of God since no man who lived 3k years ago could have gotten that one so scientifically correct.
No, the bible says "things that moveth" come from water. It specifies that, implying that either biblical authors didn't know of animals that don't move, or that the bible is entirely missing where non-moving animals come from.

In order for you to claim that "the bible, science, and history do not conflict" does not demand that you fill in theological gaps with science and pretend that the bible doesn't have these gaps. The bible says nothing of the nature of electricity, of atoms, or even that galaxies exist. The bible isn't long enough to cover everything.

However, any time you claim that the bible does mention something, you have to back it up with verses that specify the topic. Mentioning that stars exist is not the same as stating that galaxies exist, for example.



Noah's descendants were Humans and they did NOT want to be scattered among the prehistoric people all over the Earth...BUT...the Lord knew it was the correct way to produce the 7.4 Billion Humans alive today so.
The explicit reason people were scattered was to actually harm humanity and it's potential for progress: 5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 6 The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

There's absolutely NOTHING suggesting the events at Babel benefited humanity in the long run. Logically, creating multiple languages wouldn't benefit humanity, aside from sign language for the deaf and mute, and braille as a written language for the blind. Those languages were definitively made by us, not any god.



Sure, but it took them thousands of years whereas the Lord scattered Humanity all over the Earth, including Australia, at about the same time.
Wrong, our species was already present in Australia over 40 thousand years ago. People had long since spread around by 10-11 thousand years ago.

After Noah's descendants mixed with prehistoric people, they learned to grow food and settle down. Adam farmed with NO evolution.
-_- technology and innovation aren't a part of evolution. People in the 1500s were not "less evolved" than modern people on account of less advanced technology. Furthermore, the start of farming is estimated at 12,000 years ago, which falls 1000 years before Noah's arrival, according to you.


History calls the area SW of Lake Van, Turkey, the Cradle of Civilization on this Earth. Farming, city building and EVERY other trait of modern Humans came from the Fertile Crescent which began in Northern Mesopotamia, the land between the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.
Incorrect. Farming techniques and what is farmed varied significantly by region, and people that lived in North America were isolated from the people in the Fertile Crescent before farming began. Another way genetics counter your claims: the slight variations of human races. If people had been spread around about 10,000 years ago, there would have been significant genetic mixing at this time. Yet, our genes indicate otherwise.




Not so, since they were made for each other. His kinds (Jesus) and Their kinds (Trinity) CAN have children together as Gen 6:1-4 states. Another scientific proof of the Literal God.
Genesis never names "prehistoric peoples", so your claims about them are empty from a theological perspective. That it names that "moving animals" exist is not specific enough to back your claim.


Some falsely accuse me of being a racist unless I agree that ALL people on planet Earth today are Humans (descendants of Adam). I know of NO prehistoric people alive on planet Earth today, so I agree. ALL Humans today are a combination of His Jesus kinds (Humans) and Their kinds (prehistoric people) who came from Water.
So you are just going to ignore that not every human on this planet has genes indicating hybridization with other species and that this directly contradicts your claim that the intelligence within all modern humans is the result of such hybridization.


I know and the sons of God (prehistoric people) are falsely classified as Humans which is totally false since NO prehistoric person descended from Adam.
You do not know, for you have no evidence at all by which to back your claim that people that lived more than 11 thousand years ago on this planet weren't the same species as ourselves. Even their genes match up.


The sons of God (prehistoric people) did not have the superior intelligence Adam was made with UNTIL they married and had children with Humans (descendants of Adam). It's HOW God produced the 7.4 Billion Humans alive today.
In scripture where? In science where? In history where?



Not so, since NO other living creature posts since they don't have the required superior intelligence of Adam, who was made with an intelligence like God's. Gen 3:22
-_- there are chimpanzees that write and use sign language. Most of what they like to talk about is food. Studies also have found that they understand the basic concept of currency.


There were NO Humans (descendants of Adam) on this Earth until some 11k years ago, according to History
Wrong, according to both science and history, our species has existed for at least 100 thousand years.


AND they appeared suddenly in the mountains of Ararat exactly as God told us. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE Science, History and Scripture AGREE. God Bless you
Incorrect, Ararat is too far North East of the area where agriculture actually started (if it actually began in the Fertile Cresent and not China). Your map doesn't distinguish the fact that the boundary of the Fertile Cresent expands farther than the area in which agriculture began the earliest. When agriculture started, it was in Syria or China. Ararat is in Eastern Turkey. Furthermore, you don't account for the fact that farm animals were raised before agriculture took place in the Fertile Cresent, in 13000 BCE.

Another problem: the bible claims people were scattered all over, but Judaism remained confined to a limited area. Why? The same god spread all of these people around, but only those that remained in a specific area kept worshiping this deity and documenting it? That makes absolutely no sense.
 
Upvote 0

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
80
Southern Ga.
✟165,215.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Then it would not change the date of the rock.

It seems that you do no realize that what is measured is the amount of decay after the rock has solidified. What happens before then is not what is being discussed right now.
.
You are absolutely correct, nobody posting at this point know what the subject of the OP is, you guys have managed to drag it off into the world of make believe where The Theory Evolution exists, how about getting back on subject.

I have answered the question in the OP, therefore it it up to you to refute it, and not go off talking about everything under the sun.

All of your assumption and supposition on what might have happened a bunch of years ago, doesn't amount to a pile of isotopes.

Your all to smart for each other.
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,654
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟119,577.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
.
You are absolutely correct, nobody posting at this point know what the subject of the OP is, you guys have managed to drag it off into the world of make believe where The Theory Evolution exists, how about getting back on subject.

Could this sudden outburst of indignation, on the behalf of the OP, have anything to do with the fact that you have just lost an argument? No, surely not.
 
Upvote 0

JIMINZ

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2017
6,600
2,358
80
Southern Ga.
✟165,215.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
I stopped here. If you want to claim this you need evidence for this. The Bible is not evidence for God any more than the Koran is evidence for Allah. Or the Hindu writings are evidence for Brahma.
.
Or the Scientific writings are for The Theory of Evolution.

All of you big brains speaking in this thread can't even come to a consensus of opinion.

The following is the subject of the OP, get back on subject.

Can anyone provide physical evidence of the first mammal that was born? What was the mother (species) and what was the father (species) Not interested in speculation, conjecture, beliefs, I am looking for something that can stand up to a challenge?

Up front, I do not believe anyone can provide such evidence but I have been wrong before and this may be one of those times, time will tell.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,522
2,609
✟102,963.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
.
Or the Scientific writings are for The Theory of Evolution.

All of you big brains speaking in this thread can't even come to a consensus of opinion.

The following is the subject of the OP, get back on subject.
-_- if necessary, we'll make a separate thread to continue our discussion, since it is perfectly relevant to a creation vs evolution debate subforum.

Also, we are all different people debating on different sides of the topic, so why would we come to a complete consensus? We'd just stop debating if that happened.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
.
You are absolutely correct, nobody posting at this point know what the subject of the OP is, you guys have managed to drag it off into the world of make believe where The Theory Evolution exists, how about getting back on subject.

I have answered the question in the OP, therefore it it up to you to refute it, and not go off talking about everything under the sun.

All of your assumption and supposition on what might have happened a bunch of years ago, doesn't amount to a pile of isotopes.

Your all to smart for each other.

Sorry, but since you have no knowledge at all of science you really could not properly answer the OP. If you do not understand radiometric dating many here, me included are willing to help you understand the topic. When you claim that others have made an assumption you only demonstrate your lack of education in these matters.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
.
Or the Scientific writings are for The Theory of Evolution.

All of you big brains speaking in this thread can't even come to a consensus of opinion.

The following is the subject of the OP, get back on subject.

And it was a poorly formed question since there was no "first mammal". And what makes you think that we cannot come to a consensus. Some of us will cover different aspects of this but over all we agree.
 
Upvote 0