Humans did NOT evolve from Apes...

[Aman777]

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

God's first act of creation was to create a mass of [sea] water into the hollow of His hand.

Isaiah 40:12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?

I say sea water, because all the natural elements in the periodic table are found in sea water.

Amen. Each person is given a different understanding by the Holy Spirit. Thanks for sharing your's.

*** I'm not sure which heaven is meant in that verse (since there are three of them) ...

2 Corinthians 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, ( whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth; ) such an one caught up to the third heaven.

... but it is either Heaven proper, or outer space.

Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void;

He called it "Earth," and it was at first "formless and void," since it was nothing but sea water sloshing around in the palm of His hand, and it was void of life.

I prefer to think of heaven as one of the first elements which God created for Jesus to shape into physical matter. I see the Multiverse as Eternity, where God lives, where one city is 1500 miles square including in height. Eternity is where Adam's firmament/heaven was placed in the midst of water on the 2nd Day. Gen 1:8

This is BEFORE our Cosmos was made on the 3rd Day according to Genesis 2:4 since Jesus (Lord God) made at least two temporary heavens/worlds on that Day. The 1st was Adam's and it was about 7 miles in diameter. It's Earth was only 22.5 feet in elevation on it's highest mountains. Gen 7:20 It had only 4 Rivers and they all came from one source. Gen 2:10 Adam's firmament was placed in the Water of the Multiverse, showing that it was totally self-sufficient. Gen 1:7 It was totally destroyed in the flood. 2Pet3:6

Also made on the 3rd Day was our Cosmos. Jesus took some of the air, dust, and water and "inflated it" thus, the Big Bang of our Cosmos which happened 13.7 Billion years ago in man's time. It was late on the 3rd Day since it was less than a Billion years before the first stars lit up. Astronomers have recently discovered that the Big Bang was long before the first stars lit up 3rd Day Gen 2:4 and the First Stars lit up on the 4th Day. Gen 1:16

From: ESA Science & Technology: First stars formed even later than previously thought Observations of very distant galaxies hosting supermassive black holes indicate that the Universe had been completely reionised by the time it was about 900 million years old.

Reionised is a fancy word for lit up. Scripture and Astronomers AGREE. No man who lived 3k years ago knew that because it's testable proof of God Who did.

*** God then creates gravity at some point not documented in His autobiography (the Bible), and the earth becomes a ball of sea water in the hollow of His hand.

I like to call that ball of sea water Terra Aqua.

Then God shears off a layer of Terra Aqua and balloons it out into space.

Genesis 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Genesis 1:7 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.

... and that is when Second Heaven (the atmosphere) is created.

So to put this all together, God makes three heavens (also referred to as "firmaments"), then populates them with their respective artifacts:

1st Heaven = 0-62 miles up = atmosphere = populated with terrestrial life, etc.

2nd Heaven = 63 miles-edge of universe = populated with stars, planets, moons, etc.

3rd Heaven = Heaven proper = populated with seat of Christ, Crystal Sea, the Tabernacle, etc.

Sorry, but I cannot agree since the first firmament is solid, beat out like metal and contains Adam's entire Earth. The firmament of our world is the Cosmic microwave Background which some call the echo of the Big Bang. Beyond our Cosmos, which is in the midst of dust of the ground of the Multiverse, is where God lives in a perfect physical Heaven filled with perfect physical people who live forever in Eternity, which has no beginning and no end. It's also called the 7th Day and Christians will rest (Heb-cease) from all our works there and we will celebrate with Jesus for His Creation of the perfect 3rd Heaven is now complete and death has been destroyed. 1Co 15:26 God Bless you

 

[AV1611VET]

God Bless you

Thank you, bro!

Interesting perspective you have there!

 

[dad]

Science has incorrectly classified the sons of God (prehistoric people) as Humans (descendants of Adam).

Since we have the record right till Adam, I suppose there are no prehistoric people. You seem to be calling the early remains of man, like the Neanderthal and etc 'sons of god'. That is fine for an opinion, but not fine to be called the truth of God.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Then please correct me. Show me where I have taken the verse out of context or everyone will see that you cannot. BTW, please us the KJV since most others have been ALTERED. God Bless you

Seems that the conversation has moved on, but here it is anyway:

Genesis 1:21-24
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.

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.

In verse 21, rather than everything coming from the waters we have the birds being created at the same time as the creatures of the seas, therefore not coming from the waters. And then in verse 24 the earth brings forth land animals - it's not animals coming out of the sea onto land. Context is such a pesky problem, isn't it?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Really?

Yes. You weren't aware of that?
I mean, you learn this even before high school...

God doesn't know when 24 hours are up, unless He creates the Earth and goes there?

Genesis doesn't make any mention of an "earth day". It just says "day" - and speaking from a context where earth doesn't even exist yet.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Heaven will soon be full of them.

Yes, yes... any day now....

 

[DogmaHunter]

The scripture was intended for the "inhabitants of the planet earth", the same people that would have a 24hr day as reference.

Sure. I don't see why that must mean that when the god of the entire universe speaks about a "day", it would have to be an earth day.

That is unless in all your wisdom, you think people will naturally even think about mars (well, at least one would ) when they read the account?

In all my wisdom, I instantly recognize that when an entity that does NOT live on this planet, talks about a "day" - it doesn't necessarily mean a 24 hour day.

He is not a God of confusion

I'ld say that that is debatable, seeing the ridiculous amount of different denominations - all of which have different interpretations of these, apparantly, non-confusing texts.

, however people clearly can be.

What makes you think that you're not one of them?

Worst thing about it, you don't even see how ridiculous that is.

What is ridiculous, is to take a 3000 year old text which, when taken literally, flies in the face of the actual facts of reality... and then deny/ignore the facts of reality, so you can continue believing said text.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Yet you offer no details,

Try some science. Geology, physics, biology,... none of these sciences are compatible with the creation myth of the bible as written in genesis.

The world is not young.
The universe is not young.
Extant species weren't created from scratch - instead, they evolved from a common ancestor.
The entire world never flooded.
The earth did not exist before the sun.
Etc etc etc etc.

just a nothing that we are supposed to take as wisdom?

Please don't pretend as if you don't know that the mainstream natural sciences are completely incompatible with a literal genesis account.

What does that even mean?

I don't see what's tripping you up.
You claimed that you are able to tell what parts are to be taken literal and what not.
I responded by asking if you are capable of being wrong, when identifying wich parts are to be taken literally and which not....

Well, can you? Can you be wrong? Or do you consider your particular interpretation of these texts to be completely infallible?

Because any person can ere hardly means they are prone to it.

So... is this you admitting that yes, you CAN be wrong when identifying what is literal and what isn't?

In that case, I have a follow up question for you: HOW can you find out if you are wrong or not, about that?

 

[DogmaHunter]

I appreciate your goal but we all should be humble right, and all expect to learn more, all. And in this case you will learn possibly an additional fact from verse 1 in relation to "when it talks about "the first day" - there is no planet earth." because even in an fully symbolic or figurative reading only. He created the Universe is the simply symbolic or figurative reading (most reading it only figuratively still believe He got it started), and therefore all that follows naturally, like Earth, for instance, is simply an outcome of that. Thus on even a figurative 'first day', even then, the Earth already comes into existence during verse 1 (check and see).

Then that "figurative first day", lasts some +8 billion years.

All people make mistakes. All should be humble. It's like Isiah 55 -- His thoughts are above our thoughts.

I'll just let the universe tell me the facts instead of some ancient book.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Try some science. Geology, physics, biology,... none of these sciences are compatible with the creation myth of the bible as written in genesis.

The world is not young.
The universe is not young.
Extant species weren't created from scratch - instead, they evolved from a common ancestor.
The entire world never flooded.
The earth did not exist before the sun.
Etc etc etc etc.

Still more talk, no meat.

Please don't pretend as if you don't know that the mainstream natural sciences are completely incompatible with a literal genesis account.

Not much there either. Your giving me nothing to reply to here. lol

I don't see what's tripping you up.
You claimed that you are able to tell what parts are to be taken literal and what not.
I responded by asking if you are capable of being wrong, when identifying wich parts are to be taken literally and which not....
Well, can you? Can you be wrong? Or do you consider your particular interpretation of these texts to be completely infallible?

So... is this you admitting that yes, you CAN be wrong when identifying what is literal and what isn't?

In that case, I have a follow up question for you: HOW can you find out if you are wrong or not, about that?

I already answered this, why are you asking again? How can I find out what? That was a little incoherent, but I'll try...common sense?

And why in the world would an Atheist care how anyone understands the Bible? it's all wrong to you because God doesn't exist. Or maybe I should ask you what should or should not be taken literally in the Bible? lol. See where I'm headed with this?

 

[AV1611VET]

Genesis doesn't make any mention of an "earth day". It just says "day" - and speaking from a context where earth doesn't even exist yet.

The earth was the first object that appeared in the universe, so I'm going to disagree with you on this.

The earth did indeed exist.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Still more talk, no meat.

If you are completely ignorant on the sciences of geology, biology, physics etc... then what do you want me to tell you?

Do you expect me to give you a crash course in all those sciences in forum posts?

Anyone with high school level knowledge on these subjects, would understand how the bulk of these sciences are completely incompatible with a literal reading of genesis.

Are you really going to pretend that you are unaware that the consensus of, for example, geologists and physicists, is that the earth is 4.5 billion years old, that the planet was never completely flooded and that the universe is some 13.7 billion years old?
And that the consensus within biology is that life share ancestry and that humans, as well as any other species, evolved?

Not much there either. Your giving me nothing to reply to here. lol

So... you DO pretend to be unaware of these facts....

I already answered this, why are you asking again? How can I find out what? That was a little incoherent, but I'll try...common sense?

How does "common sense" lead you to believe that genesis should be taken literally.
Walk me through it, if you please.

And why in the world would an Atheist care how anyone understands the Bible?

General interest.

it's all wrong to you because God doesn't exist.

I don't know if a god exists or not.
I just see no reason to assume or believe one does.

But that's not actually the reason I don't buy into a literal reading of genesis. The reason I consider a literal reading thereof absurd, is simply because it flies in the face of the facts of reality.

If you are asking me what I will believe: reality or some ancient book... I'll choose reality any day of the week.

Or maybe I should ask you what should or should not be taken literally in the Bible?

And my answer to that would be that as a general rule of thumb, if the facts of reality contradict a literal reading of any book, you have two options:
- you just say that the text is clearly incorrect
or
- you assume the text isn't meant to be taken literally

lol. See where I'm headed with this?

Not really, no.

I don't know what to tell you...

I'll just say that "true" are those things that correspond to reality.
So if you have a text of which the literal reading is in contradiction with reality, then either the text is simply wrong, or a literal reading is not the way to go.

You seem to be choosing for an option number three: reality is wrong.

I'm fascinated by that choice.

 

[DogmaHunter]

The earth was the first object that appeared in the universe

That's demonstrably incorrect. In reality, that is.
Not talking about some book ...

 

[Colter]

The earth was the first object that appeared in the universe, so I'm going to disagree with you on this.

The earth did indeed exist.

 

[Colter]

Are people even willing to believe that life was created to evolve according to Gods plan?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Are people even willing to believe that life was created to evolve according to Gods plan?

Even I, as an atheist, am willing to admit that that is a possibility.
Not a plausibility (since there is no evidence to support it), but certainly a possibility (since there is no way to logically disprove it).

 

[AV1611VET]

That's demonstrably ...

No, it isn't.

You weren't there.

And even if you were there and saw the earth created ex nihilo, you couldn't repeat it in a laboratory.

And even if you could repeat it in a laboratory, you couldn't show that it was Earth that was made that way.

So your science fails on several different levels, is myopic, and can take a hike.

 

[DogmaHunter]

No, it isn't.

Yes, it is.

You weren't there.

Neither was I when George Washington became president.

And even if you were there and saw the earth created ex nihilo, you couldn't repeat it in a laboratory.

I wouldn't have to.

And even if you could repeat it in a laboratory, you couldn't show that it was Earth that was made that way.

Why do you consider it a problem when I can't demonstrate something, but not a problem when you can't demonstrate something?

So your science fails on several different levels, is myopic, and can take a hike.

Your religious beliefs can take a longer hike.

 

[Aman777]

Since we have the record right till Adam, I suppose there are no prehistoric people. You seem to be calling the early remains of man, like the Neanderthal and etc 'sons of god'. That is fine for an opinion, but not fine to be called the truth of God.

Sure it is when you read that "every living creature that moveth" was created and brought forth from WATER on the 5th Day Gen 1:21 AND the sons of God (prehistoric people) moveth. Science has also confirmed that prehistoric people descended from the common ancestor of Apes, which are NOT Adam's descendants. History provides the bones of these people which the traditional religious story CANNOT explain. ALSO, prehistoric people were made of FLESH. This is important as the following verse shows:

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

Some believe the sons of God were Angels but Angels are not made of FLESH since flesh and blood cannot enter Heaven, but Angels do. Mat 18:10

ONLY mankind and the sons of God (prehistoric people) were made of FLESH. Amen?

 

[Colter]

Even I, as an atheist, am willing to admit that that is a possibility.
Not a plausibility (since there is no evidence to support it), but certainly a possibility (since there is no way to logically disprove it).

That's perfectly reasonable. There is absolute truth, but man is finite. So we will always be short of absolute truth. We believe that is by designe for the purpose of "experience" and the fact that, if we are children of deity, we are NOT that absolute deity.

Let's assume we lived during the times of Jesus and that he was real, that the accounts we are given are accurate. After he left we STILL would have no absolute proof or scientific explanation of what we witnessed. At best we could only tell others what we witnessed, future generations would be left with our story.

So my point is, if some of these accounts are accurate we would be where we are right now. If they are NOT accurate then we are left to believe common Jewish fisherman left Judaism to create a fiction wherein they are less than heroic and a female prostitute was the first to believe while the boys hid out in doubt. Theses men stuck with their very controversial story even to their persecution and death.