- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,856,218
- 52,662
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
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.
They sent probes to the moon to test all sorts of things prior to manned missions.
You really think that's equivalent to NASA sending probes to the moon? Really?Ya -- and some kids "tested" my house by sending a drone over it.
You really think that's equivalent to NASA sending probes to the moon? Really?
You don't have it straight. You should read up on the history of moon exploration, it's pretty interesting.Let me get this straight.
Please go read.Some scientists think the layer of moondust is deep.
So they send satellites to look down at it.
They find out that the layer of moondust is not deep.
So they claim they tested the layer?
That's like saying some scientists believe Saturn didn't have any rings, so they build a telescope and find out Saturn does have rings, then claim they tested Saturn for rings.
AIG is renowned for its outrageous lies about mainstream science.See post 52 above.....tons of info there. A lot of scientifically backed data too.
Now if the Earth is only 6000 years old and hundreds of reversals have occurred according to the link, there would be very few magnetic stripes around mid-Atlantic ridge. For example if the total time for magnetic reversal and stability time was 100 years, for a 6000 year Earth there would only be around 60 magnetic stripes.
This is the second and most common lie perpetrated by AIG, is lying by omission of the overwhelming evidence against a 6000 year old Earth.
It it does again, we Christians will probably get the blame for it.
Just like we did in AD 58, when it flipped, and Nero blamed us for it:
Acts 17:6 And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also;
Notice prior to AD 58, Jesus' parents lived in Galilee.
Luke 2:39 And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.
And notice how they got to Jerusalem:
Luke 2:42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.
Today, you go down to Jerusalem from Galilee, since Galilee is some 80 miles north of Jerusalem.
I would think that the land in Genesis would not have the evidence of prior life forms because, like you say, they were not created yet. Of course some hold to a young earth which tells them that everything was already " built- in" to the system. But if that were the case, then God has set up confusion with the ultimate delusion. I think not! So the logical answer is,.....science is uncovering the truth. God made us a promise that knowledge will grow and increase as the years pass. So let's grow with it, shall we?On the third day of the creation week, Earth consisted of one giant ball of seawater.
Let's call it Terra Aqua, for lack of a better term.
View attachment 361158
Then God commanded the atoms to get together and form land.
Then He commanded the waters to stand aside and let the land come to the surface.
View attachment 361159
Here's my question:
Are we expected to believe that that land consisted of millions and millions of years' worth of layers of fossils?
Including fossils of plants, which said plants weren't even created until later in the day?
I contend that God created only ONE LAYER, and calls that layer "Earth."
Not Hadean, Archean, Proterozoic, Paleozoic, Mesozoic, Cenozoic, or any other kind of "zoic".
"Earth"
What say you?
I would think that the land in Genesis would not have the evidence of prior life forms because, like you say, they were not created yet.
I fully agree with the biblical account of Creation. However, I'm not sure where you get the idea that God commanded the atoms to get together and form land. According to Genesis, we read:On the third day of the creation week, Earth consisted of one giant ball of seawater.
Let's call it Terra Aqua, for lack of a better term.
View attachment 361158
Then God commanded the atoms to get together and form land.
Then He commanded the waters to stand aside and let the land come to the surface.
Relax like a trusting little child enjoying Daddy's Creation.I fully agree with the biblical account of Creation. However, I'm not sure where you get the idea that God commanded the atoms to get together and form land. ....
Nothing there about commanding atoms, as far as I can see.
Mankind hates truth. The cures for all diseases were known perfectly long, long ago. Who covered them up, even making them illegal to use in the usa (hint: science/druglords).science is uncovering the truth.
Yes, I know about all material things being made up of atoms. I didn't mean to deny that by my post. I just meant to question the statement, "Then God commanded the atoms to get together and form land." According to Genesis, He made dry land by causing the seas to gather in seas, leaving the rest of the earth as dry land.Relax like a trusting little child enjoying Daddy's Creation.
water is made of atoms (supposedly - I've never seen an atom)..
dirt/ earth is made of atoms .....
All Creation was made thru Yeshua, and there is nothing that was made as if without Him.
All the 'things' He Created, Orchestrated, Directed, Forever and still going strong!
Are 'things' made of atoms. (spirituals and other invisibles too, but different subject)
Adam lived with trilobites, dinosaurs, and his wife.
In fact, Eve may have had a favorite pet.
The dragon:
View attachment 361178
Nothing there about commanding atoms, as far as I can see.
HER HUSBAND! ADAM. She was made especially for ADAM, a suitable helper.
How about we just stick with Genesis 1-11 being a generic, prophetic account and concern ourselves more or less with "history" from Abraham to Acts?
I mean, 'generic' from our point of view, not from that of Moses (or whoever the emending scribe was who put Genesis together in its final form.)How about we not?
I find it hard to consider Genesis 1-11 generic, when specific names, places, dates, occurrences, and conversations are given.
Jude's citing of "Enoch" isn't exactly an example of Jude taking Genesis literally. If anything, your quote merely shows that Jude valued the pseudepigraphical book, 1 Enoch, from which he quoted.Did Jude take Genesis generically?
Jude 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Not to mention Jesus taking both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 literally.
I'm sure that Jesus, while in His earthly tent, was limited in His overall understanding.
I'm not sure why this would surprise us since Jesus wasn't All-knowing while living on Earth and would most likely have assumed the authority and relevance of the first two chapters of the book of Genesis in a more literal way.
I accept the authority of Genesis 1 and 2 as well, but not literally.
Same with me.
I, in my earthly tent, am limited in overall understanding.
Then I'll do the same.
Because you don't want to make the same mistake that Jesus made?
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?