Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8936 total)
59 online now:
dwise1 (1 member, 58 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Post Volume: Total: 861,908 Year: 16,944/19,786 Month: 1,069/2,598 Week: 315/251 Day: 43/43 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Creationism Explains Hominid Fossil Skulls (FINAL STATEMENTS ONLY)
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 12 of 137 (599576)
01-08-2011 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by ApostateAbe
01-04-2011 1:14 PM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Abe,

ApostateAbe writes:

Creationists, on the other hand, expect cut-and-dry delineations of created "kinds," of which all humans belong to a single "kind," all descended from Adam and Eve. There should be no ambiguity within the model of young-Earth creationism about which fossil specimens are human and which are not, and the criteria of such decisions would be predicted to be as plain as day. After all, according to Genesis, only one species was created in the image of God.


There was a man formed from the dust of the ground according to Genesis 2:7 before any other living life form on earth during the day God created the Heaven and the Earth according to Genesis 2:4.
Since this man was formed the day God created the Heaven and the Earth in Genesis 1:1 we have no idea when that was.

There was a modern man created in the image/likeness of God in Genesis 1:27 on the sixth day after all other living life forms on earth was called forth including the sea monsters (translated as whales) created in Genesis 1:21.

This man came into existence some 6,000+ years ago.

Therefore according to the Genesis account there was two races of mankind that began to exist with an indefinite period of existence between them.

BTW I am a creationist as I believe God created the Universe.

Just like everybody else believes that God or a God created the Universe, whether they will admit it or not. Whether it was my God, Hawkings instanton, the God partical, or the creator of the two branes that bumped together and created the Universe. Whatever caused the Universe to begin to exist would be God as it would be everything that is, was, or ever will be.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-04-2011 1:14 PM ApostateAbe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 12:04 AM ICANT has responded
 Message 15 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-09-2011 3:18 AM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 14 of 137 (599590)
01-09-2011 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by ApostateAbe
01-09-2011 12:04 AM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Abe,

You can find out what I believe about the two stories in the thread found beginning in Message 1

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 12:04 AM ApostateAbe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 12:42 PM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 17 of 137 (599645)
01-09-2011 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by ApostateAbe
01-09-2011 12:42 PM


Re: documentary hypothesis and belief
Hi Abe,

ApostateAbe writes:

Do you suppose there is anything wrong with such an explanation?

Its just as good an explanation as the one given for the origin of the universe and the origin of life. We know they happened because we are here in the universe.

Is it a good explanation for the Bible? no.

It is a great explanation for those who do not believe in God and His Word.

Either the Bible is the Word of God presented in mens words or it is not God's Word.

Has man rearranged the texts of the Bible? I believe they have just as the documentary hypothesis is another attempt to discredit the Bible as the Word of God.

Do I believe the truth is still there? Yes, it is just harder to find and if you don't have the Holy Spirit to lead you in all truth you will not find it.

There was no one to write down the account of creation in the beginning but the Bible has recorded in it a lot of information that is agreeable with what we observe that took place in times we have no written history for other than the Bible.

So unless God told or either showed Moses what happened in the beginning during his 40 days on the mountain with Him how would anyone know information that has been confirmed in these latter times?

According to Genesis there should be fossils of mankind and animals that existed before the events recorded in Genesis 1:2-2:3. Those fossils exist.

According to Genesis we are told of at least one extinction event that has taken place in the past. We find many more than that.

It takes 100 tons of decayed matter to produce 1 gallon of gasoline Since there are trillions of gallons of gasoline in the earth that means that this vegetation and life forms had to exist and then be covered by a lot of material that turned into rock. It is covered in some places by 5 miles of rock. Where did all that rock come from?

BTW I am a literalist when it comes to God's Word.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 12:42 PM ApostateAbe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 4:26 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 28 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2011 12:01 AM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 18 of 137 (599651)
01-09-2011 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Dr Adequate
01-09-2011 3:18 AM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Dr,

Dr Adequate writes:

Which of the skulls belong to which of the two races, and which are just apes?

I have no idea what body those skulls belonged on. If they were attached to a body I could make a judgment.

Dr Adequate writes:

Oh, don't be silly.

You mean you don't believe that the very small, very hot, universe that existed at T=10-43 was the complete universe and everything in it.

Since there is no reason for that entity to exist it is either God or was created by God.

God said "I AM", which I understand to mean all that there is, was or ever will be.

So where amy I being silly?

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-09-2011 3:18 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by anglagard, posted 01-09-2011 4:34 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 26 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-09-2011 11:12 PM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 23 of 137 (599699)
01-09-2011 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by ApostateAbe
01-09-2011 5:14 PM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Abe,

ApostateAbe writes:

Here is the full skeleton of Lucy (Australopithicus afarensis).

Isn't that the reconstructed skeleton of Lucy?

That doesn't look like the complete skeleton of Lucy we find Here.

ApostateAbe writes:

But, if Turkana Boy was the one closer in descent to the image of God, then this is a rough reconstruction of what God looks like:

Lucy dates to 3.5 million years ago.
Turkana Boy dates to 1.5 million years ago.

The man created in the image/likeness of God in Genesis 1:27 dates to 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 5:14 PM ApostateAbe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 01-09-2011 10:25 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 25 by Coyote, posted 01-09-2011 10:45 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 27 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 11:21 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 33 by jar, posted 01-10-2011 2:26 PM ICANT has acknowledged this reply

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 29 of 137 (599731)
01-10-2011 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by ApostateAbe
01-09-2011 11:21 PM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Abe,

ApostateAbe writes:

ICANT, do you really think that Lucy existed 3.5 million years ago, Turkana Boy existed 1.5 million years ago, and God created man 6,000 to 10,000 years ago? I am trying to understand your position. Where do you place Lucy and Turkana Boy in the history of life?

I have no problem with Lucy dating to 3.5 million years or Turkana Boy dating 1.5 million years ago.

According to Genesis there has been at least 2 different times that mankind has inhabited the earth. Jewish folklor has it that there has been many worlds inhabited in the past.

Lucy and Turkana Boy would be placed sometime after Genesis 1:1 and it's history that is recorded in Genesis 2:4-4:24 and the events recorded in Genesis 1:2-2:3.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-09-2011 11:21 PM ApostateAbe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-10-2011 11:07 AM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 31 of 137 (599765)
01-10-2011 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by arachnophilia
01-10-2011 12:01 AM


Re: documentary hypothesis and belief
Hi arach,

arachnophilia writes:

genesis 1:1-1:3 forms a complete sentence. genesis 1:1 is a dependent clause. you cannot simply insert a gap here, since the primary action takes places in verse 3. we've been over this. please actually learn some hebrew grammar instead of just pretending that you know what you're talking about.

You keep repeating that Genesis 1:1 is a dependent clause. Do you think if you repeat it enough it will make it a fact?

In the field of linguistics, a sentence is an expression in natural language, and often defined to indicate a grammatical unit consisting of one or more words that generally bear minimal syntactic relation to the words that precede or follow it. A sentence can include words grouped meaningfully to express a statement, question, exclamation, request or command.[1]

A "declarative sentence" or "declaration", the most common type, commonly makes a statement: "I am going home."

Source

A sentence is an expression in natural language.
A declarative sentence makes a statement.

A declarative sentence simply states a fact or argument, states an idea, without requiring either an answer or action from the reader, it does not give a command or request, nor does it ask a question. You punctuate your declarative sentences with a simple period.
Source

A declarative sentence states a fact.

Independent Clause

An independent clause is a group of words that contains a subject and verb and expresses a complete thought. An independent clause is a sentence.

Jim studied in the Sweet Shop for his chemistry quiz.
Dependent Clause

A dependent clause is a group of words that contains a subject and verb but does not express a complete thought. A dependent clause cannot be a sentence. Often a dependent clause is marked by a dependent marker word.

Source

An independent clause is a group of words that contains a subject and verb and expresses a complete thought.

A dependent clause is a group of words that contains a subject and verb but does not express a complete thought.

arachnophilia "genesis 1:1-1:3 forms a complete sentence."

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

1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Somebody thought Genesis 1:1 was a complete sentence as they put a period behind earth.

Why did Pusey, Delitzsch, Dillman and Driver believe Genesis 1:1 was a sentence of completed action with an undetermined period of time between verse 1 and verse 2?

Why does the Massoretic Text in which the Jewish scholars tried to incorporate enough 'indicators' to guide the reader as to correct punctuation there a small mark which is technically known as Rebhia, which is classified as a "disjunctive aceent"?

That "disjunctive aceent" makes the waw that starts verse 2 be translated as but rather than and.

arachnophilia, "you cannot simply insert a gap here".

I don't insert a gap between verse 1 and verse 2.

I have the creation of Heaven and Earth with the history given in Genesis 2:4-4:24 taking place in the light portion of day one that had ended with the evening we find at Genesis 1:2 which God added to that dark period and declared the first day in Genesis 1:5.

God's definition of day.

1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

God defined day as a period of light.
God also defined day as a combined period of light and a period of darkness.

As far as God's definition of day that is all that constitutes a day.
Mankind has added a lot to God's definition of day.

arachnophilia, "we've been over this."

Yes you keep making your assertions of your beliefs.

arachnophilia, " please actually learn some hebrew grammar instead of just pretending that you know what you're talking about."

At least my knowledge is comprable with Pusey, Delitzsch, Dillman and Driver as my beliefs were learned and formed before I knew they existed, and it agrees with them.

Now I have asked you before to take Genesis 1:1 and explain to me why it is not a declarative statement. I will present Genesis 1:1 again with the Hebrew words of the original text and ask you to take them and show why they are not a complete declarative sentence.

First word:

Is בראשית the Hebrew word meaning first, beginning, best, chief, with the preposition ב meaning in, on, with, by and we can even add your at?
Translation In beginning

Second word:

Is ברא a verb of action in the Qal form which means to create, shape, form? Translation created

Third word:

Is אלהים God the subject of the verb ברא? Translated God

Fourth word:

את particle, sign of the definite direct object not translated in English Not translated

Fifth word:

Is השמים Heaven with the prefix ה the definite article thus translated the Heaven?

Sixth word:

ואת particle, sign of the definite direct object not translated in English. With the prefix ו Not translated

Seventh word:

Is האדץ Earth with the prefix ה the definite article thus translated the Earth?

Combined translation or original text:
In (or at your preference) beginning created God the Heaven the Earth.

In beginning tells us when the event took place.
Created tells us the action of the verb was complete.
God the subject of the verb tells us who completed the action.
the Heaven and the Earth are nouns that tell us what was created.

Thus we have a complete sentence composed of a subject and a verb making a declaration That in beginning God created the Heaven the and Earth.

This completed action is not dependent upon anything before it or anything after it.

Conclusion: Genesis 1:1 is a declarative statement of completed action, telling us God created the Heaven and the Earth in the beginning.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2011 12:01 AM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Coyote, posted 01-10-2011 2:20 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 39 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2011 5:06 PM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 34 of 137 (599781)
01-10-2011 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by ApostateAbe
01-10-2011 11:07 AM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Abe,

ApostateAbe writes:

ICANT, very well. I take it your model is somewhat like that of Hugh Ross, where each "day" can be interpreted as a very long time, and I take it you are still not sure about whether Lucy and Turkana Boy should be considered human or ape.

No Abe I do not hold the view that Hugh Ross did or any of those who hold the general gap theory, or the modified gap theory. I do not believe Satan has been cast out of heaven yet as he was there in Job's day, and according to Revelation he is still there accusing the breathren constantly.

As I posted in Message 31 my last post to arachnophilia , I believe God defined what a day is.

Genesis 2:4 tells me it begins the generations (history) of the Heaven and the Earth in the day they were created.

According to God's definition of day given in Genesis 1:5 that had to be a light period or a light period combined with a dark period.

A dark period is not mentioned until Genesis 1:2 which would have ended the light period in which the Heaven and the Earth was created in. According to the history given in Genesis 2:4-4:24 there was a mankind formed from the dust of the ground as well as plants and animals. There is no mention of fish as there was only the river that flowed from Eden and watered the Garden with the flow off being divided into 4 rivers. Woman was made from a rib of the man and they were kicked out of God's paradise because of disobeying a command given to the man. They had children who had children and there was at least one citiy built. The only persons we are told that died was Abel and the young man that Lamech killed. No age is given for anyone in this history.

So there was mankind on the earth from the beginning as the man formed from the dust of the ground was the first life form on earth.

These people did not exist at Genesis 1:2 as the earth was covered with water. There was no dry land.

The fossils of Lucy and Turkana Boy could be descendants of those early people but I doubt it very seriously.

The earth had to be much smaller at that time as the trillions of tons of material necessary to produce the oil, coal, and natural gas had to be produced and then covered with rock some of it with 5 miles of rock.

So I would assume that the midrash that talks of many worlds would probably be true but God did not see fit to inform Moses of those events.

Remember we do not know when the beginnig was. Anything we come up with is just a guess.

ApostateAbe writes:

The theory of evolution expects that there should be intermediate forms between humans and lower primates.

Darwin expected there would be millions of intermediate forms that would be found. When they were not the theory had to be modified.

ApostateAbe writes:

These were most certainly not predicted by anyone who explained life with creation by God.

Lets see what the text says.

Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

The Hebrew word translated 'every beast' means living, alive. It has nothing with any specific living thing but rather all living things.
The Hebrew word translated 'every fowl' includes anything that flies.
Then it is repeated with the Hebrew words translated 'every living' and 'creature' which means all living beings of any sort.

So what creature that we could ever find a fossil of got left out in that verse.

ApostateAbe writes:

Your model can accommodate the evidence. With enough imagination,

It takes no imagination only reading the text as it was written.

ApostateAbe writes:

so can strict mainline young-Earth creationism,

There is no way the man formed from the dust of the ground before any other life form in Genesis 2:7 who was placed in a garden and forbiden to eat from a specific tree in the garden, can be the same man that was created on day six in Genesis 1:27 after all other life forms and given permission to eat from all trees, nothing was forbidden.

So how could YEC be correct by any streach of the imagination?

ApostateAbe writes:

The model with the most probability has all of the criteria.

My thesis has an answer to the questions, where the Universe and everything in it came from? Why it exists? And the prediction that life and the unvierse as we know it will cease to exist in the future.

Find me a theory that answers those questions.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-10-2011 11:07 AM ApostateAbe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-10-2011 7:43 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 41 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-10-2011 7:49 PM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 35 of 137 (599783)
01-10-2011 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Coyote
01-10-2011 2:20 PM


Re: documentary hypothesis and belief
Hi Coyote,

Coyote writes:

And another give-away. You don't even see the need to be consistent with other creationists! You are pretty much all just making it up as you go.

Why do I have to agree with other creationist?

As far as the fossil skulls they are proof that a creature with that skull lived at one time unless they are an imatation.

But they could have existed at anytime between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

I did build cabinets with pull outs to store hundreds of teaching tools of human bodies in a University.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Coyote, posted 01-10-2011 2:20 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Taq, posted 01-10-2011 3:55 PM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 36 of 137 (599784)
01-10-2011 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Coyote
01-09-2011 10:45 PM


Re: Reconstructed skeleton
Hi Coyote,

Coyote writes:

Why don't you leave the details of these reconstructions to the experts? You obviously have nothing to contribute to the discussion except a sullen disbelief in all things scientific that may happen to contradict your particular beliefs.

I don't mind them reconstructing what they think the fossil should look like.

But to take the 5 bones of Lucy's head and construct the beautiful picture presented by ApostateAbe is preposterous.

That reconstruction came out of someone's imagination.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Coyote, posted 01-09-2011 10:45 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Taq, posted 01-10-2011 3:54 PM ICANT has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 45 of 137 (599847)
01-11-2011 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Dr Adequate
01-10-2011 7:49 PM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Dr,

Dr Adequate writes:

What a preposterous lie.


Maybe it is preposterous.

But he said they would be numerous in all stratas.

At the present we have a known 2 million species on earth.

Scientist say there could be 100 million species on earth today.

Scientist say 99.9% of the life forms that have lived on earth are extinct.

Taking our known number of 2 million life forms and that is only .01% of life forms that have lived on earth.

If these scientist know what they are talking about that would mean there have been at least 200 million extinct species.

So if they are correct there should be millions of fossils of extinct life forms found in the many different layers that it takes to cover the life forms that produced our oil, coal, and natural gas to the depth of 5 miles.

Then again I may just be being preposterous.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-10-2011 7:49 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by jar, posted 01-11-2011 10:22 AM ICANT has acknowledged this reply
 Message 47 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-11-2011 10:30 AM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 48 by Coyote, posted 01-11-2011 10:34 AM ICANT has responded
 Message 51 by Granny Magda, posted 01-11-2011 10:49 AM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 54 by Taq, posted 01-11-2011 11:10 AM ICANT has responded
 Message 67 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-11-2011 2:30 PM ICANT has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 49 of 137 (599855)
01-11-2011 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by ApostateAbe
01-10-2011 7:43 PM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Abe,

Your reference you gave talks about a process that everytime I mention it on EvC I get attacked.

ApostateAbe writes:

You can read all about it here.

The abrupt manner in which whole groups of species suddenly appear in certain formations, has been urged by several palaeontologists--for instance, by Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick, as a fatal objection to the belief in the transmutation of species.

When I mention transmutation as the process of one creature becoming a totally different creature I am refered to the statement that was when man tried to turn lead into gold.

As far as I am concerned and Agassiz, Pictet, and Sedgwick it is what is called 'Macro-Evolution' today.

ApostateAbe writes:

If you object that not enough intermediate varieties have been found to confirm the prediction, then I suppose that would be relevant if you had an explanation with greater explanatory power that covers the existing evidence of seemingly intermediate forms.

So I can go down to the local used car lot and take a bunch of pictures of the automobiles in the lot and I have proved they all came from the same factory. Is that what you are saying?

Just because things are designed for a specific purpose and may resemble many others does not mean their origin was the same place, or from the same ancestor.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by ApostateAbe, posted 01-10-2011 7:43 PM ApostateAbe has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Taq, posted 01-11-2011 11:12 AM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 01-11-2011 7:19 PM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 50 of 137 (599856)
01-11-2011 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Coyote
01-11-2011 10:34 AM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Coyote,

Coyote writes:

What you are doing is denying the timeline based entirely on religious beliefs. As more and more evidence is found, you are forced to deny that too.

Nice sketch.

The problem with all such sketches is that you only have life forms at the ends of the branches. All the other pictures of the various life forms are missing. I wonder why.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Coyote, posted 01-11-2011 10:34 AM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Theodoric, posted 01-11-2011 11:05 AM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 53 by Coyote, posted 01-11-2011 11:05 AM ICANT has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 58 of 137 (599873)
01-11-2011 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Taq
01-11-2011 11:10 AM


Re: Genesis species
Hi Taq,

Taq writes:

You are making the assumption that everything that lived also turned into a fossil that is preserved to this day and is accessible to scientists. This is a very, very poor assumption.

No.

If only .01% were preserved there would be over 2 million and that is using the low end number of existing species to base the caculations on. If we used the high end numbers there would be over 50 million different species represented at the .01%.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Taq, posted 01-11-2011 11:10 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Taq, posted 01-11-2011 11:38 AM ICANT has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6188
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 62 of 137 (599887)
01-11-2011 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by arachnophilia
01-10-2011 5:06 PM


Re: documentary hypothesis and belief
Hi arach,

arachnophilia writes:

nonsense. man was not made on day one.

If he evolved you are correct.

If he was created by God he was formed from the dust of the ground the same day (light period) that the Universe and Earth began to exist.

Now this light period could have covered billions or even trillions of years. So everything did not have to happen instantly, which agrees with science.

arachnophilia writes:

grammar is not a matter of belief.

Sure it is when you break so many rules to reach your prefered translation.

arachnophilia writes:

1-3: When God began to create.

I know that there are some of the recent translations that use this translation.

Jewish Publication Society (3rd ed.) When God began to create heaven and Earth"

JPS Tanakh Translates Genesis 1:1 as When God began to create heaven and earth.

The Living Bible: "When God began creating the heavens and the earth..."

J.M.P. Smith and E.J. Goodspeed, are proponents of this translation.

It really does not matter that there are at least 4 reasons it will not work under Biblical Hebrew's rules of grammer.

1. It changes the state of the verb. bara' is Qal perfect 3rd masculine singular. The perfect state is always a finite verb. But your translation requires a Qal infinitive construct.

2. Turns a noun into a verb. Not only does your translation require confusing an infinitive construct and perfect but also requires confusing a noun and a verb. There are several Hebrew words translated "begin, began" but they cannot be confused with re'shith which is used 51 times in the OT. The most common word for began in Genesis is chalal. The Bible never uses a verb form for re'shith or its root re'sh.

3. Puts the prepositional phrase in the wrong place. Biblical Hebrew does not allow splitting an infinitive, and prepositional phrase. Hebrew prepositions are prefixed onto the noun they modify thus they are inseparable prepositions. The preposition is not used on God therefore God is not the object of the preposition and thus When God is not justified.

4. The new verse becomes a dependent clause. Hebrew grammar and syntax forbid a dependent clause from being joined to the independent clause by a waw conjunction. So it makes no difference which verse you want to tie it to verse 2 or 3 as they both start with a waw conjunction.

arachnophilia writes:

(b) When the story of creation is resumed later,

Resumes????

I thought you believed there was two stories in Genesis 1 and 2.

Regardless, it does not resume as Genesis 2:4 begins the history of what took place in the day God created the Heaven and the Earth unless there was an absence of anything at Genesis 1:2.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2011 5:06 PM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by arachnophilia, posted 01-11-2011 6:59 PM ICANT has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019