The BOOK of GENESIS—it MATTERS!
If you’re a Christian and you believe the New Testament but you subscribe to the theory of evolution and think it doesn’t matter if you think the Book of Genesis is a fairy tale or an allegory, you’d better think again. The book of Genesis is referenced many times in the New Testament. Jesus believes in the creation account:
“But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.”
—Mark 10:6
If you believe in Jesus and Jesus believes in the creation account, shouldn’t you believe in the creation account in Genesis? You most certainly should, for Jesus said this:
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
—John 5:46-47
Moses wrote the first 5 books of the Bible. So if you don’t believe in what Moses wrote, which includes the creation account, how will you believe the words of Jesus?
If you claim to be a Christian but reject the creation account, which Jesus proclaimed, then I ask are you abiding in Jesus?
5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.
—John 15:5-6
Jesus is the Vine and we who believe are the branches. The Vine feeds the branches. If you are being fed something contradictory to the Book of Genesis, it is not coming from the Vine. So if you believe in the theory of evolution, I ask you again, are you abiding in the Vine?
The theory of evolution contradicts the book of Genesis, which states that each kind produces its own kind, not another kind. Man was made in the image of God, not the image of monkeys. The flaws in the theory of evolution are many and if you believe in the theory of evolution, you believe in some very foolish things. To believe in evolution is to believe in folly.
To believe in Jesus and His words is to believe in the Genesis account. To believe in the theory of evolution is to reject the teachings of Jesus.
The Gap Theory
Some believers subscribe to the Gap Theory, which basically allows for the theory of evolution. The Gap Theory basically states that millions or billions of years ago, God created the heavens and earth perfect and angels and mortal men were living in harmony until Satan rebelled and all went to hell, so to speak, and so God had to obliterate the heavens and earth and start anew again in what is commonly known as the week of Creation.
The Scriptural rebuttal to the Gap Theory is devastating and efficient. No wiggle room exists when the Gap Theory is held up to the light of the Word:
Q: According to the Word, how long did it take God to make the heavens and earth and all that is in them?
A: Six days:
“For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day…”
—Exodus 20:11
God didn’t complete the heavens and earth and everything in them for 6 days (so no way things occurred before DAY 1 of CREATION), and rested on DAY 7 of CREATION, providing the pattern of the Sabbath given to the Israelites.
Q: According to the Biblical account of creation, when and where did death come into creation and through whom?
A: Six thousand and some odd years ago in the garden of Eden, through Adam:
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
—1 Corinthians 15:21-22
The Scriptures you just read negate the possibility of a pre-Adamic existence which the Gap Theory postulates. The clear and obvious meaning of those Scriptures are that there couldn’t have been a pre-Adamic existence of any creatures of any kind living and dying upon the earth, for death did not exist before DAY 1 of CREATION. Death was not part of the equation until DAY 6 of CREATION. It took SIX days for the LORD to create the heavens and the earth and all that is in them.
So God completed His work on the heavens and earth on DAY 6 of CREATION, that is, the heavens and earth didn’t come fully into play with things living and walking and creeping upon the earth until DAY 6 of CREATION, which is when Adam and Eve were in the garden of Eden and death entered into the equation.
The Gap Theory doesn’t hold the water of the Word and is proven false by the two Scriptures provided. There is too much fodder for folly mentioned by the gap theory to cover it all, but I would like to highlight one of them. It is a claim of the Gap Theory that in between the first two verses of the Bible, Satan deceived a third of the angels in a rebellion and war in heaven. The Scripture where they hinge this belief about Satan deceiving and rebelling with a third of the angels comes from REV 12:4, which speaks not to an event in the past, but speaks to an event in our not-too-distant future.
In chapter 12 of Revelation, we see the dragon knock down a third of the stars out of the sky down to the earth with his tail:
“And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.”
—REV 12:4
The above verse does not speak to Satan deceiving a third of the angels. The above verse speaks to the dragon knocking a third of the stars down to the earth with his tail in an act of war in heaven in the end times. And he not only knocks down a third of the stars, he stomps on them.
Concerning the little horn in Daniel (which is the beast of Revelation), it says this:
“And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.”
—DAN 8:10
To help explain what I am saying, let us suppose good angels wear white hats and bad angels wear black hats. The traditional understanding of Revelation 12:4 is the dragon knocked down with his tail angels wearing black hats. I am saying that the dragon knocked down with his tail angels wearing white hats. For more on this and other things in the end times script for mankind known as the Book of Revelation, CLICK HERE.
FIRST TWO CHAPTERS OF GENESIS
Now, I would like to dig in a little deeper into the first two chapters of GEN and propose the key to the paradox of what on the surface appears to be a contradictory order of events.
In the beginning (GEN 1:1) God, who is Spirit, created the physical universe we find ourselves living in. The Spirit world begat the material world. The Spirit of God gave birth to the physical universe. Spirit first, physical second. GEN CHP 1 gives us the order of things created in the PHYSICAL UNIVERSE, what is commonly known as the 7 DAYS of CREATION, and GEN CHP 2 gives us the order of things created in the SPIRITUAL UNIVERSE.
Remember, it is the SPIRITUAL UNIVERSE that gave birth to/spawned/begat/manifested the PHYSICAL UNIVERSE.
On DAY 5 of CREATION of the physical universe, God made the fishees and the fowl first (see GEN 1:21) and then on DAY 6, God made the beasts of the earth that walketh and creepeth upon the earth (see GEN 1:24) and then God created mankind and gave him dominion over the fishees, fowls, and beasts:
“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”
—GEN 1:26
So the sequence of events as delineated in the timeline in GEN CHP 1, which is the physical timeline of the created material physical universe and is the classic timeline familiar to us in the physical universe of which time is a function of, is this:
1.Fowl
2.Beasts
3.Mankind/Adam+Eve
But in GEN CHP 2, we are privy to the big-bang-spontaneous-spiritual-combustion-explosion-forever-existing-Spirit-of-God kind of viewpoint and the order of creation in the spiritual world, which manifested or gave birth to the ever expanding physical universe we dwell in. The Spirit of God—ever existing—created the spiritual things first, which gave birth to the physical things.
And so GEN CHP 2 tells us the order of things created in the spiritual world and it was this:
First came that special handiwork of creation made in the image of God, mankind, or Adam:
“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.”
—GEN 2:7
And then Adam was given dominion over the beasts and fowl, who were created AFTER him in the spiritual timeline of things:
“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.”
—GEN 2:19
(NOTE: NAMING the animals gave ADAM dominion over them; GEN 2:19 dovetails with GEN 1:26)
So to pull all this altogether:
The order of creation in the spiritual world was this:
1.Adam/mankind (GEN 2:7)
2.Beasts (GEN 2:19)
3.Fowl (GEN 2:19)
And so in a Last In First Out (LIFO) kind of way, the spiritual timeline of Mankind/Adam first, beasts second, and fowl third, gave birth to the order of things created in the physical timeline as this:
1.Fowl (GEN 1:21)
2.Beasts (GEN 1:24)
3.Mankind/Adam (GEN 1:26)
God, the great I AM, the Spirit who initiated it all when He hovered over the waters and spoke things into existence, stands outside of time because He created the physical universe, of which time is a function of. Amen.
Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.
"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.
Before It’s News® is a community of individuals who report on what’s going on around them, from all around the world. Anyone can join. Anyone can contribute. Anyone can become informed about their world. "United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.
LION'S MANE PRODUCT
Try Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend 60 Capsules
Mushrooms are having a moment. One fabulous fungus in particular, lion’s mane, may help improve memory, depression and anxiety symptoms. They are also an excellent source of nutrients that show promise as a therapy for dementia, and other neurodegenerative diseases. If you’re living with anxiety or depression, you may be curious about all the therapy options out there — including the natural ones.Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend has been formulated to utilize the potency of Lion’s mane but also include the benefits of four other Highly Beneficial Mushrooms. Synergistically, they work together to Build your health through improving cognitive function and immunity regardless of your age. Our Nootropic not only improves your Cognitive Function and Activates your Immune System, but it benefits growth of Essential Gut Flora, further enhancing your Vitality.
Our Formula includes: Lion’s Mane Mushrooms which Increase Brain Power through nerve growth, lessen anxiety, reduce depression, and improve concentration. Its an excellent adaptogen, promotes sleep and improves immunity. Shiitake Mushrooms which Fight cancer cells and infectious disease, boost the immune system, promotes brain function, and serves as a source of B vitamins. Maitake Mushrooms which regulate blood sugar levels of diabetics, reduce hypertension and boosts the immune system. Reishi Mushrooms which Fight inflammation, liver disease, fatigue, tumor growth and cancer. They Improve skin disorders and soothes digestive problems, stomach ulcers and leaky gut syndrome. Chaga Mushrooms which have anti-aging effects, boost immune function, improve stamina and athletic performance, even act as a natural aphrodisiac, fighting diabetes and improving liver function. Try Our Lion’s Mane WHOLE MIND Nootropic Blend 60 Capsules Today. Be 100% Satisfied or Receive a Full Money Back Guarantee. Order Yours Today by Following This Link.
| Online: | |
| Visits: | 1,657,513,614 |
| Stories: | 8,296,400 |
Whistler Blowers, Insiders
The Theory of Evolution is a clear and direct attack on Genesis 3 that does not withstand critical examination
mayhem…so you say. All the races and Adam and Eve were created whole with soul in the image of the Elohim. Animals evolved over the ages. I’ve seen proof of both statements. am123 can tell us just how long mankind has been on this planet. I believe it is about 8,000 years.
You keep saying you’ve seen proof or you have proof, elijah. Where is this proof? I’m looking for something more substantial than subjective opinion, my friend.
I’ve got proof that mankind and Adam and eve were created whole with soul in the Image of god and his angels. that’s in Genesis. and any one can find proof of the evolution of the animal world…get a high school science textbook….start with sea life… the progression is easy to document….unless concrete evidence is out of bounds….then forget it. If concrete evidence is a good thing to you, visit any natural history museum….there’e always enough proof in any of them. Don’t believe any human evolution took place…we know it did not.
Of course you’ll need some common sense. And a desire for truth.
If any of these things aren’t even worth checking out with an open mind, you’re getting close to fanaticism.
“any one can find proof of the evolution of the animal world…get a high school science textbook”
Please pardon my interruption in the discussion fellas, but in the quest to provide proof of evolution Mayhem, good luck trying to get max to pin the tail on that donkey!
I think, it’s “in the science text books” is a much as you’re going to get out of him.
Carry on!
P.S. Correct me if I’m wrong max, but don’t high school science text books claim man is just another animal in the evolutionary tree of life?
Science textbooks are so yesterday, elijah. The Creation v Evolution debate has been conducted at the PhD level and Evolution got it’s butt kicked to the curb.
You’re so repetitive that you could put your writings to a 12 bar styled I-IV-V progression and make a bleeping song out of it! Gee you’re a hard guy to like but yes i did see the flights, like-likey-liked.
If the progression is so “easy to document” why won’t you document it? One missing link would shut me up quicker than you might imagine. And again with the condescension, you try my patience, elijah.
Good question, am123, very good
Polar opposites is what i said and if a picture helps anyone to see the forest among the trees then here ya go…
http://www.creationliberty.com/images/kind01.jpg
… and it’s said believing the Bible is ridiculous, Pfft!
Mayhem…well, My computer skills are worse than my notebook..I can’t cut and paste or upload anything. I could go to the same websites you could and find anything…to support anything…or refute anything. If your’e so narrow minded that you can’t believe concrete, “rock solid” evidence in the natural world that tells us that even the Grand Canyon out dates your young earth suppositions, then I don’t have anything you can relate to…if this amazing “Erat” can’t inspire some curiosity in you, nothing I could show you is going to make any impression.
Knowing about the planet you live on, in detail, In “miniscule” detail, IS NOT going to interfere with your understanding of the divine creation of man. Doesn’t bother me, that there’s real evidence of a lush earth, filled with evolving flora and fauna, where huge beasts lived and developed for hundreds of millions of years….You burn their essential oils in your automobile.
If your understanding of the beginning of the story is as limited as it looks, you’ve already missed some very important guidance.
Excuses, excuses, the easiest thing, in the world, that man knows how to make. I post some of my comments and links from an android tablet – get with the times, Grandpa, ya dinosaur.
You state that i’m narrow minded and that i lack common sense, let alone my being un-guided. You also imply that i’m willfully ignorant, willfully blind, scripturally inept and without due diligence in the sciences. You were warned about your tone yet chose to continue with the condescension. So be it.
It frustrates me no end that idiots like you, elijah, refuse to see the miraculous glory of the creators work. You’d rather believe the science textbooks when they claim that a piddling little river carved out the Grand Canyon over millennium. It probably could but that’s not the point. The point is that the Grand Canyon aligns entirely with the Biblical flood account and so does the fossil record contained therein.
The same “science” books that am123 pointed out contain a huge contradiction for your position. You hadn’t thought that one through, had you? I’d have the decency to be embarrassed, elijah, if that had been me putting my foot in my mouth.
Question: If the Biblical flood did happen what would we expect to find? Answer: A relatively narrow band of fossilized remains indicating the state of the natural world during a short period of geological time. Lo and behold this is exactly what we do find. Coincidence? I think not.
Darwin wrote regarding the lack of transitional fossils as, “…the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory,” but explained it by relating it to the less than perfect geological record. Well we’ve come a long way since then and still no missing link. Do you claim to know better than the father of Evolution, elijah?
Oil comes from dead mammals? Oh my giddy aunt do you need some schooling. Well you’re in the right place my friend. If i were you, and all i had was opinion, i’d shut my mouth and watch to see if Pix gets very far in this debate.
123…look up ‘eohippus’ ..You can find nice pages on google….with a step by step photo lineup of the skeletons found in nature, dating way back…..compare the modern horse with eohippus…..
Of course, there is a chance that some group of atheistic “evolutionists” could have designed the remains and placed them where they could be called ‘antiquity’. but that would have taken a huge army of conspirateurs and and several centuries of digging to bury the skeletons….but I suppose its possible.
Mayhem. You starting to sound “dark agey”, bro. there’s no proof i can find that fossil fuels come from “mammals….I think the ‘big boys were reptiles.
So, in your mind the the glories of god’s green earth don’t qualify as “miraculous’….
What is your theory of the origin of fossil fuels?
You talk about “the” biblical flood, but there was a greater cataclysmic flood waaay before Noah’s. Called the Katabole….but you probably will deny that, too.
You are denying ‘concrete’, rock solid evidence that your beliefs about young earth are not logical. I’ve given ya”ll biblical proof that its not true, also. You find a way to deny anything that is not in ‘lockstep’ with your suppositions
Your POV is an insult to normally intelligent inquiring minds.
*****a note to all….the dark ages are still with us…there is proof of it in the denial of
hundreds of years of ‘scientific’ exploration…
Missed a whole generation of scientific discovery, eh, Mayhem…..that’s ok….I think it is sinful to go through life denying the apparent facts of nature. If I was there would ya’ll try to burn me as a witch?
I’ve never seen any proof of the evolution of humankind….it doesn’t exist….mankind and Adam and Eve were created in the image of God, whole, complete with souls.
Do you really believe ignoring God’s own Natural world is serving the Almighty….I don’t believe it is.
On one hand you deny the spiritual nature of the preservation of the Hebraic bloodline, and then go right out and claim spirituality to explain the incongruities of your own philosophy. Double speak…all the way. You can’t see it, your medieval eyes don’t see that far.
Let me take you down another thought….The word ‘rib’, the one god fashioned Eve, out of, Translates as “curve”, could that be a reference to DNA?
Mayhem…123….Man did not evolve!!!! he was created whole IN THE IMAGE OF GOD. Say, did either of you ‘read’ in 10 of my replies that I agree that MAN is not part of the evolutionary ‘theory’? It must be really difficult trying to get past your traditional eisegesis, to actually consider that you’ve purposely limited yourselves to a theory that is not supported biblically or scientifically.
The people who say man did evolve are as closed minded as you guys like to pretend to be. I’m am now as suspicious of ya’ll’s theosophy as you are of mine….
max/elijah,
You said to look up eohippus. I did. What I found was the story put forth by evolutionists regarding the evolution of the modern horse is, to put it mildly, horse doo doo. For one thing, eohippus is supposed to be the first horse in the ancestry of modern horses. But it has more in common and looks more like a Hyrax (which is a modern animal in Africa) than it does the modern horse.
Here is what passes for modern science today:
Originally, the “facts” about the evolution of the horse in school text books was that horse evolution was depicted in a straight line. When that was shown to be in error, they got out their erasers and changed the evolutionary tree of the horse into an evolutionary bush in order to cover up their previous mistakes.
I am reminded of the Coelacanth fiasco, a fish with stubby fins. Instead of saying it was a fish with stubby fins, the evolutionists claimed fossils of the Coelacanth showed intermediate form between fish and modern day amphibians because of their stubby, leg-like fins. Oh how wonderfully it displayed the evolutionary tree they claimed! Until in 1938 someone caught a live Coelacanth that is, blowing that theory out of the water. But of course, the evolutionists just got out the erasers and changed the “facts” again! Such is the folly of evolutionary science, and I use that term loosely.
Back to the horses, according to the current “facts” regarding the evolution of horses, the sequence of horse evolution starts in North America, then jumps to Europe, and then back to America again. Imagine that, just how did that happen one might ask, did the horses swim across the ocean? Did they evolve thumbs so they could build ships and sail across the ocean? Well, according to evolutionists, the horses crossed the Bering Strait land bridge. To think that horses are going to leave North America with its plush land with plenty of food and migrate over a sparse, barren, frigid 1,000 mile land bridge is laughable and preposterous.
How about answering this question max, which I’ve tried to get you to answer several times: do you believe in the dating calculations of modern science?
If you do, then here’s another question for you: do you believe the following soft tissue, which is flexible and pliable and returns to its original shape when stretched, is 68 million years old? You can see it at about the 9:00 mark of this video from 60 Minutes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJOQiyLFMNY
One more question if you believe that max: if you were to find a dinosaur bone that with soft tissue that is 68 million years old, would you straight away put it into a zip-lock plastic bag in order to prevent spoilage?
I won’t point out a bunch of other dating fiascos like rocks that are only 20 years old being dated by modern science coming out to be a couple millions of years old as I think Mayhem can provide plenty of such ridiculous dating examples.
“Say, did either of you ‘read’ in 10 of my replies that I agree that MAN is not part of the evolutionary ‘theory’?”
Yes max, I realize you said you don’t believe man evolved. But you also said “any one can find proof of the evolution of the animal world…get a high school science textbook”.
So here you are holding up science textbooks as truth, yet, even you don’t believe it all as truth, which is why I pointed that out. You are trying to play both sides in the creation vs. evolution debate. So you say we can find proof of evolution in a science textbook, but I want to know, what should we do, chop off the homo sapiens and homo whatevers from the evolutionary tree and take the rest of the tree as gospel truth?
123..Fine job….good going….be careful. Don’t caught thinking for yourself….go to your supportive material and leave the rest….your job is done here.
So max, you’re not even going to answer if you believe in the dating calculations of modern science? Should I assume that yes, you do?
Fair enough, elijah, i should have said animals but the point remains that the word “fossil” ought not be associated with the oil industry. Oil is abiotic all the way, read a book, mate.
No, elijah, man did not evolve and nor did the animals and i have nothing to add to what am123 has said on the matter.
Where did i say that the glories of god’s green earth don’t qualify as “miraculous’?
How can i be denying ‘concrete’, rock solid evidence when none has been presented?
What’s this about a witch-hunt and don’t you think it’s a little hypocritical, bringing this up, while accusing me of sounding “dark agey”? Projecting much?
As WALTER said “The Enemy has had his way with you, Maximus.”
(Mayhem understands that it is for others to decide when logic and reason have any bearing on his interpretations.)
elijah
Ancient Hebrews believed that the soul was in the blood.
Genesis 9:5
For the soul of all flesh, its life, is in its blood; therefore, I have said unto the sons of Israel, Ye shall not eat the blood of any flesh, for the soul (or the life) of all flesh is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off.
But flesh with the soul (or life) thereof, which is its blood, ye shall not eat.
For the soul of all flesh, its life, is in its blood; therefore, I have said unto the sons of Israel, Ye shall not eat the blood of any flesh, for the soul (or the life) of all flesh is its blood; whoever eats it shall be cut off.
Mayhem….If you can’t see the reality of the first world age and the huge beasts that thrived there in that hyper-oxygenated lush tropical environment, then I purposely insult your understanding as short sighted, and intentionally abridged to allow your exegesis(traditional).
There is no way flesh man Adam produced from his loins the Gentile peoples. the flesh won’t work like that, plus that bit of exegesis denies the divine bloodline of Jesus Christ, and negates the whole history of God’s ‘chosen people’.
Sorry, you’ve always been understanding, better than all but walter, but you are proving that you are equivalent to the papist priests of old, who also could not accept the Hebrew
transliterations or translations. I can understand 123′s rejection of the Hebrew, he’s got a “tunnel vision” doctrinal understanding(traditional)….but I know you know better.
One area of misunderstanding I find in ya’ll’s, young earth, theosophy is a confusion of the flood of Noah, with the flood of the Katabole….the very ‘foundations’ of this current earth/heaven age….that caused the world to “become” void and without form.
2nd Peter 3:5..’.For this they are willingly ignorant of,that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water.’ 6. ‘Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water PERISHED, (NO survivors). This reference is not to Noah’s flood….Peter covered that in chpter 2 verse5.
The Lord admonished his 6th day creation, to “Replenish” the earth. “RE”- plenish. Think for a second…what could that possibly imply, about an ‘earlier’ age.
I would bet that you and 123 will reject, again, any scripture that could even possibly contradict your exegetical belief in the young earth. So go forth and plant your un provable seeds. You’ll get called on it soon enough.
123…Ok bro, when I said the “anyone can find proof’….I was completely wrong. You have “proven” that to me. congratulations.
Mayhem…About the dinosaurs being the source of petroleum…it seems I was wrong about that,
I found out that it actually started out as microscopic sea life….so did all the natural gas….but it still took hundreds of millions of years.
max/elijah,
It takes two to tango. You refuse to answer direct questions, so what’s the point of trying to have a discussion? Trying to debate you is a waste of time.
When I see you spewing things that don’t line up with the Word, I will call you out on it. But don’t take it personal. I just call ‘em as I see ‘em.
123…for arguments’ sake lets drop the evolution thing….No need to talk to a closed door. Let’s talk about the Katabole. what do you know about that, and how do you deny that?
“Let’s talk about the Katabole. what do you know about that”
I know that it falls outside of the Word. Read the article to see why.
I believe the plush living conditions, large growth, etc. were the conditions on earth when God created the heavens and the earth during the time of Adam and Eve, when there was a water canopy over the earth. But that went out the window when God smacked the earth with the flood of Noah, the only world-wide flood of water spoken of in the Bible.
Here’s another question for you to ignore, elijah. When have i ever refused to defer to the original languages? You lie through your teeth to make any such claim. Shame on you. Take your apology and the dust from my sandals to boot.
You’ve an almighty high opinion of yourself to speak to anyone in this way. Dancing around trilling that you’re right and i’m wrong simply because everyone knows Evolution is real. So, again, any evidence or will it be more empty rhetoric? I’ll not join you in further discussion on unrelated topics but will keep an eye out in case you get back on point.
I’ve heard it said that believers can’t think for themselves…
http://www.creationliberty.com/images/kind01.jpg
… and that Evolution is perfectly sensible.
Mayhem…I don’t even care about evolution. It makes no difference what happened, in the first age before the world became void and without form….because according to your cult there’s NOTHING there….and that’s really all I want to expose. And I don’t care what you believe, you’ll know more about it all, soon.
Its good for people to know that there’s a cult out there purposely limiting the Word to support a tradition of men. Go find a symposium somewhere that tells the story the way you want it instead of the word of God. Get thine ears tickled.
You don’t even have the individuality to look at the history of the earth with an open mind….how are you ever going to see what’s going on now? In a spiritual sense you have sold out to an abridged interpretation of the reality of God’s Earth/heaven ages. If you don’t know how it all started you will never understand the end…and you have absolutely no understanding of the beginning. You have purposely excluded it from your liturgy, to make room for your young-earth theosophy. You’re just not spending enough time in the Old testament. But that’s par for the course…right?
If its not in lock step with your exegesis, you won’t even try an open minded investigation….that’s cult worship. I thought you would be more fearless……
Blah, blah, blah
I will consider any evidence you might care to put forward…
“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:” 1 Peter 3:15.
… even though your suggestion to read a high school science textbook was laughable given they support the evolution of man, without distinction. Same with your Wolf argument which fell flat due to them being Dogs, just as one would expect. And then you went the horse route, with am123, and once again your argument died with barely a whimper.
So then, elijah, now you try for a distraction from the topic when, clearly, the Author hasn’t mentioned anything extraneous to canon scripture. The only things that looks more like a capitulation is the tried and true “I haven’t got time to debate with idiots”. There’s that, in your favour, i s’pose.
I don’t care about your views on evolution…if you can’t see it, you can’t see it. No sin there. Its not important. What IS important is that you’ve admitted that you believe There was no earth before about 10 thousand years ago….That is totally not true Call yourself a Christian if you like, but don’t go around thinking you know anything about our origins…you don’t. You don’t even know about the origin of the gentile races, or the “key of David”. You have forced the scripture into a narrow, illogical and intentionally ignorant philosophy, to justify an erroneous interpretation of creation….Cultists can’t investigate any farther than the limitations they set, for protection of a ‘special’ tradition. Its not allowed, apparently. Every cult is the same when it comes to rigidity and control over the circumstances of revelation. Every one. You have been sold a bill of goods. For an intelligent fellow, you sure don’t have much knowledge of scripture…..Not even this little bit: 2 Peter 3:5,,”For this they are willingly ignorant of,that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6. Where by the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.”…….I’m sure you will come back with the Noah’s flood argument, but that is error. There WERE no survivors….This is called ‘the foundation” of this world age. The world that became void and formless. This the flood that gave us the fossil layer you mentioned in your ‘statement’ about the evidence in the Grand Canyon.
Says the man who had to change his user name the last time he couldn’t answer for his Faith
and why would anyone who reads Scripture call them self “Christian”? Whether i’m right or wrong i’ve, at least, stood behind everything i’ve ever said on this site.
So you don’t care about a subject upon which you claim my salvation hinges even though you’ve spent the best part of a week arguing the point. Too funny, elijah/max.
Mayhem…your obtuseness on the evolution question (you are not allowed to investigate with an open mind, apparently) Is a moot question now. My salvation is not tied to the question, nor is your poorly investigated answer. You’re not interested in information, whatever it is, If it doesn’t pass the young earth test. You really don’t know the first thing about the situation, and you care not to. The first thing is the Katabole….the laying of the foundations of this earth. Without this, you can’t possibly know who and what Satan himself is. Don’r worry, he’ll convince you that you missed something along the way. I’m done with you and your cult.
The Gap Theory is entirely construed by Evolutionists, as a ‘catch-all’ for their fallacious argument, they need millions of years in order to explain their beliefs…
“Well, given enough time who’s to say I’m wrong” Charles Darwin (attr)
… or something like that.
Whatever they can’t answer—how did this happen, how did that happen—they sweep it under the “millions of years” old rug, the catch all for every improbable event.
Mayhem wrote:
(…from the comment section of an article which spilled over into this one –
/christian-news/2015/03/thors-hammer-unearthed-in-denmark-proves-biblical-account-of-nephilim-giants-in-genesis-6-archaeologist-are-floored-2509902.html#comment_221568 )
“If you collated the genetic material of all the different types of Dogs, i believe, you’ll have the exact DNA from the kind found on the Ark…”
Let’s not ignore the fact that this is precisely what’s happening today with human DNA. It is being collected and collated – and for a very significant reason. The latest ‘Superman’ movie had a little to say about it. Masonic teaching about Adam Kadmon has even more to say. Big pieces of the puzzle coming together.
am123 wrote:
“And for a teaser, I propose a theory about the seemingly contradictory order of events in the first two chapters of Genesis.”
You know, I was looking at this the other day, and I think the confusion stems from where the translators ENDED the first chapter and BEGAN the second chapter of Genesis. The first ‘paragraph’ of chapter two reads:
“Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended all His work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all His work which God created and made.”
That would have been a great way to wrap up the first chapter, no? Especially when we consider how the following paragraph begins by explaining the generations of the Heavens and the Earth. It is clearly a re-telling, or rather, the giving of additional information. It is not meant to be considered as following the previous chapter in chronological order. This is fairly obvious. Also – there were no such thing as paragraphs or chapters in the original Manuscripts, so this interpretation has as much merit as another which places the beginning of chapter two a paragraph earlier.
Yes, I’ve always thought as well, that the first “paragraph” of chp 2 belongs to the end of chp 1. But the translators never asked me
I’ve read that the translators published the Bible this way to more clearly show the direct connection of the first two chapters of Genesis. I can’t see why that would be necessary and have always thought it very odd. It looks like a no brainer to me, for what it’s worth, and they started Ch 2 one paragraph earlier than logic and reason would dictate.
Yes, Walter, the collation of the hu-man genome. Very interesting and definitely something to keep a close eye on. Heads up, Brother, we’re going to be mocked large when we refuse the immortality and intelligence splice. Er… on second thoughts… being mocked might be the least of our, immediate, worries.
Mark of the Beast desolating the Temple, anyone?
Mayhem…since when does logic and reason have any bearing in your interpretations?
The book of Genesis? You mean the greatly condensed version of the ancient Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh.
Evolution is not a theory, anymore than gravity is a theory. Evolution exactly like gravity is an observable fact. The theory part is how that takes place, the mechanisms involved, not IF it takes place. Silly bean.
The story of how Adam and Eve came into being, ie Eve is made from Adam’s rib, is just too silly. All fetus’s start life as female, and if Eve was a clone of Adam, made from his rib, we would all have the same identical dna. We don’t = the story is illiterate codswallop.
Finally someone talking some sense! You’re getting there! We live in a feminine universe, but that doesn’t mean we’re weak. The female is the giver of life! Do you see where I’m going with this?
There are translation issues over the rib. The Koran also seems to say that ‘sperm’ comes the rib cage area.
“Now let man but think from what he is created! He is created from a drop emitted – Proceeding from between the backbone and the ribs:” S. 86:5-7
“The story of how Adam and Eve came into being, ie Eve is made from Adam’s rib, is just too silly.”
Really?
How silly is this:
Ribs are commonly removed during surgeries that require bone grafts in other parts of the body. The reason why ribs are used is the rib is the only bone in the body which if it is removed, and the periosteum (the membrane surrounding the rib) is left intact, the body will regenerate another rib.
Science is only playing catch up with the Bible.
am123
Yes it really could just be ‘life’ (eve) comes from the rib area that is being stated in these traditions.
Damine, rewriting ancient literature to make more sense of it?
Eve was not the first women, Lilith was, but was rejected for being too independent, refused to play 2nd fiddle to the squashed penis.
We know cloning is possible so I’m not ruling the story out on those grounds, but because we would share the same dna if it were true. We don’t. Adam would have needed to breed with a racially different women from every continent to get the same/similar variations in dna we have today. The biblical story time line is not long enough for natural variation via evolution.
am123 “Really?
How silly is this: Ribs are commonly removed during surgeries that require bone grafts in other parts of the body.”
In the SAME body. It’s not grown into a completely new body and a different gender as well.
Pix
All our (living things) DNA is related and stems from, as you stated, the original female form of life that begat life. From the virgin.
Damine “All our (living things) DNA is related and stems from, as you stated, the original female form of life that begat life. From the virgin.”
Actually in the beginning there was the cell, the cell has two choices, become immortal or divide/reproduce. When conditions are harsh the cell becomes immortal, when conditions are good the cell reproduces. It’s sole purpose is to pass on information, a dna blue print. The breeding/division process is subject to external conditions, so mutation and deformity are common under adverse conditions. It’s exactly why eg, radiation exposure causes mutation.
Some complex life forms eg clams are hermaphrodites, they start as male and turn into pregnant females. Aphids are basically clones, they are born pregnant, there is also a worm that is immortal. Sorry can’t remember it’s name but I read an article on it with the last few month. We have male and female and all shades of grey in between, eg the most obvious shade of grey being men with female dna and women with male dna.
Damine
All cells, regardless of dna gender self replicate/divide to pass on the genetic information. Gender is a later development, only relevant in high complex animals that breed. Breeding involves using two sets of dna blue prints from both the mother and father. These days the 2nd dna set can be via another women, or we can use two male sets of dna,… dna gender is not particularly important in reproduction.
The theory of evolution is a propaganda-laden farce that is fraught with folly and lacks empirical evidence from the fossil record. Consider the following lack of evidence for the theory of evolution in the fossil record:
* There is no physical evidence from the fossil record of anteaters with shorter and progressively longer snouts. The theory of evolution would have it that the anteater evolved its long snout gradually over millions of years. So at one point, according to the theory of evolution, there had to be an evolutionary ancestor to the modern anteater with a short snout, let’s say a 1 inch snout for arguments sake. And gradually over the years, there would have been an anteater with a 2 inch snout, an anteater with a 3 inch snout, and so forth up to the modern day anteater with its long snout. So does the fossil record shows such a progression? No it does not. Likewise, there is no physical evidence in the fossil record of a sequence of giraffes with shorter and progressively longer necks.
* There is no sequence in the fossil record showing one species or kind of animal changing into another species or kind of animal.
* Unless there is some breaking news somewhere, the Missing Link is still missing!
If evolution means the gradual change of one kind of organism into another kind, the outstanding characteristic of the fossil record is the absence of evidence for evolution.
Evolution is not a theory, but an observable fact, like gravity is a fact. The theory is how it works, what mechanisms are involved. We don’t need fossils to prove something we can observe taking place. The fossil records do however show the changes. As for your claim there would be evidence of change eg anteaters would have started with shorter snouts, in fact there are many varieties on anteaters with various length snouts. So which particular anteaters are you talking about? There are no missing links. Not even to how life started in the first place, there are several equally valid evidence based theories on how observable facts work.
DNA proves that all mammals share a common ancestor with a rodent like creature, and humans are members of the ape family that share a common ancestor with all other apes. We didn’t evolve from apes or monkeys.
“in fact there are many varieties on anteaters with various length snouts”
Such as?
am123 “in fact there are many varieties on anteaters with various length snouts. “”Such as?”"
http://www.arco-images.com/anteater-fossil-mine-messel-hesse-germany-eurotamandua-images-photos/259064.html
Fossil anteater with short snout. Ho hum.
How about this one? http://globalnation.inquirer.net/12387/last-stand-in-asia-for-shy-defenseless-anteater/
Do a Google search for ‘anteater species’ then click images.
You said a variety of anteaters with various length snouts.
One anteater fossil is not a variety. You won’t find a sequence of anteaters with various snouts from short to long in incremental steps, like evolution requires.
am123
“One anteater fossil is not a variety. You won’t find a sequence of anteaters with various snouts from short to long in incremental steps, like evolution requires.”
Yes it is a variety, being a single example doesn’t mean it isn’t real, it’s an example, one set by you, that proves that anteaters had a short snout. As do some living species. WTF do you want, me to post the entire effing library on anteaters?
The point is if evolution means organisms gradually changing over time, the fossil record should be chock full of anteater ancestors with snouts shorter than the 20+ inches of what they are today, all the way down to a very short snout. Likewise, you should see a similar progression with giraffes. But the fossil record doesn’t show any such progressions.
Anyone who actually investigates the fossil record will find that the fossil record wasn’t recorded over millions of years, but it was formed very rapidly, in a worldwide catastrophic event known as Noah’s flood.
am123
“The point is if evolution means organisms gradually changing over time, “. There is no IF about it.
“Anyone who actually investigates the fossil record will find that the fossil record wasn’t recorded over millions of years, but it was formed very rapidly, in a worldwide catastrophic event known as Noah’s flood.”
By anyone you mean creationists like you and they don’t investigate anything. There is no evidence of creation or the magic man you say created it.
The start of the current interglacial period c15’000 years ago, (yes we are still in an ice age that so far has lasted c30 million years) that resulted in the melting of the ice caps and raised sea levels hundreds of feet, didn’t wipe out the dinosaurs, they lived and died out millions of years ago, not a few thousand. Mammoths, saber toothed tigers, large wooly rhino’s etc, died out during the period you are referring to. Evidence of modern humans dates to at least 100’000 years ago, not a piffling 15’000.
Well then Pix, as a devout evolutionist, will you go on record for the following?
Take a look at the 30:25 mark of the following video:
“Scientific Age of the Young Earth – Dr. Don Patton”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1GJjHXX0Ic
At the 30:25 mark of the above video, you will see a fossil of a beautifully formed Wolf Spider, a big hairy spider. Riddle me this if you will: Do you believe the evolutionist account of how long it took for this fossil to form?
According to evolutionists, sedimentary rock slowly built up around this dead spider at a rate of 2 inches per one million years. So let’s say for arguments sake that the Wolf Spider is 1 inch in height. So if what the evolutionists claim is true, then the body of that Wolf Spider would have had to remain intact—fully formed—without disintegrating into dust, for 500,000 years before it turned into a perfectly formed fossil. Does that make sense, at all? Common sense tells you a spider that dies will get eaten, or it would turn to dust over several years. But to accept the explanation of evolutionists, the body of the spider remained intact for over half a million years without disintegrating so that the fossil could be perfectly formed.
So I ask you Pix, as a devout evolutionist, will you go on record agreeing that the fossil in question was formed at a rate of 2 inches per one million years, without the body disintegrating?
Then you will have no problem providing the literature supporting the observations that Evolution is a fact. Won’t you Pix? Lets see it, sunshine.
What sort of stupid obfuscation are you trying to pull saying that evolution is a provable fact given we have no idea on how it works? How it works is exactly the sort of evidence you’d need to prove the fact, isn’t it?
Wanna play, Pix? I’ll take the creation angle and you’re welcome to the evolution angle. Lets see which of us can put up the most reasonable argument.
“Gender is a later development, only relevant in high complex animals that breed” Pix…
Er… what about gender specific plants, do they fit into your example? Or are you starting to panic and merely blurting out any old rubbish with a modicum of science spin applied for effect?
Natural selection always involves a loss of genetic material and is the driving force behind all of the variations that have occurred to date. Evolution requires that the observational evidence be switched 180 degrees. Natural selection should be dropped by the Evolutionists given that it supports the Creationist argument, entirely.
Anyone else noticing the 180 degree complete turn around, black and white, good and evil, light and darkness theme continually cropping up? At the heart it’s never a slight shift in paradigm required. It’s always a case of polar opposites. Makes me think, that does.
I believe there’s still gold up for grabs, Pix, should you ever prove the Bible is any sort of version of anything. Do you have something that pre-dates Scripture to support your assertion or will you rely on the opinions of more recent scholars, as usual?
If it is as you say and in the beginning there was the cell would you care to attempt an explanation on where this singularity got it’s morals from? Logic, reason, conscience and morals all come from the creator and you stand on His foundation just to have the privilege of posting your nonsense in public. You should be more thankful, Pix, my favourite Atheist.
Mayhem
“Then you will have no problem providing the literature supporting the observations that Evolution is a fact. ” There are shed loads of evidence proving evolution, but I don’t need to prove that change is not the norm when that is all that exists. Please provide a single example of anything that has not changed over time.
“What sort of stupid obfuscation are you trying to pull saying that evolution is a provable fact given we have no idea on how it works?” Not knowing how something works doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Using your argument, do you deny gravity exists because we don’t know what causes it?
“Wanna play, Pix? I’ll take the creation angle and you’re welcome to the evolution angle. Lets see which of us can put up the most reasonable argument.” You have nothing to play with. Magic is not provable.
Mayhem
“Gender is a later development, only relevant in high complex animals that breed” Pix… Er… what about gender specific plants, do they fit into your example?
Yes, plants have as many diverse ways of reproducing as all other forms of life.
Mayhem
“Natural selection always involves a loss of genetic material and is the driving force behind all of the variations that have occurred to date. Evolution requires that the observational evidence be switched 180 degrees. Natural selection should be dropped by the Evolutionists given that it supports the Creationist argument, entirely.”
Nope. you are looking at it wrong. Natural selection takes place when conditions change. Nature hates a vacuum so adapts to every niche available. It’s a diversification of life, expansion. That is not the same as loss eg via extinctions, they take place when conditions change too fast for adaptation to keep up.
“Anyone else noticing the 180 degree complete turn around, black and white, good and evil, light and darkness theme continually cropping up? At the heart it’s never a slight shift in paradigm required. It’s always a case of polar opposites. Makes me think, that does.”
Yep, well, too much light will blind you just the same as too much dark. Balance is required, a happy shade of grey.
“I believe there’s still gold up for grabs, Pix, should you ever prove the Bible is any sort of version of anything. Do you have something that pre-dates Scripture to support your assertion or will you rely on the opinions of more recent scholars, as usual?”
That is very presumptive of you. I use all relevant scholars, especially Christian ones, specifically because they would have everything to lose and nothing to gain. I can prove the bible is fraud if that is what you mean.
“If it is as you say and in the beginning there was the cell would you care to attempt an explanation on where this singularity got it’s morals from? Logic, reason, conscience and morals all come from the creator and you stand on His foundation just to have the privilege of posting your nonsense in public. You should be more thankful, Pix, my favourite Atheist.”
Over time we adapted/evolved them. Our brain increased in size allowing for abstract thought processes, problem solving for example. We can see other animals using tools to solve problems the same as we would. There are no such things as morals, they are 100% subjective to the place and modality of the age. The fact we agree that murdering people for no good reason is unacceptable, stems from the fact we learned the benefit of social structure. There are many species who do that, wolves, the whale family, the ape family, all herd animals, for example learned to cooperate as a single unit, a society. It has nothing to do with dark age religions.
As for being thankful,.. I partake in the pagan ‘all hallows eve’ festival. That’s the annual festival where you thank all your ancestors, right back to when we were little more than pond scum tens of millions of years ago for being successful, because if a single one of them had failed to breed, we would not exist. Thank your real creators for your life, not some dark age invented narcissistic schizophrenic genocidal magic man.
By “more recent” i meant since the time of the flood, Pix, sorry i wasn’t more generous.
What does “change” have to do with this debate? I’m not stupid enough to make any such claim. Change is constant and always involves a loss of genetic material. Even in humans which is why a paternity test must allow a margin for error, albeit very small.
The difference being, Pix, we can observe gravity. What’s your point?
Correct magic is not provable but why do you get to call your magic “Science”? At least i’ll admit to believing in things that are not seen and is that any worse than believing all life spontaneously erupted from a rock? Or worse, pond scum! You think Faith is ridiculous, Pix, and you should hear yourself talking.
It is noted that nothing, other than opinion, has been presented and the attempt to deflect the onus onto proving the negative position is being ignored.
This is a “world view” argument, as i’m sure you know, Pix and while your position sounds reasonable, on the surface, it’s obvious we don’t see things the same way. Surprise
When you speak on the benefit of societal structure you show me who your God is but that’s another topic so i’ll just ask… What benefit? We generally live along rivers or large bodies of water else wise the coastline and especially where rivers meet the coastline. Am-i-wrong? There’s no herd mentality in that. Just a lack of good spots to set down roots and a little bit of getting along with each other.
I don’t really see any benefit given the greed, for power and control, that is on display for all of us to see. Do you see it? I see a viable solution rooted in a pure form of anarchy with holistic tribal influences woven throughout. Co-operation among groups based entirely on the “cost versus benefit” concept. Oh… and a King of the World cause lets face it the majority of folk like to be told what to do so they don’t have to hurt their brains worrying about the scary stuff they don’t understand.
The application of morals is subjective, Pix, and this is a portion of the freewill we are granted. But yes; we employ flexibility to arrive at the current “norm” because we think we know best. Morals are written on our hearts and in our minds by the creator of all. They are absolute and we have no right to shift our position to suit the changing times. Right is right and wrong is wrong.
In a comment, to am123, you mentioned a bunch of large time scales right up to tens of millions of years. May i inquire the dating methods being used to calculate such vast numbers?
Pix
Someone has deleted my post!
Anyway in it I point out that the y chromosome is just a degenerate version of the x chromosome (the lower right spoke being lost).
When gender did not exist then all life was female. It was only after non female life (i.e. after degeneration) emerged that gender started to have the sense it has now. Non of the kim il sunn 600 BC genesis gender freaks that you hope will dope people into your pseudo religious mass murdering marxist eschatology changes that. A I also stated these arguments are always at cross purposes. As the religious argue against a materialistic world so you, in pursuit of year zero, argue after a materialistic virgin birth even though it was you that raied the matter of the feminazi foetus as female.
Pix
None of the Kim Il Sung like year is one, 6000 BC Genesis gender freaks that you hope will dope people into your and their states pseudo religious mass murdering marxist eschatology changes that. As I also stated these arguments are always at cross purposes. As the religious argue against a materialistic world so you, in pursuit of year zero, argue now against a materialistic universes ‘virgin birth’ (reproduction of life without outside non-materialistic ‘baby daddy’ help. Even though it was you that raised the matter of this feminazi foetus as originally female.
To be precise:
Parthenogenesis (virgin birth etc) is a female – never male – trait. Life originated as female simply because it reproduced without ‘sex’ as a virgin birth. Everything else is an adaptation of this. This gives moral support to the idea of sex (if it is really sex and not violence) as that which takes place in what is wedded as one body.
Damine “Even though it was you that raised the matter of this feminazi foetus as originally female.”
Complex life. EG mammals, fish, birds, reptiles, insects… their eggs are all female, they change from female according to external influences. Bird and reptile gender depends on the external influence of incubation temperature. In mammals it’s more complex there are many influences, the largest being hormonal.
Simple life, single cells even within complex life, it matters not, because cells divide/reproduce regardless of dna gender. If they didn’t we would have very short lives, blood cells for example, only live for 1 week.
All rooted in the virgin birth that precedes genderization.
Clones, as you stated, are the result of virgin birth.
“”We know cloning is possible … we would share the same dna if it were true. We don’t”"
We do. The DNA of all life is rooted in the same source. Humans share 50% of their DNA with bananas.
Then it remains that the theory of evolution is upheld by folk who want to rob God, of the credit, for more than half of His miraculous creation.
Darwin’s theory is wholly reliant on ignoring the scientific method which led him to accept the lack of transitional fossils as, “…the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory,”.
As for me being obtuse; well i think i’ve seen all the evidence regarding the Creation versus Evolution debate, both sides, but maybe, one of these days, someone will surprise me with something new. I’ll not be holding my breath in the meantime.
There are scientists who say that what we understand as the creation of the universe (the big bang) was just a fall away from an infinite, uncreated reality into the 3 spatial dimensional world that we experience now.
I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised that some scientists are saying exactly that, so what? Until such time as man’s opinion trumps the reality i’m going to stick with the oldest known historical account of the creation.
Mayhem
“Their suggestion: our known universe could be the three-dimensional “wrapping” around a four-dimensional black hole’s event horizon. In this scenario, our universe burst into being when a star in a four-dimensional universe collapsed into a black hole.
In our three-dimensional universe, black holes have two-dimensional event horizons – that is, they are surrounded by a two-dimensional boundary that marks the “point of no return.” In the case of a four-dimensional universe, a black hole would have a three-dimensional event horizon.
In their proposed scenario, our universe was never inside the singularity; rather, it came into being outside an event horizon, protected from the singularity. It originated as – and remains – just one feature in the imploded wreck of a four-dimensional star.”
http://scitechdaily.com/universe-may-emerged-black-hole-higher-dimensional-universe/
ISAIAH 14:9
The realm of the dead below is all astir
to meet you at your coming;
it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you—
all those who were leaders in the world;
it makes them rise from their thrones—
all those who were kings over the nations.
They will all respond,
they will say to you,
“You also have become weak, as we are;
you have become like us.”
All your pomp has been brought down to the grave,
along with the noise of your harps;
maggots are spread out beneath you
and worms cover you.
How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!
You said in your heart,
“I will ascend to the heavens;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon.
I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.”
But you are brought down to the realm of the dead,
to the depths of the pit.
Mayhem
Satan being the Lord of this world.
Isaiah spoke of the fall of Nebuchadnezzar (King of Babylon) and drew upon the similarity with the coming fall of Satan as written in Revelation 20:10. The fall you mean is the one prophesied in Ezekiel 28:14-16 which Jesus spoke of in Luke 10:18.
Or did you read me half the Bible to support your treatise on string theory? But yes, Damine, Satan is the King of this World.
Mayhem
And Isaiah also spoke not of Jesus but was then reinterpreted as doing so.
This is the point. Who are you to say what is literal or not in the Bible? This ‘world’ LITERALLY came from a falling star. SUCK IT UP!!!!!
Did i claim that Isaiah spoke of Jesus or did i allow that he wrote about Satan (Lord of this world) and his coming fall?
Yes, Damine, both Satan and Jesus were described as bright morning stars, compare Isaiah 14:12 with Revelation 22:16.
Who am I? Nobody and that’s a fact Jack
Those who believe in evolution can’t believe, for example, this:
“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.”
—GEN 1:24