[_ Old Earth _] Hows this for logic

[Cygnus]

We see, over time, a gradual change in trilobites from simple arthropods, to some of the most evolved organisms. There's no point in denying the facts. If they weren't organized in chronological order, you might have had a point. But you're merely denying reality.

I can do the same thing with dogs.[/QUOTE]

No you can't. Show me a dog that's a filter feeder, or one that lives in the open sea. Dogs have a tiny amount of variation, mostly changes in size and proportions in bones. Things that are easily changed by careful breeding.[/QUOTE]
HUH??? Show you a dog that is filter feeder or lives in the sea????
You make absolutely no sense at all.

Hey, show me an oak tree growing on the sea floor...is that what you'll be asking next? Get real pal.

 

[GodsGrace]

Nope,. That would go contrary to the bible. It opens up way to many bible verses and themes to extreme contradiction where twisting of scripture through evo-interpretations is required.

As you see, you have already began to fill in the blanks...a cave man and then God decided...The bible doesn't say such a thing.

There is a problem with Genesis however.
God turned Adam and Eve out of the Garden. They went into a world where man already existed, where there was already a population. See Genesis 4:14-15. WHO exactly was supposed to kill Cain?
And verse 16 and 17. Cain settled in the land of Nod. And knew his wife. Where did his wife come from?
Another theory is that through incest the earth was populated. Caine might have married a sister. I don't have any opinion on this and don't think about it too much.
My above theory to Barbarian seems acceptable.

The bible doesn't say everything has been written. John 21:25
My idea does not seem heretical.
I do not believe in evolution the way Barbarian has explained it. I DO believe in evolution within a species.

Could you, if it's not too much trouble, tell me a couple of scriptures my idea would "twist"?

Wondering

 

[Cygnus]

There is a problem with Genesis however.
God turned Adam and Eve out of the Garden. They went into a world where man already existed, where there was already a population. See Genesis 4:14-15. WHO exactly was supposed to kill Cain?
And verse 16 and 17. Cain settled in the land of Nod. And knew his wife. Where did his wife come from?
Another theory is that through incest the earth was populated. Caine might have married a sister. I don't have any opinion on this and don't think about it too much.
My above theory to Barbarian seems acceptable.

The bible doesn't say everything has been written. John 21:25
My idea does not seem heretical.
I do not believe in evolution the way Barbarian has explained it. I DO believe in evolution within a species.

Could you, if it's not too much trouble, tell me a couple of scriptures my idea would "twist"?

Wondering

Wondering posted....."They went into a world where man already existed, where there was already a population."

That would be a false non-biblical statement.
If you notice in Gen 3:20 we read:
The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.

 

[Cygnus]

Could you, if it's not too much trouble, tell me a couple of scriptures my idea would "twist"?

Wondering

You can start with this verse....Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned Romans 5:12

....evolutionism is contradicted in the above verse.

 

[GodsGrace]

Wondering posted....."They went into a world where man already existed, where there was already a population."

That would be a false non-biblical statement.
If you notice in Gen 3:20 we read:
The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.

Yeah. I know this Cygnus.
But it doesn't really answer the question of where everyone came from, does it?

Instead of twisting scripture, it seems to me that it's one of these discrepancies non-believers like to discuss.

W

 

[GodsGrace]

You can start with this verse....Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned Romans 5:12

....evolutionism is contradicted in the above verse.

Wait. I didn't say I believed in evolution as described by Barbarian.

The rest of what you say is true and has nothing to do with what I'm speaking of...

W

 

[GodsGrace]

For Cygnus

I have to leave in 5 minutes.
If you care to respond, here's what I'm saying:

First of all, the story of Adam and Eve could be called an allegory. There WAS a first man and a first woman. We can't say that their names were Adam and Eve. The names have meaning and you know what they are and thus the names.

Okay. God breathed life into them.

Then they eat of the forbidden fruit. God bans them from the Garden lest they should eat of the tree of Life.

The world becomes populated. HOW?

Why would it be so wrong to think that maybe a different form of man existed and then God breathed life into a new form of man to make that man be like God? Having a spirit.

I'll check in later. Your reply would be interesting. Whatever it is.

W

 

[Barbarian]

Nope,. That would go contrary to the bible. It opens up way to many bible verses and themes to extreme contradiction where twisting of scripture through evo-interpretations is required.

The important part of this is that once you accept the way God did it, you don't have to go through all those revisions to scripture that YE creationism demands.

As you see, you have already began to fill in the blanks. The notion that God poofed each kind of creature into existence individually, as opposed to the Earth bringing forth living things, as He said, is an unnecessary addition to His word.

 

[Barbarian]

First of all, the story of Adam and Eve could be called an allegory. There WAS a first man and a first woman. We can't say that their names were Adam and Eve. The names have meaning and you know what they are and thus the names.

It's important to realize that there can be allegories about real people, as you suggest.

Why would it be so wrong to think that maybe a different form of man existed and then God breathed life into a new form of man to make that man be like God? Having a spirit.

Pretty much the way He did it, if you accept that He chose two humans to become different, and capable of fellowship with Him.

 

[Cygnus]

Yeah. I know this Cygnus.
But it doesn't really answer the question of where everyone came from, does it?

Instead of twisting scripture, it seems to me that it's one of these discrepancies non-believers like to discuss.

W

Sure it does...Eve was the "mother" of all people.

 

[Cygnus]

For Cygnus

I have to leave in 5 minutes.
If you care to respond, here's what I'm saying:

First of all, the story of Adam and Eve could be called an allegory. There WAS a first man and a first woman. We can't say that their names were Adam and Eve. The names have meaning and you know what they are and thus the names.

Okay. God breathed life into them.

Then they eat of the forbidden fruit. God bans them from the Garden lest they should eat of the tree of Life.

The world becomes populated. HOW?

Why would it be so wrong to think that maybe a different form of man existed and then God breathed life into a new form of man to make that man be like God? Having a spirit.

I'll check in later. Your reply would be interesting. Whatever it is.

W

Adam and Eve were not allegories. They were real, historical literal people. That's how the scriptures presents them.

There ws no different form of man. As pointed out earlier, Eve was the "mother" of all..and through one man Adam sin and death entered.
God breathing a spirit into a "new" form of man would be adding to the bible.

 

[Cygnus]

The important part of this is that once you accept the way God did it, you don't have to go through all those revisions to scripture that YE creationism demands.

As you see, you have already began to fill in the blanks. The notion that God poofed each kind of creature into existence individually, as opposed to the Earth bringing forth living things, as He said, is an unnecessary addition to His word.

I'm just presenting what the bible says...not changing it like you do. What can I say?

 

[Cygnus]

It's important to realize that there can be allegories about real people, as you suggest.



Pretty much the way He did it, if you accept that He chose two humans to become different, and capable of fellowship with Him.

Allegories....OK, here's how it went down....Paul was writing to Tim. He told Tim how the women should act in church......and Paul based it on an allegory? Hey ladies, because Eve was decieved in the allegory and Adam wasn't deceived in the allegory....you ladies are to remain silent. Don't worry ladies, remember it was just an allegory. What I just rote to Timothy NEVER HAPPENED!!!!!

Oh how the theo-evos need to re-write scripture.

 

[brother Paul]

God turned Adam and Eve out of the Garden. They went into a world where man already existed, where there was already a population. See Genesis 4:14-15

No they did not and this is not what is stated here.

a) this does not address Adam and Eve it addresses Cain (who may have been much older)
b) by the time of the Abel/Cain murder they were already adults with their own professions

Adam and Eve had not stopped being fruitful and multiplying and most likely had other children (many who were adults and most likely also had children).

Cain had been cast out from the family group not the garden...but other humans were obviously already alive (many adamic offspring)....

 

[Cygnus]

God turned Adam and Eve out of the Garden. They went into a world where man already existed, where there was already a population. See Genesis 4:14-15

No they did not and this is not what is stated here.

a) this does not address Adam and Eve it addresses Cain (who may have been much older)
b) by the time of the Abel/Cain murder they were already adults with their own professions

Adam and Eve had not stopped being fruitful and multiplying and most likely had other children (many who were adults and most likely also had children).

Cain had been cast out from the family group not the garden...but other humans were obviously already alive (many adamic offspring)....

Brother Paul, here is your scriptural support for "and most likely had other children":
Gen 5:4 The days of Adam after he fathered Seth were 800 years; and he had other sons and daughters.

 

[brother Paul]

Yeah I know so think about it....they must have had a lot babies in 800 years

 

[Cygnus]

Yeah I know so think about it....they must have had a lot babies in 800 years

...I would think it means they had babies over an 800 year (or shorter) time period.....not that Adam hit 800 then began to have babies.
As the NET bible puts it: The length of time Adam lived after he became the father of Seth was 800 years; during this time he had other sons and daughters.

 

[jasonc]

Chava and ish.the hebrew names of Adam and eve.more then just allegory but names and people.I take genesis as its simply stated as we get into things that we aren't meant to know and miss the point.the genealogy Is important.anyone can find a reason to doubt. I prefer not to give it to them

 

[Corn Pop]

Barbarian, do you believe evolution to be a hard fact, as in, the evidence is firm?, or, do you believe the evidence overwhelmingly leads to evolution, yet still has missing pieces?

Im talking evolution all from a single cell common ancestor.

 

[Barbarian]

I can do the same thing with dogs.

Barbarian chuckles:
No you can't. Show me a dog that's a filter feeder, or one that lives in the open sea. Dogs have a tiny amount of variation, mostly changes in size and proportions in bones. Things that are easily changed by careful breeding.

HUH???

As you just learned, triolbites evolved from shallow bottom-dwelling predators, to open-sea swimmers, to filter feeders, to deep ocean adapted organisms. They evolved far, far more then dogs, or even canids.

Show you a dog that is filter feeder or lives in the sea????
You make absolutely no sense at all.

Actually, the line that led to dogs, includes at least three groups that do live in the sea. But they are still carnivores which must come to shore at certain times, with only a tiny percent of the variation that evolved in trilobites during the Cambrian.

I don't think you've thought this out very well.