[_ Old Earth _] The "Cambrian Explosion" Takes Another Hit

[Barbarian]

The earliest identified bilateran (bilaterally symmetrical) animal dates at least 550 million years old:

The classification of Kimberella is important for scientific understanding of the Cambrian explosion: if it was a mollusc or at least a protostome, the protostome and deuterostome lineages must have diverged significantly before 555 million years ago. Even if it was a bilaterian but not a mollusc, its age would indicate that animals were diversifying well before the start of the Cambrian.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberella

 

[Knotical]

Why is it that you continue to push this agenda when it is clear that evolution, and the idea of an old earth, is not supported biblically?

 

[Barbarian]

Why is it that you continue to push this agenda

Because I am personally aware of the tremendous damage YE creationism has done to the faith of many people.

when it is clear that evolution, and the idea of an old earth, is not supported biblically?

Neither are protons supported Biblically. And neither of them are denied Biblically. Not everything is true is in the Bible.

The point is that complex animals, even bilaterally-organized animals, existed long before the Cambrian. Animals are much older than the Cambrian.

 

[turnorburn]

Because I am personally aware of the tremendous damage YE creationism has done to the faith of many people.



Neither are protons supported Biblically. And neither of them are denied Biblically. Not everything is true is in the Bible.

The point is that complex animals, even bilaterally-organized animals, existed long before the Cambrian. Animals are much older than the Cambrian.

Animals were made on the same day Adam was..

Genesis 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 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.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

That would be day 6.. Btw all truth is in Gods word because Jesus said He Is the truth

 

[Barbarian]

Animals were made on the same day Adam was..

Long before Darwin, Christians realized the "yom" of Genesis did not mean literal days. As you know, "yom" can mean many periods of time, "forever" and other things as well.

 

[Knotical]

Long before Darwin, Christians realized the "yom" of Genesis did not mean literal days. As you know, "yom" can mean many periods of time, "forever" and other things as well.

Not true. Also, it appears as though you do not accept that the bible is inerrant.

The only people that do not believe in a literal six days are those who are trying squeeze evolution into the bible, which is not possible, and is actually blasphemous.

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Long before Darwin, Christians realized the "yom" of Genesis did not mean literal days. As you know, "yom" can mean many periods of time, "forever" and other things as well.

Not true.

Very true. St.Augustine, then and now considered to be one of the most orthodox Christian theologians, laid out the reasons why this was so, and no one thought to argue with him over it.

Also, it appears as though you do not accept that the bible is inerrant.

Augustine pointed out that it was inerrant. It's just that the "literal meaning of Genesis" (the title of his analysis of Genesis) isn't what some modern Christians think it is.

The only people that do not believe in a literal six days are those who are trying squeeze evolution into the bible,

As you see, the the early Christian understanding of Genesis predates Evolutionary theory by over 1500 years. They might not have had the technology we do, but they certainly weren't blasphemous.

 

[turnorburn]

Barbarian observes:
Long before Darwin, Christians realized the "yom" of Genesis did not mean literal days. As you know, "yom" can mean many periods of time, "forever" and other things as well.



Very true. St.Augustine, then and now considered to be one of the most orthodox Christian theologians, laid out the reasons why this was so, and no one thought to argue with him over it.



Augustine pointed out that it was inerrant. It's just that the "literal meaning of Genesis" (the title of his analysis of Genesis) isn't what some modern Christians think it is.



As you see, the the early Christian understanding of Genesis predates Evolutionary theory by over 1500 years. They might not have had the technology we do, but they certainly weren't blasphemous.

Since when did anything Augustine say override Gods word?

 

[turnorburn]

Long before Darwin, Christians realized the "yom" of Genesis did not mean literal days. As you know, "yom" can mean many periods of time, "forever" and other things as well.

Darwin was an infidel, shouldn't be believing anything he said..

 

[Barbarian]

Since when did anything Augustine say override Gods word?

As you saw, Augustine's book is consistent with God's word.

Darwin was an infidel, shouldn't be believing anything he said..

When he wrote his book, he was a Protestant. Yes, wrong about some things, but hardly an infidel. And in science no one "trusts" anyone's word. Darwin's theory is only accepted because the evidence supports it.