[_ Old Earth _] Theistic Evolution and ape-men...

[cupid dave]

While the ancient readers had no even remote suspicion that the genealogy in Genesis could be so supportive of the Bible as a divine source of revelation, we are in the eviable position today to use what modern science claims to know as evidence that scripture was exactly right.

Those Biblers believers who insist their medieval ideas ought be supported into the 21st Century are merely foolish christians.
They represent those who would oppose such a validation of the Bible, (i.e.; science), in times like these, where religion is waning and the present secularism has nearly ridiculed the church people out of the college campuses and the adolescent community.


Genesis 5:2 supports the premise that "Adam" was a taxonomic eponym for the first appearance of man, born with a genetic mutation that reduced his Chromosome number from 24 pairs, as have all apes, to the present 23 pairs common to all men:



Gen 5:2 says god called them, the man and his wife, the "Adamites,"... i.e.; a species:

Gen 5:2 Male and female created he THEM; and blessed THEM, and called THEIR name Adam, (a species), in the day when THEY were created.


The naysayers might attempt to re-write this direct statement which support my case here, and deflect the powerful implications that follow, but they merely render a contrary opinion of their own, and in no way disparage the use of this hint, that Adam was, indeed, a name for a kind of man, the very first kind.

But the case for seeing this as a foundation for claiming that Genesis, in an uncanny and nothing short of divine revelation goes on to match the most recent book which identifies the 22 "names" that follow this first "Adam" as, likewise, analogous to the 22 now extinct human species that disappeared in the "flood" out-of-Africa 40 thousand years of "days and nights" ago:

Book:

The Last Human: A Guide to Twenty-Two Species of Extinct Humans
by G.J.Sawyer, (Author)

 

[cupid dave]

We need revisit this verse in Genesis which tells us that God created man "out of the dust of the earth."

Our science today supports that by reognizing that atoms are the dust of the earth.
God used them in a chemistry which fused two of the 24 pairs of Ape chromosomes together, inside the womb of a surrogte mother-Ape, and the first man-kind of animal appeared in a virgin birth de facto there was no human mother.





At each end of a chromosome we have a Telomere.
The purpose of the telomere in a chromosome is to prevent deterioration of the important bits of the chromosome from the end.

Chimpanzees and Humans have extremely similar DNA to humans.
But Chimpanzees have one more chromosome than Humans do, (24 pairs), and if Humans and Chimpanzees are genetically related (sharing a common ancestor), this extra chromosome had to go somewhere.
Evolutionary Biologists might predict that two chromosomes fused into one.
But they would need hard evidence to use that hypothesis as more argument for evolution in general, and for a good enough reason to make such a claim.
As it turns out Chromosome number 2 in Humans was once two different chromosomes that were fused together.
Additionally, the evidence is that an extra large Telomere appears in the middle of the #2 chromosome, as well as an extra Centromere, as depicted in the illustration above.

 

[Knotical]

Nope, not even remotely true. When the bible says that God used the "dust of the earth" to make man, He actually used dust He took from the ground. This has nothing to do with, or could even remotely construed as having change the makeup of an ape to make man.

Man was not made from Apes, and to suggest so is heretical at best.

 

[cupid dave]

Nope, not even remotely true. When the bible says that God used the "dust of the earth" to make man, He actually used dust He took from the ground. This has nothing to do with, or could even remotely construed as having change the makeup of an ape to make man.

Man was not made from Apes, and to suggest so is heretical at best.

Yes, it is heretical.

It differs profoundly with what we might say are the pharisees of this age, the establishment and self appointed authorities which gained their own power over interpreting the Bible when they opposed the Roman Catholic Church before the Reformation.

Protestant leaders ought note that the pope in 1998, said that the ToE was too well established by scientific facts for the church to oppose evolution as a natural process.
He no doubt remembers what happen in 1600 and will not lose half his RC congregtion again.





Rev. 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold,... (the golden spiritual insights of the irrepressible idea of psychic Consciousness emerging from scripture) ... tried in the fire... (of time),... that thou mayest be rich... (in continued church leadership); and (re-interpret upon) white (yet unwritten, new pages), raiment,... (of revised books of your evermore obvious misinterpretations), ...that thou mayest be clothed... (and protected in thine thinking with secularly acceptable scriptural confirmations), ...and that the shame... (as visited in Geocentricism does not reoccur concerning magical Creationism, impossible literal world-wide floods, genealogies of individuals who lived inordinately long personal life times, Sun and Moon and Stars absent from the Heavens while light shines through the Cosmos, etc) ...of thy nakedness... (of your unsupportable intuitive irrationalities) ...do not appear... (and confront you as happened before The Reformation); ...and anoint thine eyes...(awaken!)... with (the) eyesalve... (of reality!), ...that thou mayest see... (socio-psychologically).

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Protestant leaders ought note that the pope in 1998, said that the ToE was too well established by scientific facts for the church to oppose evolution as a natural process.
He no doubt remembers what happen in 1600 and will not lose half his RC congregtion again.

Of course not. If he loses half of his congregation, he loses half of that racket he's got going on over there. It's clear that he values his racket much more than he values the Word of our Lord.


The timespans you got from that book don't even match up relatively with the True timespans that these INDIVIDUALS lived. The timespan between the birth of Seth and the birth of Noah in the Book of Genesis is 926 years. The evolutionists say that Australopithecus anamensis lived around 4 million years ago. They also say that Cro-Magnon emerged around 43,000 years ago. So, that makes the whacked-out-Genesis/evolution-hypothesis timespan 3,957,000 years. Take 3,957,000 and divide that by 926 and you get that what our Lord calls a "year" would supposedly be 4273.22 "real" years. Right from the get, the math is off from the birth of Seth to the birth of Enos. The Book of Genesis says that the timespan between the birth of Seth and the birth of Enos is 105 years. 105 x 4273.22=448688.1. That's not even half a million. The timespan that the evolutionists give between anamensis and africanus is 1-2 million years!

Oh, and let me guess . . . there once lived an entire species of creature named Cro-Magnon that went around talking to God and building arks, and taking two or more of every species aboard. Wait a minute. Talking to God? They were talking to an entire race of Gods! Yeah, yeah, I can play this ridiculous game too! It's all right there in Genesis 1:26! "Let Us make man in Our image . . ." There ya have it, folks. An entire race of Gods. It was right there in Genesis all along.

It seems to me that some of you "believers" just wanna have your Holy Scripture cake and eat your heresy too.

Don't worry. Now that I've pulled the rug out from under Mr. Sawyer's feeble hypothesis, I'm sure they'll come out with a new book that tries to bend the unchanging Word of God to fit with evolution.

 

[cupid dave]

Of course not. If he loses half of his congregation, he loses half of that racket he's got going on over there. It's clear that he values his racket much more than he values the Word of our Lord.

.

If I understand you correctly, you predict that if the Pope kept fighting the science which he said is overwhelmingly convincing, he would end up losing his congregation over there?

How wil lthat be different for the Protestants here in America?


That was the point of my last post.
The church people will oose their church if they maintain their interpretation of Genesis against all reasonable and factual evidence that they merely misunderstood what was written and have had it wrong.

I am saying that the church people have the choice to align Genesis with science fact of to fight againt those facts.

In the latter the pope prophesies they will experience the Reformation all over again.
On the other, they would discover that science fact supports a better and more clearly understood Genesis.

 

[Adam]

Gensis is not a science book. It is a book of symbols that represent IDEALS, not historic facts.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

If I understand you correctly, you predict that if the Pope kept fighting the science which he said is overwhelmingly convincing, he would end up losing his congregation over there?

Thanks for calling me out on that. I should have clarified better. I was granting you your premise about the pope losing his flock and/or his worry of losing his flock, and simply responding to that premise.

How wil lthat be different for the Protestants here in America?

It wil lnot be. If God's Word says "130 years", it is 130 years. If God wanted to, He would have said "1,000,000", "2,000,000", or "3,000,000".

That was the point of my last post.
The church people will oose their church if they maintain their interpretation of Genesis against all reasonable and factual evidence that they merely misunderstood what was written and have had it wrong.

Factual evidence? Well, which is it? Was Noah a historical figure who built an ark, or was Noah a race we now call Cro-Magnon? If the hypothesis of you Scripture-tampering mental gymnasts became the mainstream, would you ditch the term "Cro-Magnon" and replace it with "Noah"? It never will because it doesn't fit, so don't worry about that. Did Noah take is sons with him, or did he fit three entire races of man on one boat?

I am saying that the church people have the choice to align Genesis with science fact of to fight againt those facts.

Well, let me tell ya that one thing that I have in common with most of those evolutionists is that I can see that evolution doesn't fit with Genesis!

I can see that those heathens got a hold on you. In some ways, you're worse than them. You spout your nonsense and appeal to those ailing souls who so badly want to be accepted by the "scientific mainstream". You are just one plank in a bridge of lies that the fools cross on their way to Hell.

 

[Knotical]

Gensis is not a science book. It is a book of symbols that represent IDEALS, not historic facts.

This reasoning is just a tad flawed. Are you saying the flood is an ideal, are you saying Cain killing Abel is an ideal, are you saying EVERYTHING that is recorded in the book of Genesis is an ideal? There are a few million people that would readily disagree with this assessment.

 

[Adam]

It is a model of cautionary tales that sets out a standard of values that are meant to help guide our own lives.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

It is a model of cautionary tales that sets out a standard of values that are meant to help guide our own lives.

If that was true, The Creator of the Universe could have easily made that clear as a forward to the Book of Genesis or something.

He didn't, so it isn't.

 

[Adam]

If it were true that Genesis was meant to be taken literally, God could have made that clear as well, in a forward. But He did not do that, either.

However, He did give us tools like critical thinking and common sense to be able to detemrine that a narrative that claims that plants existed before the earth was formed is not able to be both literal and true.

 

[Adam]

Coupled with the fact that Jesus taught in the mystery of parable, poetry and other allegorical literary devices, that is a signal that there is an underlying hidden meaning to biblical stories that is much more important than the details of the stories, themselves.

 

[Knotical]

If it were true that Genesis was meant to be taken literally, God could have made that clear as well, in a forward. But He did not do that, either.

However, He did give us tools like critical thinking and common sense to be able to detemrine that a narrative that claims that plants existed before the earth was formed is not able to be both literal and true.

You seem to have forgotten the account in Genesis where it says He made dry land appear before He created vegetation. You might want to reread Genesis 1 again.

 

[Adam]

Oh, I haven't forgotten that.

Literally, it is a direct contradiction to the fact that the sun was created on the fourth day.

The earth is a byproduct of the formation of the sun and is younger than the sun.

If the sun was created on the fourth day, and plants on the third, then plants were created before the earth.


There is also the problem that plants require sunlight in order to live and grow. Again, plants on the third day, sunlight on the fourth, cannot be literally true.


I think we all might want to reread Genesis 1 again.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Coupled with the fact that Jesus taught in the mystery of parable, poetry and other allegorical literary devices, that is a signal that there is an underlying hidden meaning to biblical stories that is much more important than the details of the stories, themselves.

Did ya hear that, folks? God, the Creator of Everything, lacked the ability to clarify that something was a parable, or simply chose not to for the LULZ, until Jesus finally came down with the ability and the desire to do so.

Please remove "Christian" from your profile until you've earned it.

 

[Knotical]

Then you apparently have forgotten that God is omnipotent, as He can create anything in any order, since it is His creation, and have it all remain perfect until the fall of man. Regardless of the order in which He created it.

 

[Adam]

Did ya hear that, folks? God, the Creator of Everything, lacked the ability to clarify that something was a parable, or simply chose not to for the LULZ, until Jesus finally came down with the ability and the desire to do so.

Please remove "Christian" from your profile until you've earned it.

Please don't strawman me or be condescending.

I never claimed that God lacked any ability. I simply said He didn't do something, which is exactly what you said in the prior post.

And you aren't the person to determine who has and has not earned the right to call themselves Christian.

If that were the case, then we must all remove "Christian" from our profile, because all of us are found lacking in one respect or another.

Finally, don't question my faith. I'm not sure if that is in this forum's TOS, but regardless, don't do it.

 

[Adam]

Then you apparently have forgotten that God is omnipotent, as He can create anything in any order, since it is His creation, and have it all remain perfect until the fall of man. Regardless of the order in which He created it.

Irrelevant to the fact that there IS a particular order that the sun, earth, life was formed and that the bible does not correctly reflect that order, if we are talking about a literal interpretation.

 

[Knotical]

Irrelevant to the fact that there IS a particular order that the sun, earth, life was formed and that the bible does not correctly reflect that order, if we are talking about a literal interpretation.

It is VERY relevant to it as God could have created it in any order He saw fit. And He saw fit to create everything in the order laid out in the first chapter of Genesis.