Questions for Jesus-Freak

[mylfmyhnr]

Again, YECs believe that life can change slowly; but they believe that 10,000 years is not enough time for a pre-anthropod mammal to evolve into monkeys, gorillas, and chimpanzies (and they are right about that). As long as JF holds to the idea that the world is less than 10,000 years old, no amount of analogies, examples, or anecdotes will ever convince him of macro evolution.

i suppose my point is that my babysitter wasn't there for the length of my daughters life. she didn't get to see the whole process and when she walked in she might have seen my omnipotence, if you will, as magic. she had a part of the story, my daughters age, and she then assumed that no one could know such nuances so quickly. partial story, assumption based on no facts. the YECs assume that they have the whole story... i suppose they believe that the evolutionists assume they have the whole story as well. i can see why they can defend their beliefs, my problem is that evolution is based on thoughtful curiosity follwed by thoughtful observation. creationism is based on a book, written by someone that can not be proven, from a standpoint of proving their own existence. religion=trust, evolution=thought. i throw in for the thought.

 

[Ladewig]

I can see why they can defend their beliefs, my problem is that evolution is based on thoughtful curiosity follwed by thoughtful observation.

If I may add to your statement "...followed by thoughtful observations in overwhelming numbers." Some Biblical literalists do not understand that at every level (molecular, cellular, organ, animal, species, genus, family, and beyond) there is evidence of evolution taking place over tens of millions of years.

Many litertalists are told by over-zealous pastors that "science is slowly coming to the conclusion that what the Bible has said all along is true." People who may not have studied science might not know that that claim is simply untrue.

 

[bruto]

i suppose my point is that my babysitter wasn't there for the length of my daughters life. she didn't get to see the whole process and when she walked in she might have seen my omnipotence, if you will, as magic. she had a part of the story, my daughters age, and she then assumed that no one could know such nuances so quickly. partial story, assumption based on no facts. the YECs assume that they have the whole story... i suppose they believe that the evolutionists assume they have the whole story as well. i can see why they can defend their beliefs, my problem is that evolution is based on thoughtful curiosity follwed by thoughtful observation. creationism is based on a book, written by someone that can not be proven, from a standpoint of proving their own existence. religion=trust, evolution=thought. i throw in for the thought.

Welcome to the zoo. Nicely put.

 

[flume]

Many literalists are told by over-zealous pastors that "science is slowly coming to the conclusion that what the Bible has said all along is true." People who may not have studied science might not know that that claim is simply untrue.

Jesus-freak, what do you think about Ladewig's statement?
In the past, did you think from what you heard on your radio station etc. that evolution was losing ground in science ?
What do you think now?
If in the past you thought that evolution was losing ground, has being on this forum made you realize that this isn't true - even if you are not yet convinced about evolution itself?

 

[RandFan]

Bump.

Ok, I don't think it likely that we will get any answers but it's worth a shot.

 

[Ossai]

jesus_freak does seem to be ignoring us, especially given that he is posting in other threads today.

 

[edge]

If evolution is true, shouldn't there be fossils everywhere and billions upon billions of them?
Or is it possible that these changes that we see are interbreeding of different species on a mass scale that eventually die out, like mules that are sterile?


Is it possible that THE ANCENT Hebrews had the timeline of creation wrong and that it was a bit longer than they thought?
Maybe 50 thousand years and then there’s the fact that no one knows the length of Gods years or days.
That these were just estimates to the best of their ability.
You guys have brought up Neanderthal man, is it possible that they were the mutation of man brought about by the fallen ones as some suspect.
Somewhere an archeologist has made an assumption that they were living next to the ancient Hebrews, don’t know if it’s true but what if, he was right about interbreeding with them, but same as the mule sterile?
What if they did actually blend in with us?
As recorded in the first chapter and elsewhere in the bible Nephilim.



"The craving of demons for a body, evident in the Gospels, offers at least some parallel to this hunger for sexual experience." -Derek Kidner
In 1947 an Arab boy tending his sheep accidentally discovered an ancient cave near the Dead Sea. In it were found a priceless collection of ancient scrolls which soon became known as the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Qumran Texts. Among these writings was one known as the Genesis Apocryphon. At first it was thought to be the long lost Book of Lamech. Although the scroll consisted of a speech by Lamech and a story about some of the patriarchs from Enoch to Abraham; it was not that book.
According to the Bible, Lamech was the son of Methuselah and the father of Noah. He was the ninth of the ten patriarchs of the antedeluvian world.
It is significant, however, that the Genesis Apocryphon mentions the Nephilim, and makes reference to the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" introduced in Genesis 6. The Apocryphon also elaborates considerably on the succinct statements found in the Bible, and provides valuable insights into the way these ancient stories were interpreted by the ancient Jews.
The copy of the Genesis Apocryphon discovered at Qumran dates back to the 2nd century B.C., but it was obviously based on much older sources. When discovered in 1947, it had been much mutilated from the ravages of time and humidity. The sheets had become so badly stuck together that years passed before the text was deciphered and made known. When scholars finally made public its content, the document confirmed that celestial beings from the skies had landed on planet Earth. More than that, it told how these beings had mated with Earth-women and had begat giants.
Is this story myth or history, fable or fact? Specialized research has revealed that many ancient legends have a basis in fact. But to answer the question, let us consult the most authoritative document known to man--the Bible.
In Genesis 6:1-4 the "sons of God" are captivated by the beauty of the "daughters of men." They subsequently marry them and produce an offspring of giants known as the Nephilim. Genesis goes on to say that these Nephilim were "mighty men" and "men of renown."
"Sons of God"? "Daughters of men"? What sort of beings were these? Were they human or did they belong to an alien species from outer space?
http://www.mt.net/~watcher/enoch5.html

I know what you are going to say but what is alien to us as described in the bible?
The fallen ones.

 

[ChristineR]

If evolution is true, shouldn't there be fossils everywhere and billions upon billions of them?
Or is it possible that these changes that we see are interbreeding of different species on a mass scale that eventually die out, like mules that are sterile?


Is it possible that THE ANCENT Hebrews had the timeline of creation wrong and that it was a bit longer than they thought?
Maybe 50 thousand years and then there’s the fact that no one knows the length of Gods years or days.
That these were just estimates to the best of their ability.
You guys have brought up Neanderthal man, is it possible that they were the mutation of man brought about by the fallen ones as some suspect.
Somewhere an archeologist has made an assumption that they were living next to the ancient Hebrews, don’t know if it’s true but what if, he was right about interbreeding with them, but same as the mule sterile?
What if they did actually blend in with us?
As recorded in the first chapter and elsewhere in the bible Nephilim.



"The craving of demons for a body, evident in the Gospels, offers at least some parallel to this hunger for sexual experience." -Derek Kidner
In 1947 an Arab boy tending his sheep accidentally discovered an ancient cave near the Dead Sea. In it were found a priceless collection of ancient scrolls which soon became known as the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Qumran Texts. Among these writings was one known as the Genesis Apocryphon. At first it was thought to be the long lost Book of Lamech. Although the scroll consisted of a speech by Lamech and a story about some of the patriarchs from Enoch to Abraham; it was not that book.
According to the Bible, Lamech was the son of Methuselah and the father of Noah. He was the ninth of the ten patriarchs of the antedeluvian world.
It is significant, however, that the Genesis Apocryphon mentions the Nephilim, and makes reference to the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" introduced in Genesis 6. The Apocryphon also elaborates considerably on the succinct statements found in the Bible, and provides valuable insights into the way these ancient stories were interpreted by the ancient Jews.
The copy of the Genesis Apocryphon discovered at Qumran dates back to the 2nd century B.C., but it was obviously based on much older sources. When discovered in 1947, it had been much mutilated from the ravages of time and humidity. The sheets had become so badly stuck together that years passed before the text was deciphered and made known. When scholars finally made public its content, the document confirmed that celestial beings from the skies had landed on planet Earth. More than that, it told how these beings had mated with Earth-women and had begat giants.
Is this story myth or history, fable or fact? Specialized research has revealed that many ancient legends have a basis in fact. But to answer the question, let us consult the most authoritative document known to man--the Bible.
In Genesis 6:1-4 the "sons of God" are captivated by the beauty of the "daughters of men." They subsequently marry them and produce an offspring of giants known as the Nephilim. Genesis goes on to say that these Nephilim were "mighty men" and "men of renown."
"Sons of God"? "Daughters of men"? What sort of beings were these? Were they human or did they belong to an alien species from outer space?
http://www.mt.net/~watcher/enoch5.html

I know what you are going to say but what is alien to us as described in the bible?
The fallen ones.

Fossilization is rare and only happens under just the right circumstances. On the other hand, there are an awful lot of them out there.

50,000 years is about the length of time that we have been more or less human and capable of understanding the idea of God. So if you are not a literal young earth creationist you can think of Adam and Eve as being the first humans who were aware of sin (had knowledge of good and evil).

It is very unlikely that the Nephilim were aliens. An actual alien could never breed with an earth creature because all earth creatures came from the same original life form and all share variants of the same DNA. An alien would likely be based on a completely different basic DNA.

On the other hand, it's possible that the Nephilim legend does have something to do with Neanderthals. I don't think it's proven by any stretch, but who knows?

 

[mylfmyhnr]

If evolution is true, shouldn't there be fossils everywhere and billions upon billions of them?

"Fossilization is actually a rare occurrence because most components of formerly-living things tend to decompose relatively quickly following death. In order for an organism to be fossilized, the remains normally need to be covered by sediment as soon as possible. However there are exceptions to this, such as if an organism becomes frozen, desiccated, or comes to rest in an anoxic (oxygen-free) environment such as at the bottom of a lake. "
Fossil

From Wikipedia

fossils aren't bones, they aren't the literal remains of the dead organism; instead they are the mineralized remains, a rock if you will, that is in the shape of the organism. it's not like diggin up dead people

 

[Beleth]

If evolution is true, shouldn't there be fossils everywhere and billions upon billions of them?

This is Creationist Claim CC200.1, "There should be billions of transitional fossils."

As usual, fully debunked in the link provided.

Or is it possible that these changes that we see are interbreeding of different species on a mass scale that eventually die out, like mules that are sterile?

I don't know, is it? I anxiously await the results of your research into this question.

Is it possible that THE ANCENT Hebrews had the timeline of creation wrong and that it was a bit longer than they thought?
Maybe 50 thousand years and then there’s the fact that no one knows the length of Gods years or days.

Why stop at 50 thousand years? If one is going to take the word of God metaphorically, why not actually make it jibe with the evidence and take it all the way back to 14 billion years?

That these were just estimates to the best of their ability.

So you believe the timeline in Gen 1 could just be an estimate and not actually the word of God, then?

You guys have brought up Neanderthal man, is it possible that they were the mutation of man brought about by the fallen ones as some suspect.

This is Creationist Claim CC051.

"The craving of demons for a body, evident in the Gospels, offers at least some parallel to this hunger for sexual experience." -Derek Kidner
In 1947 an Arab boy tending his sheep accidentally discovered an ancient cave near the Dead Sea.

Hold that thought.

In Genesis 6:1-4 the "sons of God" are captivated by the beauty of the "daughters of men." They subsequently marry them and produce an offspring of giants known as the Nephilim. Genesis goes on to say that these Nephilim were "mighty men" and "men of renown."
"Sons of God"? "Daughters of men"? What sort of beings were these? Were they human or did they belong to an alien species from outer space?
http://www.mt.net/~watcher/enoch5.html

We know from the Dead Sea Scroll story above that people find very old things in the Holy Land area.

Is it possible that one of the earlies people in the Holy Land area found a fossilized Neanderthal skeleton, made up a story about it, and one of the authors of Genesis decided to incorporate that story into the book he was writing?

 

[Lonewulf]

If evolution is true, shouldn't there be fossils everywhere and billions upon billions of them?

1) We have several fossils. Look inside a museum someday.
2) What do you think coal and fossil fuels are, genius?
3) What do you think fossils actually are? They're the few bones that were actually preserved. What do you think happens to unpreserved remains, genius?

 

[bruto]

Edge, if you simply confined your search to the Eastern shore of Lake Champlain - say, the 50 miles or so between Benson and Ferrisburgh, your billions register would overflow. Don't even bother to count the unidentifiable muck, the diatomaceous earth. Just look down. They're in virtually every rock you step on. Strange and wonderful species, now extinct, studied by biologists and paleontologists; their age, lineage, ancestry and heirs laboriously worked out by science. Here you will see the remains of the very first corals to inhabit the earth, crinoids and sponges, mussels and clams, eyeless trilobites that evolved from the first creatures ever to grow eyes. Every time I step out my back door I tread on nautiloids that crawled the earth some 400 million years ago. Grab your Bible and deny it if it pleases you to do so, but this world, this creation if you prefer to think of it as such, is many many times more strange, wonderful, complex and beautiful than the stunted little desert story you cling to.

 

[edge]

Lots of legions could have started with the observances of the Neanderthals.

Or could it be literally the breeding of the fallen ones with humans created the Neanderthals? And giants, and what were these giants, better selection?
First attempts produce Neanderthals then later more like us, but super size, reference, David and the last of his kind Goliath.
The whole race of giants was wiped out and Goliath was the last one.
The Seventh Day Adventists go one step further and explain that they were manipulating animals too through genetics, which is how dinosaurs were created. They also claim that they were used for warfare.
The Bible is telling us that we were being manipulated.


Is it possible that carbon 14 dating is wrong and that fossils take less time than we think and is it possible, if Noah’s ark is in Iran on Mt. Ararat that the petrified remains point to that being a possibility? They’re learning now that coal only takes a couple of weeks to form in a laboratory.

http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_177234625.html

The Bible states clearly that this group of fallen ones were cast down and chained for their type of manipulation because of the plot that they had in mind and a certain number of these that didn’t participate were left to continue.

http://www.mt.net/~watcher/chamishgiants.html

Something is manifesting itself but not in the same way as in the past.
These things that Barry Chamish talks about are they the remainder of the fallen ones?
Trying to manifest themselves into our reality?
Ya got to wonder especially about every abduction case, which is horrifying to the captured?
The angelic conspiracy may not be too far from the truth if we are in the end times.


http://www.mt.net/~watcher/angelicconspiracy.html

When you look at the old pictures from mars about the face there it makes you wonder, that was a picture from high in orbit and it looks like a face of a man like the Egyptians carved it but when you look at it with a closer shot with better cameras it looks like a lion.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/apod/apod_search?cydonia+new

 

[edge]

Edge, if you simply confined your search to the Eastern shore of Lake Champlain - say, the 50 miles or so between Benson and Ferrisburgh, your billions register would overflow. Don't even bother to count the unidentifiable muck, the diatomaceous earth. Just look down. They're in virtually every rock you step on. Strange and wonderful species, now extinct, studied by biologists and paleontologists; their age, lineage, ancestry and heirs laboriously worked out by science. Here you will see the remains of the very first corals to inhabit the earth, crinoids and sponges, mussels and clams, eyeless trilobites that evolved from the first creatures ever to grow eyes. Every time I step out my back door I tread on nautiloids that crawled the earth some 400 million years ago. Grab your Bible and deny it if it pleases you to do so, but this world, this creation if you prefer to think of it as such, is many many times more strange, wonderful, complex and beautiful than the stunted little desert story you cling to.

Those things that you mentioned are still alive today.
They are not all extict are they?
What did they catch of the west coast of Africa?

 

[Tanstaafl]

Let me simplify that for you:

Is it possible that if dozens of bizarre and random assertions are true, that a book written thousands of years ago by ignorant shepherds might by sheer chance turn out to be correct?​

 

[bruto]

Those things that you mentioned are still alive today.
They are not all extict are they?
What did they catch of the west coast of Africa?

As far as I know, the ones I'm talking about, most of them from the Ordovician era, before there was even land, are extinct, though many bear a clear resemblance to living species. I can't tell the difference, but people who know many times more than I do about the tiny differences between one shellfish and another can. I don't think anyone has met up with a Cryptolithus Tesselatus recently either. Too bad. I think they're kind of cute.

At a much later time, after there was land, but Lake Champlain was connected to the sea, it even had whales (whose fossils have also been found). Very cool. Also extinct.

 

[edge]

Belelth says,

Why stop at 50 thousand years? If one is going to take the word of God metaphorically, why not actually make it jibe with the evidence and take it all the way back to 14 billion years?

It's where you’re coming from and were I'm coming from that make the differences Belelth.
You are trying to say man fell up and I say he fell down, you are using a theory and I am using what is written down as a historical documentation to the best of what was comprehended by men writing down what they could on what they could use.
If only they had computers back then with cameras.
Although what they used lasted thousand of years, were as a hard drive won’t make it past ten years in a dump.

Let me simplify that for you:

Tanstaafl says,

Let me simplify that for you:

Is it possible that if dozens of bizarre and random assertions are true, that a book written thousands of years ago by ignorant shepherds might by sheer chance turn out to be correct?

How do you know that they were all shepards?
And ignorant?


They are all cosentrated in one area bruto and many others, but in this whole county I have not found one.



The answer was, Coelacanth ('hollow spine' in Greek, coelia (κοιλιά) meaning hollow and acanthos (άκανθος) spine) IPA: [ˈsiːləˌkænθ] is the common name for an order of fish that includes the oldest living lineage of jawed fish known to date. The coelacanths, which are closely related to lungfishes, were believed to have been extinct since the end of the Cretaceous period, until a live specimen was found off the east coast of South Africa, off the Chalumna River in 1938. Since then, they have been found in the Comoros, Sulawesi (Indonesia), Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, Madagascar, Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park in South Africa, and more recently, sister-species in Sulawesi (Indonesia),[1] considerably increasing the geographical distribution ascribed to this species.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth

Lamprey eels is another one.

These things should be dead according to evolution.

 

[ChristineR]

No edge, evolution says nothing about primitive species becoming extinct. That makes as much sense as saying that because someone tore down an old house and built new ones the town cannot have any old houses.

 

[Tanstaafl]

How do you know that they were all shepards?
And ignorant?

Well, granted they weren't all shepherds. But of course they were ignorant. So are we, though not as much so. They had no idea of the structure of the solar system, the galaxy (even the idea of a galaxy), even Newton's laws were unknown. The world was far more of a mystery then, so they invented their best guesses about things. I probably would have done the same, and probably would not have guessed as well as they did.

But they were ignorant, through no fault of their own. To look to them for answers to questions about the natural world, when so much real information is available to us now, is choosing to be more ignorant than they ever were.

 

[Beleth]

Lots of legions could have started with the observances of the Neanderthals.

Yep.

What this means, of course, is if they could have started with the finding of some Neanderthal bones, they didn't necessarily have to start with someone accurately scribing the Word of God.

Or could it be literally the breeding of the fallen ones with humans created the Neanderthals? And giants, and what were these giants, better selection?

Sure, it could be. How can we know for sure without making stuff up?
(This is not a rhetorical question. There is an answer; I want to see if you know what it is.)

Is it possible that carbon 14 dating is wrong and that fossils take less time than we think

No. It is not possible. This is Creationist Claim CD011. See also CD011.1, CD011.2, CD011.3, CD011.4, CD011.5, CD012, CD013, and the rest of the CD0xx chain, from CD001 to CD031.

and is it possible, if Noah’s ark is in Iran on Mt. Ararat

This is Creationist Claim CH500. See also CH501, CH502.1, CH502.2, CH503, CH503.1, CH503.2, and the other eleven pages of refutations I am not going to link to separately in section CH.

that the petrified remains point to that being a possibility?

What petrified remains? The wood they found on Ararat wasn't petrified.

They’re learning now that coal only takes a couple of weeks to form in a laboratory.

This is Creationist Claim CC361.1. Unfortunately for Creationists, coal deposits show evidence of a history. Just because artificial coal can be formed in weeks doesn't mean that natural coal took that quickly to form, especially when natural coal shows other traits that cannot form in weeks.

These things that Barry Chamish talks about are they the remainder of the fallen ones?
Trying to manifest themselves into our reality?

I anxiously await the results of your research into those questions.

When you look at the old pictures from mars about the face there it makes you wonder, that was a picture from high in orbit and it looks like a face of a man like the Egyptians carved it but when you look at it with a closer shot with better cameras it looks like a lion.

It does?
(That was a rhetorical question. The answer is "No, it does not.")