Skip to content

ExpatSingapore

Home Message Board Contact Us Search

ExpatSingapore Message Board 19 June 2018, 1:25:23 AM *
Username: Password: (or Register)
 
Pages: 1 ... 154 155 [156] 157 158 ... 164
  Print  
Author Topic: Science Disproves Evolution  (Read 435977 times)
Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2325 on: 22 February 2018, 3:29:23 AM »

here are just a few


GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26 Man is to have dominion over fish, birds, cattle, and all wild animals, yet--
GE 2:15-17 It is wrong to be able to tell good from evil, right from wrong.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

GE 1:28 God encourages reproduction.
LE 12:1-8 God requires purification rites following childbirth which, in effect, makes childbirth a sin. (Note: The period for purification following the birth of a daughter is twice that for a son.)

GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation.
GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation.
(Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of omniscience as well as with the fact that God allegedly does not change his mind: NU 23:19-20, 1SA 15:29, JA 1:17.)

GE 2:4, 4:26, 12:8, 22:14-16, 26:25 God was already known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) much earlier than the time of Moses.
EX 6:2-3 God was first known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) at the time of the Egyptian Bondage, during the life of Moses.

GE 2:17 Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit.
GE 5:5 Adam lived 930 years.

GE 2:15-17, 3:4-6 It is wrong to want to be able to tell good from evil.
HE 5:13-14 It is immature to be unable to tell good from evil.

GE 4:4-5 God prefers Abel's offering and has no regard for Cain's.
2CH 19:7, AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike.

GE 4:9 God asks Cain where his brother Able is.
PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view.

GE 4:15, DT 32:19-27, IS 34:8 God is a vengeful god.
EX 15:3, IS 42:13, HE 12:29 God is a warrior. God is a consuming fire.
EX 20:5, 34:14, DT 4:24, 5:9, 6:15, 29:20, 32:21 God is a jealous god.
LE 26:7-8, NU 31:17-18, DT 20:16-17, JS 10:40, JG 14:19, EZ 9:5-7 The Spirit of God is (sometimes) murder and killing.
NU 25:3-4, DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21, PS 7:11, 78:49, JE 4:8, 17:4, 32:30-31, ZP 2:2 God is angry. His anger is sometimes fierce.
2SA 22:7-8 (KJV) "I called to the Lord; ... he heard my voice; ... The earth trembled and quaked, ... because he was angry. Smoke came from his nostrils. Consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it."
EZ 6:12, NA 1:2, 6 God is jealous and furious. He reserves wrath for, and takes revenge on, his enemies. "... who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? His fury is poured out like fire, and rocks are thrown down by him."
2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is love.
GA 5:22-23 The fruit of the Spirit of God is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

GE 4:16 Cain went away (or out) from the presence of the Lord.
JE 23:23-24 A man cannot hide from God. God fills heaven and earth.

GE 6:3 The Lord said, "My spirit will not be in man forever, for he is only flesh; so the days of his life will be a hundred and twenty years."
GE 9:29 Noah lived nine hnndred and fifty years.

GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood.
GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood.
NU 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood.

GE 6:6. EX 32:14, NU 14:20, 1SA 15:35, 2SA 24:16 God does change his mind.
NU 23:19-20, 1SA 15:29, JA 1:17 God does not change his mind.

GE 6:19-22, 7:8-9, 7:14-16 Two of each kind are to be taken, and are taken, aboard Noah's Ark.
GE 7:2-5 Seven pairs of some kinds are to be taken, and are taken, aboard the Ark.

GE 7:1 Noah was righteous.
JB 1:1,8, JB 2:3 Job was righteous.
LK 1:6 Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous.
JA 5:16 Some men are righteous, (which makes their prayers effective).
1JN 3:6-9 Christians become righteous (or else they are not really Christians).
RO 3:10, 3:23, 1JN 1:8-10 No one was or is righteous.

GE 7:7 Noah and his clan enter the Ark.
GE 7:13 They enter the Ark (again?).

GE 11:7-9 God sows discord.
PR 6:16-19 God hates anyone who sows discord.

GE 11:9 At Babel, the Lord confused the language of the whole world.
1CO 14:33 Paul says that God is not the author of confusion.

GE 11:12 Arpachshad [Arphaxad] was the father of Shelah.
LK 3:35-36 Cainan was the father of Shelah. Arpachshad was the grandfather of Shelah.

GE 11:26 Terah was 70 years old when his son Abram was born.
GE 11:32 Terah was 205 years old when he died (making Abram 135 at the time).
GE 12:4, AC 7:4 Abram was 75 when he left Haran. This was after Terah died. Thus, Terah could have been no more than 145 when he died; or Abram was only 75 years old after he had lived 135 years.

GE 12:7, 17:1, 18:1, 26:2, 32:30, EX 3:16, 6:2-3, 24:9-11, 33:11, NU 12:7-8, 14:14, JB 42:5, AM 7:7-8, 9:1 God is seen.
EX 33:20, JN 1:18, 1JN 4:12 God is not seen. No one can see God's face and live. No one has ever seen him.

GE 10:5, 20, 31 There were many languages before the Tower of Babel.
GE 11:1 There was only one language before the Tower of Babel.

GE 15:9, EX 20:24, 29:10-42, LE 1:1-7:38, NU 28:1-29:40, God details sacrificial offerings.
JE 7:21-22 God says he did no such thing.

GE 16:15, 21:1-3, GA 4:22 Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac.
HE 11:17 Abraham had only one son.

GE 17:1, 35:11, 1CH 29:11-12, LK 1:37 God is omnipotent. Nothing is impossible with (or for) God.
JG 1:19 Although God was with Judah, together they could not defeat the plainsmen because the latter had iron chariots.

GE 17:7, 10-11 The covenant of circumcision is to be everlasting.
GA 6:15 It is of no consequence.

GE 17:8 God promises Abraham the land of Canaan as an "everlasting possession."
GE 25:8, AC 7:2-5, HE 11:13 Abraham died with the promise unfulfilled.

GE 17:15-16, 20:11-12, 22:17 Abraham and his half sister, Sarai, are married and receive God's blessings.
LE 20:17, DT 27:20-23 Incest is wrong.

GE 18:20-21 God decides to "go down" to see what is going on.
PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view.

GE 19:30-38 While he is drunk, Lot's two daughters "lie with him," become pregnant, and give birth to his offspring.
2PE 2:7 Lot was "just" and "righteous."

GE 22:1-12, DT 8:2 God tempts (tests) Abraham and Moses.
JG 2:22 God himself says that he does test (tempt).
1CO 10:13 Paul says that God controls the extent of our temptations.
JA 1:13 God tests (tempts) no one.

GE 27:28 "May God give you ... an abundance of grain and new wine."
DT 7:13 If they follow his commandments, God will bless the fruit of their wine.
PS 104:15 God gives us wine to gladden the heart.
JE 13:12 "... every bottle shall be filled with wine."
JN 2:1-11 According to the author of John, Jesus' first miracle was turning water to wine.
RO 14:21 It is good to refrain from drinking wine.

GE 35:10 God says Jacob is to be called Jacob no longer; henceforth his name is Israel.
GE 46:2 At a later time, God himself uses the name Jacob.

GE 36:11 The sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz.
GE 36:15-16 Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz.
1CH 1:35-36 Teman, Omar, Zephi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek.

GE 49:2-28 The fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel are: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Joseph, and Benjamin.
RE 7:4-8 (Leaves out the tribe of Dan, but adds Manasseh.)

GE 50:13 Jacob was buried in a cave at Machpelah bought from Ephron the Hittite.
AC 7:15-16 He was buried in the sepulchre at Shechem bought from the sons of Hamor.

EX 3:1 Jethro was the father-in-law of Moses.
NU 10:29, JG 4:11 (KJV) Hobab was the father-in-law of Moses.

EX 3:20-22, DT 20:13-17 God instructs the Israelites to despoil the Egyptians, to plunder their enemies.
EX 20:15, 17, LE 19:13 God prohibits stealing, defrauding, or robbing a neighbor.

EX 4:11 God decides who will be dumb, deaf, blind, etc.
2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is a god of love.

EX 9:3-6 God destroys all the cattle (including horses) belonging to the Egyptians.
EX 9:9-11 The people and the cattle are afflicted with boils.
EX 12:12, 29 All the first-born of the cattle of the Egyptians are destroyed.
EX 14:9 After having all their cattle destroyed, then afflicted with boils, and then their first-born cattle destroyed, the Egyptians pursue Moses on horseback.

EX 12:13 The Israelites have to mark their houses with blood in order for God to see which houses they occupy and "pass over" them.
PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from God.

EX 12:37, NU 1:45-46 The number of men of military age who take part in the Exodus is given as more than 600,000. Allowing for women, children, and older men would probably mean that a total of about 2,000,000 Israelites left Egypt.
1KI 20:15 All the Israelites, including children, number only 7000 at a later time.

EX 15:3, 17:16, NU 25:4, 32:14, IS 42:13 God is a man of war--he is fierce and angry.
RO 15:33, 2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is a god of love and peace.

EX 20:1-17 God gave the law directly to Moses (without using an intermediary).
GA 3:19 The law was ordained through angels by a mediator (an intermediary).

EX 20:4 God prohibits the making of any graven images whatsoever.
EX 25:18 God enjoins the making of two graven images.

EX 20:5, 34:7, NU 14:18, DT 5:9, IS 14:21-22 Children are to suffer for their parent's sins.
DT 24:16, EZ 18:19-20 Children are not to suffer for their parent's sins.

EX 20:8-11, 31:15-17, 35:1-3 No work is to be done on the Sabbath, not even lighting a fire. The commandment is permanent, and death is required for infractions.
MK 2:27-28 Jesus says that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (after his disciples were criticized for breaking the Sabbath).
RO 14:5, CN 2:14-16 Paul says the Sabbath commandment was temporary, and to decide for yourself regarding its observance.

EX 20:12, DT 5:16, MT 15:4, 19:19, MK 7:10, 10:19, LK 18:20 Honor your father and your mother is one of the ten commandments. It is reinforced by Jesus.
MT 10:35-37, LK 12:51-53, 14:26 Jesus says that he has come to divide families; that a man's foes will be those of his own household; that you must hate your father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, and even your own life to be a disciple.
MT 23:9 Jesus says to call no man on earth your father.

EX 20:13, DT 5:17, MK 10:19, LK 18:20, RO 13:9, JA 2:11 God prohibits killing.
GE 34:1-35:5 God condones trickery and killing.
EX 32:27, DT 7:2, 13:15, 20:1-18 God orders killing.
2KI 19:35 An angel of the Lord slaughters 185,000 men.
(Note: See Atrocities section for many more examples.)

EX 20:14 God prohibits adultery.
HO 1:2 God instructs Hosea to "take a wife of harlotry."

EX 21:23-25, LE 24:20, DT 19:21 A life for a life, an eye for an eye, etc.
MT 5:38-44, LK 6:27-29 Turn the other cheek. Love your enemies.

EX 23:7 God prohibits the killing of the innocent.
NU 31:17-18, DT 7:2, JS 6:21-27, 7:19-26, 8:22-25, 10:20, 40, 11:8-15, 20, JG 11:30-39, 21:10-12, 1SA 15:3 God orders or approves the complete extermination of groups of people which include innocent women and/or children.
(Note: See Atrocities section for many other examples of the killing of innocents.)

EX 34:6, DT 7:9-10, TS 1:2 God is faithful and truthful. He does not lie.
NU 14:30 God breaks his promise.

EX 34:6, DT 7:9-10, TS 1:2 God is faithful and truthful. He does not lie.
1KI 22:21-23 God condones a spirit of deception.

EX 34:6, DT 7:9-10, TS 1:2 God is faithful and truthful. He does not lie.
2TH 2:11-12 God deludes people, making them believe what is false, so as to be able to condemn them. (Note: some versions use the word persuade here. The context makes clear, however, that deception is involved.)

EX 34:6-7, JS 24:19, 1CH 16:34 God is faithful, holy and good.
IS 45:6-7, AM 3:6 God is responsible for evil.

EX 34:6-7, HE 9:27 God remembers sin, even when it has been forgiven.
JE 31:34 God does not remember sin when it has been forgiven.

LE 3:17 God himself prohibits forever the eating of blood and fat.
MT 15:11, CN 2:20-22 Jesus and Paul say that such rules don't matter--they are only human injunctions.

LE 19:18, MT 22:39 Love your neighbor [as much as] yourself.
1CO 10:24 Put your neighbor ahead of yourself.

LE 21:10 The chief priest is not to rend his clothes.
MT 26:65, MK 14:63 He does so during the trial of Jesus.

LE 25:37, PS 15:1, 5 It is wrong to lend money at interest.
MT 25:27, LK 19:23-27 It is wrong to lend money without interest.

NU 11:33 God inflicts sickness.
JB 2:7 Satan inflicts sickness.

NU 15:24-28 Sacrifices can, in at least some case, take away sin.
HE 10:11 They never take away sin.

NU 25:9 24,000 died in the plague.
1CO 10:8 23,000 died in the plague.

NU 30:2 God enjoins the making of vows (oaths).
MT 5:33-37 Jesus forbids doing so, saying that they arise from evil (or the Devil).

NU 33:38 Aaron died on Mt. Hor.
DT 10:6 Aaron died in Mosera.

NU 33:41-42 After Aaron's death, the Israelites journeyed from Mt. Hor, to Zalmonah, to Punon, etc.
DT 10:6-7 It was from Mosera, to Gudgodah, to Jotbath.

DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21 God is sometimes angry.
MT 5:22 Anger is a sin.

DT 7:9-10 God destroys his enemies.
MT 5:39-44 Do not resist your enemies. Love them.

DT 18:20-22 A false prophet is one whose words do not come true. Death is required.
EZ 14:9 A prophet who is deceived, is deceived by God himself. Death is still required.

DT 23:1 A castrate may not enter the assembly of the Lord.
IS 56:4-5 Some castrates will receive special rewards.

DT 23:1 A castrate may not enter the assembly of the Lord.
MT 19:12 Men are encouraged to consider making themselves castrates for the sake of the Kingdom of God.

DT 24:1-5 A man can divorce his wife simply because she displeases him and both he and his wife can remarry.
MK 10:2-12 Divorce is wrong, and to remarry is to commit adultery.

DT 24:16, 2KI 14:6, 2CH 25:4, EZ 18:20 Children are not to suffer for their parent's sins.
RO 5:12, 19, 1CO 15:22 Death is passed to all men by the sin of Adam.

DT 30:11-20 It is possible to keep the law.
RO 3:20-23 It is not possible to keep the law.

JS 11:20 God shows no mercy to some.
LK 6:36, JA 5:11 God is merciful.

JG 4:21 Sisera was sleeping when Jael killed him.
JG 5:25-27 Sisera was standing.

JS 10:38-40 Joshua himself captured Debir.
JG 1:11-15 It was Othniel, who thereby obtained the hand of Caleb's daughter, Achsah.

1SA 8:2-22 Samuel informs God as to what he has heard from others.
PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees and hears everything.

1SA 9:15-17 The Lord tells Samuel that Saul has been chosen to lead the Israelites and will save them from the Philistines.
1SA 15:35 The Lord is sorry that he has chosen Saul.
1SA 31:4-7 Saul commits suicide and the Israelites are overrun by the Philistines.

1SA 15:7-8, 20 The Amalekites are utterly destroyed.
1SA 27:8-9 They are utterly destroyed (again?).
1SA 30:1, 17-18 They raid Ziklag and David smites them (again?).

1SA 16:10-11, 17:12 Jesse had seven sons plus David, or eight total.
1CH 2:13-15 He had seven total.

1SA 16:19-23 Saul knew David well before the latter's encounter with Goliath.
1SA 17:55-58 Saul did not know David at the time of his encounter with Goliath and had to ask about David's identity.

1SA 17:50 David killed Goliath with a slingshot.
1SA 17:51 David killed Goliath (again?) with a sword.

1SA 17:50 David killed Goliath.
2SA 21:19 Elhanan killed Goliath. (Note: Some translations insert the words "the brother of" before Elhanan. These are an addition to the earliest manuscripts in an apparent attempt to rectify this inconsistency.)

1SA 21:1-6 Ahimalech was high priest when David ate the bread.
MK 2:26 Abiathar was high priest at the time.

1SA 28:6 Saul inquired of the Lord, but received no answer.
1CH 10:13-14 Saul died for not inquiring of the Lord.

1SA 31:4-6 Saul killed himself by falling on his sword.
2SA 1:2-10 Saul, at his own request, was slain by an Amalekite.
2SA 21:12 Saul was killed by the Philistines on Gilboa.
1CH 10:13-14 Saul was slain by God.

2SA 6:23 Michal was childless.
2SA 21:8 (KJV) She had five sons.

2SA 24:1 The Lord inspired David to take the census.
1CH 21:1 Satan inspired the census.

2SA 24:9 The census count was: Israel 800,000 and Judah 500,000.
1CH 21:5 The census count was: Israel 1,100,000 and Judah 470,000.

2SA 24:10-17 David sinned in taking the census.
1KI 15:5 David's only sin (ever) was in regard to another matter.

2SA 24:24 David paid 50 shekels of silver for the purchase of a property.
1CH 21:22-25 He paid 600 shekels of gold.

1KI 3:12 God made Solomon the wisest man that ever lived, yet ....
1KI 11:1-13 Solomon loved many foreign women (against God's explicit prohibition) who turned him to other gods (for which he deserved death).

1KI 3:12, 4:29, 10:23-24, 2CH 9:22-23 God made Solomon the wisest king and the wisest man that ever lived. There never has been nor will be another like him.
MT 12:42, LK 11:31 Jesus says: "... now one greater than Solomon is here."

1KI 4:26 Solomon had 40,000 horses (or stalls for horses).
2CH 9:25 He had 4,000 horses (or stalls for horses).

1KI 5:16 Solomon had 3,300 supervisors.
2CH 2:2 He had 3,600 supervisors.

1KI 7:15-22 The two pillars were 18 cubits high.
2CH 3:15-17 They were 35 cubits high.

1KI 7:26 Solomon's "molten sea" held 2000 "baths" (1 bath = about 8 gallons).
2CH 4:5 It held 3000 "baths."

1KI 8:12, 2CH 6:1, PS 18:11 God dwells in thick darkness.
1TI 6:16 God dwells in unapproachable light.

1KI 8:13, AC 7:47 Solomon, whom God made the wisest man ever, built his temple as an abode for God.
AC 7:48-49 God does not dwell in temples built by men.

1KI 9:28 420 talents of gold were brought back from Ophir.
2CH 8:18 450 talents of gold were brought back from Ophir.

1KI 15:14 Asa did not remove the high places.
2CH 14:2-3 He did remove them.

1KI 16:6-8 Baasha died in the 26th year of King Asa's reign.
2CH 16:1 Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign.

1KI 16:23 Omri became king in the thirty-first year of Asa's reign and he reigned for a total of twelve years.
1KI 16:28-29 Omri died, and his son Ahab became king in the thirty- eighth year of Asa's reign. (Note: Thirty-one through thirty-eight equals a reign of seven or eight years.)

1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, 2TH 2:11 God himself causes a lying spirit.
PR 12:22 God abhors lying lips and delights in honesty.

1KI 22:42-43 Jehoshaphat did not remove the high places.
2CH 17:5-6 He did remove them.


All assumed contradictions have been found to be false. Go here to examine some of them:
http://www.berenddeboer.net/sab/index.html
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_book.html
« Last Edit: 22 February 2018, 3:31:51 AM by Pahu » Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.


Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2326 on: 22 February 2018, 3:33:59 AM »

Proteins 2


To form proteins, amino acids must also be highly concentrated in an extremely pure liquid (c). However, the early oceans or ponds would have been far from pure and would have diluted amino acids, so the required collisions between amino acids would rarely occur (d). Besides, amino acids do not naturally link up to form proteins. Instead, proteins tend to break down into amino acids (e).

c.    “It is difficult to imagine how a little pond with just these components, and no others [no contaminants], could have formed on the primitive earth. Nor is it easy to see exactly how the precursors would have arisen.” Francis Crick, Life Itself (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1981), p. 85.

d.    “But when multiple biopolymers must all converge at the same place at the same time to collectively interact in a controlled biochemical cooperative manner, faith in ‘self-organization’ becomes ‘blind belief.’ No empirical data or rational scientific basis exists for such a metaphysical leap.” Abel and Trevors, p. 9.

e.    “I believe this [the overwhelming tendency for chemical reactions to move in the direction opposite to that required for the evolution of life] to be the most stubborn problem that confronts us—the weakest link at present in our argument [for the origin of life].” George Wald, “The Origin of Life,” p. 50.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
« Last Edit: 22 February 2018, 3:36:29 AM by Pahu » Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
oldmike
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1252


View Profile
« Reply #2327 on: 22 February 2018, 18:33:52 PM »

As I have remarked often before, Evolution has nothing to say about the origin of life.
Logged
oldmike
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1252


View Profile
« Reply #2328 on: 22 February 2018, 18:36:59 PM »

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_book.html

Thanks for ;posting this link. It provides more evidence for errors in the Bible.
Logged
Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2329 on: 22 February 2018, 23:16:04 PM »

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_book.html

Thanks for ;posting this link. It provides more evidence for errors in the Bible.

Look a little closer. You will find explanations for every item.
Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
oldmike
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1252


View Profile
« Reply #2330 on: 23 February 2018, 3:46:12 AM »

Quote
   Look a little closer. You will find explanations for every item.   

OK let's look at one " Explanation"
From the Skeptic's annotated bible:

Quote
  1. The two contradictory creation accounts.
The Book of Genesis begins with two contradictory creation accounts (1:1-2:3 and 2:4-3:24). In the first, God created humans (male and female) after he finished making all of the other animals. In the second, God made one man ("Adam") and then created all of the animals in order to find a helpmeet for Adam. God brought all of the animals to Adam, but none of them appealed to him. So God made a woman from one of Adam's ribs to serve as his helpmeet.
Here are two of the more obvious contradictions between the two creation accounts.

In the first creation story, humans are created after the other animals.
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. 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. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27
In the second story, humans were created before the other animals.
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 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. Genesis 2:18-19 

And the response:


 
Quote
The author of the SAB claims there are two creation accounts in Genesis. This is a 19th century invention. And because there are no 2 creation accounts, there is no contradiction. I.e. the premise is false, therefore the conclusion doesn't follow. For a more in-depth discussion see Genesis contradictions.
For those interested in the history of the book Genesis, it appears that Genesis is far older than originally assumed by the church. It seems quite likely that Moses did not write Genesis, but compiled it from very ancient sources, clay tablets taken from Ur by Abraham or perhaps given to Abraham by Sem, son of Noah.   

The King James Bible, published in 1611 has the two conflicting stories. They cannot be a 19th century invention.
There is no mention of Noah, Sem or Abraham having clay tablets. even if they ever existed, there is no evidence that what was written on them was divinely inspired

As to the date of composition, From Wikipedia.
Quote
For much of the 20th century most scholars agreed that the five books of the Pentateuch—Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy—came from four sources, the Yahwist, the Elohist, the Deuteronomist and the Priestly source, each telling the same basic story, and joined together by various editors.[16] Since the 1970s there has been a revolution in scholarship: the Elohist source is now widely regarded as no more than a variation on the Yahwist, while the Priestly source is increasingly seen not as a document but as a body of revisions and expansions to the Yahwist (or "non-Priestly") material. (The Deuteronomistic source does not appear in Genesis).[17]


Examples of repeated and duplicate stories are used to identify the separate sources. In Genesis these include three different accounts of a Patriarch claiming that his wife was his sister, the two creation stories, and the two versions of Abraham sending Hagar and Ishmael into the desert.[18]

This leaves the question of when these works were created. Scholars in the first half of the 20th century came to the conclusion that the Yahwist was produced in the monarchic period, specifically at the court of Solomon, 10th century BC, and the Priestly work in the middle of the 5th century BC (the author was even identified as Ezra), but more recent thinking is that the Yahwist was written either just before or during the Babylonian exile of the 6th century BC, and the Priestly final edition was made late in the Exilic period or soon after   

Logged
Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2331 on: 23 February 2018, 23:14:55 PM »

Quote
   Look a little closer. You will find explanations for every item.   

OK let's look at one " Explanation"
From the Skeptic's annotated bible:

Quote
  1. The two contradictory creation accounts.
The Book of Genesis begins with two contradictory creation accounts (1:1-2:3 and 2:4-3:24). In the first, God created humans (male and female) after he finished making all of the other animals. In the second, God made one man ("Adam") and then created all of the animals in order to find a helpmeet for Adam. God brought all of the animals to Adam, but none of them appealed to him. So God made a woman from one of Adam's ribs to serve as his helpmeet.
Here are two of the more obvious contradictions between the two creation accounts.

In the first creation story, humans are created after the other animals.
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. 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. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 1:25-27
In the second story, humans were created before the other animals.
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 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. Genesis 2:18-19 

And the response:


 
Quote
The author of the SAB claims there are two creation accounts in Genesis. This is a 19th century invention. And because there are no 2 creation accounts, there is no contradiction. I.e. the premise is false, therefore the conclusion doesn't follow. For a more in-depth discussion see Genesis contradictions.
For those interested in the history of the book Genesis, it appears that Genesis is far older than originally assumed by the church. It seems quite likely that Moses did not write Genesis, but compiled it from very ancient sources, clay tablets taken from Ur by Abraham or perhaps given to Abraham by Sem, son of Noah.   

The King James Bible, published in 1611 has the two conflicting stories. They cannot be a 19th century invention.
There is no mention of Noah, Sem or Abraham having clay tablets. even if they ever existed, there is no evidence that what was written on them was divinely inspired

As to the date of composition, From Wikipedia.
Quote
For much of the 20th century most scholars agreed that the five books of the Pentateuch—Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy—came from four sources, the Yahwist, the Elohist, the Deuteronomist and the Priestly source, each telling the same basic story, and joined together by various editors.[16] Since the 1970s there has been a revolution in scholarship: the Elohist source is now widely regarded as no more than a variation on the Yahwist, while the Priestly source is increasingly seen not as a document but as a body of revisions and expansions to the Yahwist (or "non-Priestly") material. (The Deuteronomistic source does not appear in Genesis).[17]


Examples of repeated and duplicate stories are used to identify the separate sources. In Genesis these include three different accounts of a Patriarch claiming that his wife was his sister, the two creation stories, and the two versions of Abraham sending Hagar and Ishmael into the desert.[18]

This leaves the question of when these works were created. Scholars in the first half of the 20th century came to the conclusion that the Yahwist was produced in the monarchic period, specifically at the court of Solomon, 10th century BC, and the Priestly work in the middle of the 5th century BC (the author was even identified as Ezra), but more recent thinking is that the Yahwist was written either just before or during the Babylonian exile of the 6th century BC, and the Priestly final edition was made late in the Exilic period or soon after   



Nonsense! Here are the facts from The Skeptic's Annotated Bible under the heading The two contradictory creation accounts:

Don't Genesis 1 and 2 present contradictory creation accounts?

Genesis 1earth and hand
Day one - Heavens and earth are created. "Let there be light." Day and Night.
Day two - Atmospheric waters separated from earth waters.
Day three - Land appears separating the seas. Vegetation is made.
Day four - Sun, moon, stars are made.
Day five - Sea life and birds are made.
Day six - Land animals, creeping things, and man (male and female) are made.

Genesis 2
States heaven and earth were created. There was no plant yet on earth, no rain yet, and no man. But, a mist rose watering the surface of the ground. Then the Lord formed man from dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. Finally, God made Eve.

There is no contradiction between Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 1 is a detailed explanation of the six days of creation, day by day. Genesis two is a recap and a more detailed explanation of the sixth day, the day that Adam and Eve were made. The recap is stated in Gen. 2:4, "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven." Then, Moses goes on to detail the creation of Adam and Eve as is seen in verses 7 through 24 of Gen. 2. Proof that it is not a creative account is found in the fact that animals aren't even mentioned until after the creation of Adam. Why? Probably because their purpose was designated by Adam. They didn't need to be mentioned until after Adam was created.

https://carm.org/dont-genesis-1-and-2-present-contradictory-creation-accounts

Here is another:

Q. The account of creation is contradictory. Genesis 1:25-27 and Genesis 2:18-22 are out of order. Is this a contradiction in the Bible?

No. These show two different events, while providing more detail to the first as well. The first event shows the creation of man and animals (after plants and so on). This happened on the 6th day. The account of this event listed in Gen. 1:25-27 is a brief overview.

The second event also happened on the 6th day and is a more detailed account of exactly what took place on the 6th day. In this event it shows that God also create a garden and place man there on the 6th day. At this time (still the 6th day) God creates more animals, like the ones before, and brings them to Adam to name.

It is also at this time that God creates woman. Thus this account provides more detail to the order of events recorded in Gen. 1:25-27 but does not contradict it. Thus the order of events is as follows: first God creates the animals, then man, then creates a garden, then places man in the garden, then creates more animals, and then creates woman all on the 6th day.

At no point does the Bible claim that the events in Genesis 2:18-22 happen after the 6th day.

http://onthelineministries.com/contradictions-in-the-bible/#Q11

And yet another:

Did God Create Animals or Man First?

by    Eric Lyons, M.Min.

After reading the first two chapters of the Bible, some skeptics, in an attempt to disprove the Bible’s inerrancy, have accused the writer of Genesis of erring in regard to the record of events occurring on day six of creation. While Genesis 1:24-27 plainly indicates that man was created after the animals, critics claim that Genesis 2:18-19 teaches that man was created before animals. They strongly assert that such language by the author of Genesis proves that the Bible is not divinely inspired.

Does Genesis two present a different creation order than Genesis one? Is there a reasonable explanation for the differences between the two chapters? Or is this to be recognized as a genuine contradiction?

Some Bible students resolve this alleged contradiction simply by explaining that the Hebrew verb translated “formed” could easily have been translated “had formed.” In his Exposition of Genesis, H.C. Leupold stated:

Without any emphasis on the sequence of acts the account here records the making of the various creatures and the bringing of them to man. That in reality they had been made prior to the creation of man is so entirely apparent from chapter one as not to require explanation. But the reminder that God had “molded” them makes obvious His power to bring them to man and so is quite appropriately mentioned here. It would not, in our estimation, be wrong to translate yatsar as a pluperfect in this instance: “He had molded.” The insistence of the critics upon a plain past is partly the result of the attempt to make chapters one and two clash at as many points as possible (1942, p. 130, emp. added).

Hebrew scholar Victor Hamilton agreed with Leupold’s assessment of Genesis 2:19 as he also recognized that “it is possible to translate formed as ‘had formed’ ” (1990, p. 176). Keil and Delitzsch stated in the first volume of their highly regarded Old Testament commentary that “our modern style for expressing the same thought [which the Holy Spirit, via Moses, intended to communicate—EL] would be simply this: ‘God brought to Adam the beasts which He had formed’ ” (1996, emp. added). Adding even more credence to this interpretation is the fact that the New International Version (NIV) renders the verb in verse 19, not as simple past tense, but as a pluperfect: “Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air” (emp. added). Although Genesis chapters one and two agree even when yatsar is translated simply “formed” (as we will notice in the remainder of this article), it is important to note that the four Hebrew scholars mentioned above and the translators of the NIV, all believe that it could (or should) be rendered “had formed.” And, as Leupold acknowledged, those who deny this possibility do so (at least partly) because of their insistence on making the two chapters disagree.

The main reason that skeptics do not see harmony in the events recorded in the first two chapters of the Bible is because they fail to realize that Genesis 1 and 2 serve different purposes. Chapter one (including 2:1-4) focuses on the order of the creation events; chapter two (actually 2:5-25) simply provides more detailed information about some of the events mentioned in chapter one. Chapter two never was meant to be a chronological regurgitation of chapter one, but instead serves its own unique purpose—i.e., to develop in detail the more important features of the creation account, especially the creation of man and his surroundings. As Kenneth Kitchen noted in his book, Ancient Orient and the Old Testament:

Genesis 1 mentions the creation of man as the last of a series, and without any details, whereas in Genesis 2 man is the center of interest and more specific details are given about him and his setting. Failure to recognize the complementary nature of the subject—distinction between a skeleton outline of all creation on the one hand, and the concentration in detail on man and his immediate environment on the other, borders on obscurantism (1966, p. 117).
Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe summarized some of the differences in Genesis 1-2 in the following chart (1992, p. 35):

Genesis 1                                              Genesis 2
Chronological Order                              Topical Order
Outline                                                      Details
Creating Animals                                      Naming Animals

The fact is, “Genesis 2 does not present a creation account at all but presupposes the completion of God’s work of creation as set forth in chapter 1.... [C]hapter 2 is built on the foundation of chapter 1 and represents no different tradition than the first chapter or discrepant account of the order of creation” (Archer, 1982, pp. 68-69). In short, Genesis chapters 1 and 2 are harmonious in every way. What may seem as a contradiction at first glance is essentially a more detailed account of chapter one. The text of Genesis 2:19 says nothing about the relative origins of man and beast in terms of chronology, but merely suggests that the animals were formed before being brought to man.

If one still rejects both the possibility of yatsar being translated “had formed,” and the explanation of the two chapters being worded differently because of the purposes they serve, a final response to the skeptics allegations is that the text never says that there were no animals created on the sixth day of creation after Adam. Although in my judgment it is very unlikely that God created a special group of animals to be named by Adam (after creating all others before the creation of man—Genesis 1:20-27), some commentators hold this view. After his comments concerning the translation of yastsar, Victor Hamilton indicated that the creatures mentioned in 2:19 refer “to the creation of a special group of animals brought before Adam for naming” (p. 176, emp. added). Hamilton believes that most all the animals on the Earth were created before Adam; however, those mentioned in 2:19 were created on day six after Adam for the purpose of being named. In U. Cassuto’s comments on Genesis 2 regarding the time Adam named the animals, he stated: “Of all the species of beasts and flying creatures that had been created and had spread over the face of the earth and the firmament of the heavens, the Lord God now formed particular specimens for the purpose of presenting them all before man in the midst of the Garden” (1961, p. 129, emp. added). Both of these long-time Bible students recognize that the text never says there were no animals created after Adam, but that all animals were created either on days five and six (before and possibly even after Adam was created). However unorthodox (or unlikely) this position may be, it does serve as another reason why skeptics have no foundation upon which to stand when they assert that a contradiction exists between Genesis 1:24-27 and 2:19.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=643
Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
oldmike
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1252


View Profile
« Reply #2332 on: 24 February 2018, 1:30:41 AM »

You are simply trying to explain away the fact that there are two different accounts. As these are mere myths , this is to be expected. The only true message in the first chapters of Genisis is:

1 In the beginning God
Logged
Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2333 on: 24 February 2018, 2:15:24 AM »

You are simply trying to explain away the fact that there are two different accounts. As these are mere myths , this is to be expected. The only true message in the first chapters of Genisis is:

1 In the beginning God

And the rest of Scripture!

THE GARDEN OF EDEN

I believe the Garden of Eden story is an allegory containing symbols. I believe it is the symbolic story of the beginning of the human condition and our fall after Genesis 1:1. I believe that before the beginning only God existed in the three persons of the Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

God the Son created the universe and the angels (John 1:1-3). I believe this is the story of Eden and its first inhabitants. The angels were created in the image of God. God is Spirit (John 4:24) and the angels were spirit. God has a mind and the angels had a mind. God has free will and the angels had free will.

God's purpose for creating the angels was for companionship:

➢   "And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God" (Jas. 2:23).

➢   "...for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and were created" (Rev. 4:11).

In order to have companions He had to give the angels free will. In giving them free will He had to refrain from forcing His will on them. He could not create character in the angels without violating their free will and thus defeating the very purpose for their creation-companionship. They had to develop character through the things they experienced and the choices they made. He could not build in obedience without interfering with their free will. They had to be companions with Him because that was their choice. Forced companionship is not true companionship. He could not force them to love Him. He could not force them to want to obey Him. Love and obedience had to develop in each individual through experience with Him.

In order for God to create the universe He had to establish certain laws. The physical laws that hold the creation together are based on spiritual laws. Breaking these laws is sin and results in death. These principles were taught to the angels, but truth is never really known unless it is experienced. I can hear about the pain of hunger, but until I experience hunger I will never really know that pain. The angels were taught the correct way to live. They were taught the difference between right and wrong. They were taught that sin is the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4) and the wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23), but since they had never experienced death they did not know what death was.

Rebellion

The angels began to go throughout creation experiencing, growing and developing character. This is the symbolism of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. They had direct access to eternal life represented by the tree of life. By living in obedience to God they would have life but disobedience would bring separation and death. All they had to do was choose good and avoid evil as God defined those terms. Some of the angels began to follow a course that was contrary to God's will. They decided they could define good and evil. This is the symbology of eating the forbidden fruit. Instead of relying on God's definition of good and evil they chose to ignore Him and make that decision for themselves. As they moved in this direction they began to drift farther and farther away from the good that God had revealed to them. They were following a path that seemed good to them but was in opposition to what God had revealed was good. "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death" (Pr. 14:12; 16:25). More and more they were following the spirit of rebellion. They were accusing God of being in error. They thought they were right and God was wrong. This spirit of rebellion and accusation is the definition of Satan, in my opinion.

Separation

In the beginning of the Eden story, we are told that Adam was made from the dust of the ground. This sounds like the earth, but if the story is symbolic then certain earth symbols can be used symbolically. We are also told that God formed Eve from one of Adam's ribs. I believe that when God first created the angels He created them without defining sexual attributes as Jesus suggested. Perhaps each angel possessed the spiritual equivalent of both male and female attributes in perfect balance. When God began His plan of salvation on earth He accentuated the male attribute in some and the female in others. The story of Eve coming from Adam's rib is the story of this separation. Each individual still contains both sexual attributes, but in the male the female attribute is suppressed, and in the female the male attribute is suppressed. This is not found in Scripture in such detail, but Edgar Cayce (more about him later) made this claim in some of his readings and it makes sense to me. Jesus does seem to suggest this when He said; [COLOR="#FF0000"]"For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven"[/COLOR] (Mt. 22:30).

God could not allow these angels to continue their disobedience throughout His creation. As a matter of fact, they had separated themselves from God-the "Tree of Life"-and were now under the death penalty as the law demanded. Since God is just He had every right to execute sentence against these rebellious angels immediately, but God is also merciful. "And the LORD passed by before him [Moses], and proclaimed, The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin…" (Ex. 34:6,7).

The angels' rebellion did not take God by surprise. Since He had given His angels free will, He did not know exactly what choices they would make, but He did know all the choices that were possible, including rebellion. It is not that God does not know everything there is to know about everyone and everything, but in His sovereignty He can choose to limit Himself. So He already had a plan ready in the event that path was chosen:

"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation [manner of life] received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you" (1 Pet. 1:18-20).

Since death was the penalty for sin, that penalty could not be changed without destroying the law and bringing down all of creation, since creation depends on God's law for its existence. But the angels could be saved from death if someone died in their place. Someone else had to receive their punishment for them. There was only one person in all of creation who could do such a thing and that was God Himself, the one who had created everything and everyone in the first place and had established the laws that made it all work. But just paying their penalty for them would not bring about repentance on the part of the disobedient angels. First, they had to understand that their way was wrong and God's way was right-and repent.

When the angels rebelled, they were making a statement. They were saying that God's revelation of good and evil was incorrect and they took on themselves to define what was good and evil. This is the symbol of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden. When they began to decide for themselves what was good and evil they were eating forbidden fruit. They were saying their way was better than God's revealed way. That attitude persists to this day among most of the people on earth, doesn't it?

Judgment

About a third of the angels made this statement and the rest of them knew of it. If God had destroyed the rebellious angels at that point His righteousness and power would have been demonstrated and the surviving angels would have served God more out of fear than love, which was not God's desire. Also the question would remain unanswered: was God's way really right? Would the path the rebellious angels had taken really have ended in disaster? These questions would have remained unanswered if God had exercised His righteousness and destroyed them. Besides, God is merciful and did not want to lose a single angel. As we are told in 2 Peter 3:9; "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness, but is longsuffering to us-ward [toward us], not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." God is life, not death.

Death and destruction are not part of God's nature although He will resort to such measures if necessary, after all else fails. We have a sober reminder of this fact in Isaiah 28:21; "For the LORD shall rise up as in mount Perazim. He shall be wroth as in the valley of Gibeon, that He may do His work, His strange work, and bring to pass His act, His strange act." In Deuteronomy 30:19,20, God seems to be pleading as He says; "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live, that thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey His voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto Him, for He is thy life, and the length of thy days…" Jesus expressed the same feeling in Matthew 23:37 when He said, [COLOR="#FF0000"]"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee. How often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"[/COLOR] Can you hear the sobs in these statements? Down through history to this present time we witness mankind's tendency to choose death instead of life, don't we? The worldwide practice of murdering unborn babies is just one example. In the United States alone over 3000 babies are legally murdered every day, and most of us ignore and/or accept this fact.

Confined to Earth

And so God confined the rebellious angels to earth. When the disobedient angels arrived, they were furious at having their wings clipped, so to speak. They had literally been grabbed by the scruff of their necks and yanked out of their freewheeling roaming throughout God's creation and confined to this tiny speck of dust called earth. I believe this is vividly and symbolically portrayed in Revelation 12:7-12.

Destruction

I believe that even though they could no longer roam freely throughout creation, they still retained some of their angelic powers. Giving full vent to their rage they literally raised hell here on earth to such an extent that they destroyed it. Volcanic dust and debris in the atmosphere was miles thick, cutting out all light. Genesis 1:2 describes the scene this way: "And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep." The word "was" in this verse is translated from the Hebrew word "hayah" which can also be translated "became" and has been in over 65 Bible verses from Genesis 2:7 through Ezekiel 36:4.

After the disobedient angels had destroyed the earth with their tantrum, there was no more they could do. They had literally reached the end of their rope. Jesus may have had this period in mind in His parable of the prodigal son, when he reached the point where he was starving in the pigpen (Lk. 15:11-16). God allowed these angels to demonstrate to themselves as well as the other angels what happens when they go their own way outside of His will.

Renewal

I believe that when man first appeared on earth, he appeared in five different places as the five races. In Genesis 1:26,27 we learn:

"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. So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them."

The word "man" in this passage comes from the Hebrew word "adam," and means a human being, an individual or mankind. I believe the context here calls for the translation "mankind."

Also, up to this point He said, "Let there be light...a firmament...let the earth bring forth grass...the fruit tree…" etc. But when He created mankind He said "Let Us make man in Our image…" God seems to be saying here that mankind is totally different from the rest of His creation.

The fall

In affect God told His fallen angels, "You say your way is better than My way. All right, we will see. I am giving you the world and all the raw material you need to experiment with your way. With your intelligence you have everything you need to create paradise or hell. We shall see how much better your way is." And so human history began on earth and mankind was given the physical version of the spiritual law that holds creation together-The Ten Commandments.

After the angels had their tantrum on earth they were the spiritual equivalent of someone who has been terribly burned in a fire, or someone who has been severely injured in an accident. God's six days of creation were spent re-creating the earth. On the sixth day He re-created (healed) His fallen angels in His image: mind, spirit, and will; but this time adding the physical equivalent of His image, providing a physical vehicle through which they could express themselves in a physical, three dimensional world.

God then inserts a parable in a parenthesis in Genesis two and three giving a symbolic review of man's beginning and fall and using two real people, Adam and Eve, on whom He focuses in the rest of Scripture. It is from these two that the chosen people came. This race was the vehicle for the writing of Scripture, which records for mankind God's nature, our nature, our need for salvation, His plan of salvation and the history of His relationship with His chosen people and their neighbors. After the flood all wicked mankind was destroyed except the descendents of Adam and Eve through Noah and his family.

[From Reincarnation in the Bible? http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/reincarnation-in-the-bible-dan-carlton/1112712362?ean=9781491811009 ]
Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
oldmike
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1252


View Profile
« Reply #2334 on: 24 February 2018, 3:58:25 AM »

We are in total agreement.
Logged
Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2335 on: 24 February 2018, 4:07:18 AM »

We are in total agreement.

Eureka!
Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2336 on: 28 February 2018, 23:59:04 PM »

Proteins 3


Furthermore, the proposed energy sources for forming proteins (earth’s heat, electrical discharges, or solar radiation) destroy the protein products thousands of times faster than they could have formed (f). The many attempts to show how life might have arisen on earth have instead shown
(a) the futility of that effort (g),
(b) the immense complexity of even the simplest life (h), and
(c) the need for a vast intelligence to precede life.

f.    “The conclusion from these arguments presents the most serious obstacle, if indeed it is not fatal, to the theory of spontaneous generation. First, thermodynamic calculations predict vanishingly small concentrations of even the simplest organic compounds. Secondly, the reactions that are invoked to synthesize such compounds are seen to be much more effective in decomposing them.” D. E. Hull, “Thermodynamics and Kinetics of Spontaneous Generation,” Nature, Vol. 186, 28 May 1960, p. 694.

Pitman, p. 140.

Duane T. Gish, Speculations and Experiments Related to Theories on the Origin of Life, ICR Technical Monograph, No. 1 (El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation Research, 1972).

g.    “An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.” Crick, p. 88.

Francis Crick, a Nobel Prize winner and the co-discoverer of the DNA molecule, did not give up. He reasoned that if life could not have evolved on earth, it must have evolved somewhere else in our galaxy and been transported to earth—an old theory called panspermia. Just how life evolved on a distant planet is never explained. Crick proposed directed panspermia—that an advanced civilization sent bacteria to earth. Crick (p. 15) recognized that “it is difficult to see how viable spores could have arrived here, after such a long journey in space, undamaged by radiation.” He mistakenly thought that a spacecraft might protect the bacteria from cosmic radiation. Crick grossly underestimated the problem. [See Eugene N. Parker, “Shielding Space Travelers,” Scientific American, Vol. 294, March 2006, pp. 40–47.]

h.   Robert Shapiro, Origins (New York: Bantam Books, 1986).

The experiments by Harold Urey and Stanley Miller are often mentioned as showing that the “building blocks of life” can be produced in the laboratory. Not mentioned in these misleading claims are:

Organic molecules in life are of two types: proteins and nucleic acids (DNA and RNA). Nucleic acids, which are incredibly complex, were not produced, nor would any knowledgeable person expect them to be produced.

The protein “building blocks” were merely the simpler amino acids. The most complex amino acids have never been produced in the laboratory. (In 2011, several more amino acids were found in Miller’s old experimental materials, but the more complex amino acids found in life were still missing. See Eric T. Parker et al., “Primordial Synthesis of Amines and Amino Acids in a 1958 Miller H2S-Rich Spark Discharge Experiment,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 21 March 2011, pp. 1–6.)

Amino acids are as far from a living cell as bricks are from the Empire State Building.

Half the amino acids produced have the wrong handedness. [See: [Handedness: Left and Right ]

Urey and Miller’s experiments contained a reducing atmosphere, which the early earth did not have, and components, such as a trap, that do not exist in nature. (A trap quickly removes chemical products from the destructive energy sources that make the products.)

All of the above show why intelligence and design are necessary to produce even the simplest components of life.

“The story of the slow paralysis of research on life’s origin is quite interesting, but space precludes its retelling here. Suffice it to say that at present the field of origin-of-life studies has dissolved into a cacophony of conflicting models, each unconvincing, seriously incomplete, and incompatible with competing models. In private even most evolutionary biologists will admit that science has no explanation for the beginning of life.” Behe, “Molecular Machines,” pp. 30–31.

Rick Pierson, “Life before Life,” Discover, August 2004, p. 8.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown]
Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
oldmike
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1252


View Profile
« Reply #2337 on: 01 March 2018, 0:28:05 AM »

As I have frequently pointed out, evolution has nothing to say about how life began.
It is interesting to note that in former times, when the Genesis account was generally accepted, so was the idea that life was spontaneously generated as an everyday fact. e.g. maggots from rotting meat, frogs from mud, etc. As the dominant view of philosophers and thinkers continued to be in favour of spontaneous generation, some Christian theologians accepted the view. Augustine of Hippo discussed spontaneous generation in The City of God and The Literal Meaning of Genesis, citing Biblical passages such as "Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life" (Genesis 1:20) as decrees that would enable ongoing creation.
Logged
Pahu
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1327



View Profile
« Reply #2338 on: 01 March 2018, 5:41:50 AM »

As I have frequently pointed out, evolution has nothing to say about how life began.
It is interesting to note that in former times, when the Genesis account was generally accepted, so was the idea that life was spontaneously generated as an everyday fact. e.g. maggots from rotting meat, frogs from mud, etc. As the dominant view of philosophers and thinkers continued to be in favour of spontaneous generation, some Christian theologians accepted the view. Augustine of Hippo discussed spontaneous generation in The City of God and The Literal Meaning of Genesis, citing Biblical passages such as "Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life" (Genesis 1:20) as decrees that would enable ongoing creation.

Evolution still teaches life was spontaneously generated e.g. Darwin't warm little pond. Biblical passages such as "Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life" (Genesis 1:20) were speaking about God creating life, not spontaneous generation.

The disciplines of science prove creation and disprove evolution. For example:

Whale Variations Support Creation


BY BRIAN THOMAS, M.S.

Whales are graceful and remarkable swimming mammals. The 84 living species are amazingly diverse, ranging from over 100 feet long down to the size of an average dog. Recent research attempted to discover an evolutionary reason for this great diversity in body sizes, but the surprising findings actually support the creation model of whale development.

The largest whales mostly eat plankton, medium-sized whales dine on squid, and small whales consume fish. The researchers found no signs in the DNA that these whale groups underwent size fluctuations after they had resolved into their current respective niches. Instead, if they all shared a single common whale ancestor, the different groups rapidly settled into their sizes and niches "by 25 million years ago at the latest," and "for many millions of years, they have not changed very much."2

The dates given in the study were not directly measured, since nobody was around to record whale beginnings, but were instead derived from the dates assigned to whale fossil-bearing rock layers as interpreted by paleontologists. Realistically, if whales changed size over time, it could have occurred recently rather than in the far distant past. And this makes even more sense given the researchers' other conclusion "that evolution in early whales was explosively fast."2 If variations occurred quickly, then vast ages are not necessary.

Even though various whale populations are well-settled into ecological roles, interbreeding between some of them is not unknown. For example, "wholphins" arise from the union of a bottlenose dolphin and a false killer whale.3 This indicates that at least these whale forms likely shared a common ancestor. Others probably did, too.

Variations in certain features, like body or snout length, can fluctuate within the still-interbreeding members of the whale kind. But this process cannot legitimately be extrapolated to explain the ultimate origin of the core features that define whales themselves, because in all of these cases, the bodies and snouts are already there and very well-formed.4

Discerning which modern species descended from an originally created form is no easy task. One clue is to examine breeding records and the presence or absence of novel, essential organs. For example, blue whales are not only larger than other whales, reaching weights of 180 metric tons, but they have baleen integrated with expandable skin attached to a specially shaped mouth. Only when all those components--which are very different from the mouth structures of other whales--are integrated simultaneously does the blue whale's method of screening the ocean for plankton function. So, this "all-or-nothing" apparatus indicates that blue whales probably do not share ancestry with those whales without it.

In other words, differences in some easy-to-alter features--like size or color--may change between generations, but this is due to well-designed internal capacities to adapt. In contrast, the invention of entire new organs or whole new creatures has only one reasonable explanation, which is creation.

Evolutionary frontman Richard Dawkins recognized this, although he insisted in 1996 on attributing the creative power to nature--despite the lack of any positive evidence supporting this conclusion. He wrote:

Evolution is very possibly not, in actual fact, always gradual. But it must be gradual when it is being used to explain the coming into existence of complicated, apparently designed objects, like eyes….Without gradualness in these cases, we are back to a miracle.5

According to the Proceedings of the Royal Society B study, the changes in whales were not gradual. But the whale changes did not occur in any core "complicated" features,6 and thus what is being termed "evolution" is actually either designed variation within a created kind, or pure imagination.

http://www.icr.org/article/whale-variations-support-creation
« Last Edit: 01 March 2018, 23:34:28 PM by Pahu » Logged

Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
oldmike
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1252


View Profile
« Reply #2339 on: 01 March 2018, 14:47:01 PM »

Quote
   Evolution still teaches life was spontaneously generated e.g. Darwin't warm little pond.   

No it does not.

The last sentence of The Origin of Species, first edition, 1859:

"There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved."

In other words, Darwin explicitly starts his evolutionary process after some mysterious beginning ("originally breathed into a few forms or into one"), without attempting to specify how the process could have initially been set up.

In a private letter to Joseph Hooker in 1871 (cited in Fortey 1998, according to various internet postings):

"It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive in some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c., present, that a proteine (sic) compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were found."

Here Darwin is making up a hypothetical scenario for the purpose of a different argument. People had argued that if life could form spontaneously, then we should see it happening today, too. Darwin is simply pointing out that even if life were forming spontaneously today, any such proto-life form would immediately be eaten or absorbed by some more developed, modern living thing, and we would never see it. This would not have been a problem the very first time a self-replicating compound was formed. So this argument against the "warm little pond" origin story is not convincing. But his caveat ("and oh! what a big if!") suggests that he does not take this scenario very seriously.

Apparently, this is the only place in all of Darwin's public and private writings where he even speculates about this initial stage. He never published any opinion on the matter. He seems to have realized that it was:

touchy for many people;
not amenable to scientific investigation, at least with the knowledge of his day;
and most importantly, not relevant to whether or not his theory of evolution was correct for the time after the process had gotten rolling, however that happened.
He makes this third point clearly in the last sentence of the Origin of Species. His theory applies to the time after self-replicating, living things had appeared. Once they are present, they will evolve as his theory describes. How they appeared in the first place is a separate, more difficult question. The answer, while of great interest, does not affect the validity of Darwin's theory one way or the other.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 154 155 [156] 157 158 ... 164
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines