Bible and ufo's

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   
CONCLUSION users.aristotle.net...
As shown above, the evidence that "the sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6 are fallen angels is substantial. By their sexual immorality, these angels produced offspring which were strong and violent. The concept of a race of giants which resulted from the union of gods and humans is virtually universal in the world's early civilizations. www.mt.net... Sons of God, Daughters of Men!! www.studiesintheword.org... Sons of God in the Old Testament refers to angels. Sons of God in the New Testament refers to God's Spirit-led people.




posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 09:45 PM
link   
I've written some articles from a biblical perspective, have a look I'm sure you'll find it informative.

www.numberman.net...

www.numberman.net...

www.numberman.net...

www.numberman.net...

www.numberman.net...



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deep_MindQuest
CONCLUSION users.aristotle.net...
As shown above, the evidence that "the sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6 are fallen angels is substantial. By their sexual immorality, these angels produced offspring which were strong and violent. The concept of a race of giants which resulted from the union of gods and humans is virtually universal in the world's early civilizations. www.mt.net... Sons of God, Daughters of Men!! www.studiesintheword.org... Sons of God in the Old Testament refers to angels. Sons of God in the New Testament refers to God's Spirit-led people.


There is no 'substantial' evidence of any such of a thing. While I agree with the whole premise, I don't quite understand the relevance here. The people that I was referring to were the ones in the Land of Nod when Cain was banished there, since he, Adam, and Eve were the only three known to be physically present at the time. I'm wondering where those other people came from. There was no mention of them previously. We must then assume, for this story to hold up, that they were already here before us, and we just got planted here.

Then the next question is who were these others? And what did they know that we have lost touch with since they left? Speaking of which, where'd they go? These are but a few of the problems that arise out of this. Can anyone enlighten me with supporting facts?



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Nice Response The Borg, and I'm glad you will look into the things that I posted. Lets backtrack to verse 1 of Genesis. The Bible talks about the Creation of the universe as well as what we call evolution in general.

If you look at Genesis Chapter 1, God Created(Bara) three times. In verse 1,21 and 27. God Created the universe in verse 1 and the Word formed the universe out of what was Created in verse 1. So God Created the conditions for life to exist in verse 1 and this is why another act of Creation wasn't needed until verse 21. Now, verse 20 and 21 says:

Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

So, from the Life that God brought forth from the waters, He then Created the various species that we see today. God inserted an operating system within this simple life that instruced this life on how to evolve. See, there wasn't another act of Creation needed to bring forth life from the waters in verse 20 because God Created the conditions for simple lifeforms to exist in verse 1 of Genesis.

When this was first shown to me, I said to myself that their has to be an interruption in the evolutionary record that shows this to be the case. While I was searching the net I came across introns within what's called junk DNA. About 2 billion years ago eukaryotic cells diverged from bacteria and the eukaryotic genomes are a complex mixture of useful genes and junk DNA. Within this Junk DNA are introns and the bacterial genome does not contain introns. Then I ran across these articles:

www.mg.co.za.../breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news&articleid=134442

Forget waiting for ET to call -- the most likely place to find an alien message is in our DNA, according to an expert in Australia.

Professor Paul Davies, from the Australian Centre for Astrobiology at Macquarie University in Sydney, believes a cosmic greeting card could have been left in every human cell.

The coded message would only be discovered once the human race had the technology to read and understand it.

Writing in New Scientist magazine, Davies said the idea should be considered seriously.

The article goes on to say:

For more than 40 years astronomers have been sweeping the skies with radio telescopes hoping to catch a signal from an alien civilisation.

So far the search has been in vain. But Davies believes it is wrong to assume that extraterrestrials who may be hundreds of millions of years ahead of us technologically will have chosen to communicate by radio.

Leaving artefacts for humans to find once they are sufficiently evolved -- like the obelisk in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey -- might be a more attractive strategy, he said.

But ensuring the survival of such an artefact over possibly millions of years would be difficult.

A better solution would be to incorporate information into the human genome, allowing it to be copied and maintained over immense periods of time.

One way to do this might be to deliver alien viruses which could infect cells with message-laden DNA, said Davies.

Scientists have recently discovered large sequences of "junk" DNA that contain no genes and appears to be very stable.

"If ET has put a message into terrestrial organisms, this is surely where to look," said Davies.

The other article says:

"Junk DNA" is actually the "software" that allowed complex organisms to evolve, according to an Australian molecular biologist.

Professor John Mattick of Queensland University's Institute of Molecular Bioscience argues that scientists have been too focused on the protein-production role of DNA and ignored its role in helping to put all the proteins together at the right time and place.

"The genetic program has to do two things," said Professor Mattick. "It has to specify the protein components, the bricks if you like, but it also has to specify the patterns in which those things are put together."

Traditionally, scientists have written off non-protein-coding DNA as "junk". Professor Mattick sees it differently.

It goes on to say:

Scientists have been surprised at the amount of DNA in the human genome that does not code for proteins. Some of this non-coding DNA is present within genes (introns), while other others lie between genes.

"The discovery of the mosaic structure of genes in higher organisms was the biggest surprise in the history of molecular biology. It was swept under the carpet within a few months of being discovered because everybody "knew" that genes coded for proteins. It was rationalised as junk, as an evolutionary hangover," said Professor Mattick.

"This stuff is in all the textbooks. But there was never any evidence for it, it was just a straight assumption."

He set up an alternative hypothesis "that introns are conveying information" and went in search of evidence that would either support it or knock it down.

"I could find nothing that could knock it down. Several things in the textbooks that could theoretically knock it down turned out to be incorrect assumptions," he said.

You can read the whole article here:
www.abc.net.au...

So, God inserted an operating system within introns in what's called junk DNA. Thise operating system told the life that God brought forth from the waters, how to evolve. Again their are no introns in the bacterial genome and they just appear when species begin to form. This matches the Bible and I have no doubt that this is the case because this was shown to me before I knew about introns within junk DNA. When this was shown to me I knew that something within the evolutionary record would show this to be true.

This leads to verse 26 and 27. See, these species evolved and then God Created again in verse 27 and then humans began to evolve. Adam was formed from the dust of the ground. The gods had dominion over mankind but not Adam and the rest I explain in my earlier post. See, there were two bloodlines, one between Adam and Eve and this is why Noah was perfect in his generations and there's one between Adam and the daughters of mankind. The bloodline between Adam and Eve ended with Jesus and the serpent constantly tried to corrupt this bloodline and you can see this in the Old Testament. The Nation of Israel were chosen to carry this bloodline.

THANK YOU, LORD JESUS!!!
quantumtheologica.blogspot.com...

[edit on 18-1-2006 by polomontana]



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 03:28 AM
link   
polomontana,

Am I to assume that you're suggesting that there are two separate humanoid creations: one by Evolution, and one by Creation? If so, that's a very interesting idea that I've not thought about in a long time.

I just disacknowledged it because I don't believe that we evolved from the slime that came out of the ocean. It is said that God made us out of the dust of the Earth, and I take that to mean not evolved from sea sludge. I'll have to look more into this. But in the meantime, good post; you got me thinkin.



posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   
www.khouse.org... Alien Encounters - A Christian Perspective !



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Search out "The Urantia Book" and know "The Truth" above the phyical illusion of the "earth's" dream.

www.truthbook.com...





top topics
 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join