It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: AreUKiddingMe
a reply to: peter vlar
I'm not a Ken Ham fan myself, it was an easy article to find. But the word dinosaur didn't even exist until recently, and more than likely were what was referred to "dragons" in the Bible.
The story of Noah's ark and creation science has just as much if not more empirical evidence than the evolutionist theory.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: AreUKiddingMe
a reply to: peter vlar
I'm not a Ken Ham fan myself, it was an easy article to find. But the word dinosaur didn't even exist until recently, and more than likely were what was referred to "dragons" in the Bible.
That isn't evidence. That is an inference.
The story of Noah's ark and creation science has just as much if not more empirical evidence than the evolutionist theory.
It does. Does it? Care to post any? I'm actually curious where this evidence actually exists, because I've not seen a single piece of empirical evidence for either of those things, while seeing TONS of empirical evidence for evolutionary theory. This of course makes your statement above false.
Dinosaurs quite definitely lived millions of years ago and they quite definitively evolved.
originally posted by: stormbringer1701
There was a regional flood at about the time Noah's flood was supposed to take place. The evidence is in the geological record. Apparently a natural sea wall collapsed allowing one of the local seas to ingress into the region.
the purpose of the flood was to prevent cultural and genetic mixing to interdict the messianic prophesies. The Proto-Hebrews were mixing by intermarriage and adopting the religions and cultures of surrounding neighbors and the fallen watchers. At the time of the flood the bible says only the generations of Noah and his family remained eligible to carry the Messiah's blood line.
The flood did not have to be global to achieve it's objective. It is impossible in fact for the flood to have been global and logistically and physically impossible for the ark to have served as a lifeboat for the entire world's biodiversity. They would not fit and could not reach the Ark launch site due to geographical barriers. also loading the entire biodiverstiy of the planet would have taken an impossible amount of time. also from the archeological and cultural records clearly people other than Noah's extended family survived that period.
And again the answer lays in the ancient texts in hebrew and greek. The word used translated as world has multiple meanings. the hebrews and used the same word to mean dirt, kingdom, region, area and other things.
Also note that if the Proto-Hebrews had been obedient to God there would have been no need to genocide their neighbors because the messianic bloodline and prophesies would not have been in jeopardy.
That said there was a world flood but it occurred between line one and two of the creation narrative and not at Noah's time.
originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
originally posted by: borntowatch
I have met people in the scientific community who believe there was once nothing and then POOF
Everything suddenly as if by magic appeared, you recon people who believe that dinosaurs are not real are as silly as people who believe in this poof theory
But hey believe what you want, me I believe there are dinosaurs in existence today, somewhere.
Erm, look out of your window sometime. Those birds in the sky? They're descended from dinosaurs.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The only time the world was covered in water was likely billions of years ago if at all.
originally posted by: stormbringer1701
It is not racism. The very first messianic prophesy said i will place emnenity between your seed and her seed. remember that her seed is ultimately Jeshua. so Jeshua has to be of traceable unbroken lineage to Adam and Eve. after Able was killed by Cain this was through Seth.
Lest you think it's not the next messianic prophesy say you shall bruise his heel and he shall bruise your head. Jeshua's heel was bruised on the cross. Satan's head was crushed when Christ defeated death (which is also an power and office given to Satan) by his resurrection.
Throughout the old testament additional messianic prophesies were given and the yall had to be fullfilled by Jeshua or else His mission would fail.
The Jews were chosen only in that sense. God is not a respector of persons. when he made non adamic man he said not only that they were good. He proclaimed them doubly good. see gen 1:6. That is the only time God said that. But verse six is not Adam the person named Adam. That does not happen until the day after God had rested so that was on day 8.
The adam in verse six and the adam in verse 8 are distinguished by an impersonal form in verse six and a personal article in day 8. The two creation dates of adam are not evidence of an error or inconsistency in the bible in the original language manuscripts which are still available in interlinear bibles, other study aid and in the MSSs which are still stored in the British Museum.
yes it is true that at various points in geological time every part of the surface of the earth were under water. but the time of each period of marine phase is widely separated in time. the fossilized sea critters that are everywhere are not proof of Noah's flood. and fossils take a lot of time to be transformed to rock. a bit more than 6000 years or so. and by "bit" i am being deadpan facetious.
originally posted by: denybedoomed
My father in law says while working in Wyoming on a construction site they were digging the things up like crazy, he brought some home and I have one intact in my garage. He said there were so many that they were just throwing them out. a reply to: Sublimecraft
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
originally posted by: stormbringer1701
It is not racism. The very first messianic prophesy said i will place emnenity between your seed and her seed. remember that her seed is ultimately Jeshua. so Jeshua has to be of traceable unbroken lineage to Adam and Eve. after Able was killed by Cain this was through Seth.
It IS racism. It's a bunch of humans saying that THEY are better and more worthy than a bunch of other humans based on made up reasons. THAT is racism. Why exactly could another group of people NOT carry Jesus' blood line? There is no reason given, just that it is a no-no. That is racism.
Lest you think it's not the next messianic prophesy say you shall bruise his heel and he shall bruise your head. Jeshua's heel was bruised on the cross. Satan's head was crushed when Christ defeated death (which is also an power and office given to Satan) by his resurrection.
Throughout the old testament additional messianic prophesies were given and the yall had to be fullfilled by Jeshua or else His mission would fail.
You do know that many prophecies were written after the fact, are purposely vague, or stories are changed to align with prophecy right? No ACTUAL prophecies have ever been fulfilled, because that can't happen. Accurately predicting the future means that humans don't have free will.
The Jews were chosen only in that sense. God is not a respector of persons. when he made non adamic man he said not only that they were good. He proclaimed them doubly good. see gen 1:6. That is the only time God said that. But verse six is not Adam the person named Adam. That does not happen until the day after God had rested so that was on day 8.
The adam in verse six and the adam in verse 8 are distinguished by an impersonal form in verse six and a personal article in day 8. The two creation dates of adam are not evidence of an error or inconsistency in the bible in the original language manuscripts which are still available in interlinear bibles, other study aid and in the MSSs which are still stored in the British Museum.
You're off on some weird tangent here.
originally posted by: stormbringer1701
I see that there is quite a lot of distance here. your presumption is that the bible was written by men. that the bible is not divine. and you ascribe to God the motives of man in any case where you might allow for his existence which you don't. therefore there is no further need for discussion. because you cannot be persuaded if you start with those assumptions as postulates and axioms.
The discussion of adam was not tangential. i pointed out that non adamic, non-jew, non proto-hebrew races that were not chosen to fulfill the salvation plan were described as very good by God. if it was racist and written by Jews or Proto-jews dontcha think that the non jews would not have been described as "very good" when thier ancestors merely got "good" billing?
Because it was Gods plan and his promise that it would happen the way the prophesies said. if the lineage was impure Jeshua would not be qualified to be the perfect sacrifice as set forth in prophesy and by the rules set up in the various covenants. If his ancestors were not of the lineage of adam and eve and also by relation to david of the king line and by the lineage of the priest line he could not fulfill the law and the prophesies. The problems the proto hebrews had obeying God were the reason for most of the death and destruction that ensued in the OT. It's not as if they were especially good at being God's chosen people. and if the book were written as a racist manifesto that certainly would not have been what they would have chosen to write. Were it a racist manifesto the parts about the jews being sent into exile or slavery would probably not have made the cut of the first edition.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The discussion of adam was not tangential. i pointed out that non adamic, non-jew, non proto-hebrew races that were not chosen to fulfill the salvation plan were described as very good by God. if it was racist and written by Jews or Proto-jews dontcha think that the non jews would not have been described as "very good" when thier ancestors merely got "good" billing?
Then why was it SOOOO forbidden for them to inter-mix despite God CLEARLY making it possible for the two groups of humans to do so?
originally posted by: borntowatch
originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
originally posted by: borntowatch
I have met people in the scientific community who believe there was once nothing and then POOF
Everything suddenly as if by magic appeared, you recon people who believe that dinosaurs are not real are as silly as people who believe in this poof theory
But hey believe what you want, me I believe there are dinosaurs in existence today, somewhere.
Erm, look out of your window sometime. Those birds in the sky? They're descended from dinosaurs.
Look out your own window and then tell me you believe this all just suddenly poofed out of nothing.
Maybe a witch wiggled her nose, oh wait there was nothing, it just poofed
Believe what you want to believe, dont preach at me please
originally posted by: borntowatch
originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
originally posted by: borntowatch
I have met people in the scientific community who believe there was once nothing and then POOF
Everything suddenly as if by magic appeared, you recon people who believe that dinosaurs are not real are as silly as people who believe in this poof theory
But hey believe what you want, me I believe there are dinosaurs in existence today, somewhere.
Erm, look out of your window sometime. Those birds in the sky? They're descended from dinosaurs.
Look out your own window and then tell me you believe this all just suddenly poofed out of nothing.
Maybe a witch wiggled her nose, oh wait there was nothing, it just poofed
Believe what you want to believe, dont preach at me please