What is their agenda?Umm..... its the hardcore evolutionists that have THE agenda and the creationists are reacting to it.
What is their agenda?Umm..... its the hardcore evolutionists that have THE agenda and the creationists are reacting to it.
I recall reading a comment on a study of Genesis 1 with regard to textual structure. The researcher looked at several passages that are distinctly poetic, and found that Genesis 1 had none of the "markers" of poetic language found in the unambiguous passages.
Gen 1 is obviously very poetic text. Gen 2 is in contradiction to Gen 1. You cannot read them both literally, its impossible. Either one of them is not literal or both of them.
The context of R 8:19-23 is not about Adam and about his fall. Where do you see it there?
If death did not exist prior the fall, how could Adam understand the problem with "you will die"?
Also, what was the tree of life there for, if nobody and nothing was able to die?
All illness is from the original sin. Christ will conquer this in all who believe -TRULY BELIEVE IN HIS POWER. IF YOU HAVE FAITH IN HIM ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE.Your example is a really poor one. Sickle-cell anemia is certainly a terrible disease, but is not a quick killer, so those who have it may reproduce before it claims their lives. It must be passed on by both parents to manifest in such a way to significantly affect health. It is also a lightweight compared to malaria, which is estimated to have killed more people than any other cause. Sickle-cell anemia makes its host resistant to malaria.
That all aside, natural selection is testable and has been demonstrated many times in laboratory experiments. As long as one understands that it cannot generate new information, it is most certainly a valid and essentially proven phenomenon.
There are clear contradictions. Maybe you should read Gen 1 and Gen 2 carefully and compare.No contradiction. A recap with more detail, that is all. To reiterate, then add more detail is no contradiction. I have heard this ploy used before. It could only fly if pigs could. It is call interpretation of man not guided by the Holy Spirit.
The Tree of life was a symbolism for WISDOM:
I've heard this before. The idea that sickle cell anemia is somehow beneficial should never come from grown ups.Your example is a really poor one. Sickle-cell anemia is certainly a terrible disease, but is not a quick killer, so those who have it may reproduce before it claims their lives. It must be passed on by both parents to manifest in such a way to significantly affect health. It is also a lightweight compared to malaria, which is estimated to have killed more people than any other cause. Sickle-cell anemia makes its host resistant to malaria.
That all aside, natural selection is testable and has been demonstrated many times in laboratory experiments. As long as one understands that it cannot generate new information, it is most certainly a valid and essentially proven phenomenon.
THAT IS RIGHT! ON EARTH AS IN HEAVEN , the Tree of Life is a symbolism of who is in heaven With the Triune God. Just as the Ark of the Covenant was desinged after what was shown Moses from heaven. O' the manifold Wisdom of God, how great are His mysteries and profound are His ways in which only His chosen are permitted to see.There are clear contradictions. Maybe you should read Gen 1 and Gen 2 carefully and compare.
Oh oh oh ohsoooo, symbolism it is now
![]()
THAT IS RIGHT! ON EARTH AS IN HEAVEN , the Tree of Life is a symbolism of who is in heaven With the Triune God. Just as the Ark of the Covenant was desinged after what was shown Moses from heaven. O' the manifold Wisdom of God, how great are His mysteries and profound are His ways in which only His chosen are permitted to see.
No because humans are breathing thinking beings unlike trees. And tress do not speak nor have INTELLECTS like God and reflective creatures. Hence why I say symbolism. The snake was the form Lucifer took on. He could not deceive her in his own image for she new him as a guardian Cherub and saw him routinely in the garden. He being of spirit and light can manipulate the natural realm. Angels have supernatural powers. It was no great feet for him to disguise himself as a serpent and deceive Eve. This is beyond your scope of reason for it understood through faith, and revealed in the Holy Spirit in which dwells heavenly Wisdom, which people of FAITH receive to understand the language of God.If tree of life is symbolism, then tree of knowledge of good and evil, talking snake, eve from adam's side, dust of earth etc. can be symbolism too.
In addition the Cambrian explosion layer has thousands of species created at once with no evidenceThe word theory, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, is “a hypothesis that has been
confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as
accounting for the known facts.”
To be considered a theory, something must be “confirmed” and account for the “known facts.”
Evolution has been neither. At best, evolution is a hypothesis. Unproven and without “correspondence
with fact,” it stands as an idea scientists seem desperate to substantiate, but remain unable to do so.
Evolution is the belief that life spontaneously erupted from non-living chemicals—all life today coming
from that eruption. It includes the idea that all creatures alive today have, after many varied steps,
come into existence from some previously existing creatures.
For example, it is claimed that a fish in the past began changing, then, over millions of years and many
intermediate steps, became a mammal of today. Evolution supporters suggest that fish somehow became
amphibians and amphibians somehow became mammals. This process is supposed to have taken many
millions of years, involving millions of intermediate steps to achieve.
Do not confuse the theory of evolution with adaptation of a species or genetic variation.
Adaptation simply means that something changes to fit its environment, not that it changes
into some other species.
Genetic variation occurs when there are limiting factors in the available gene pool. But again,
it does not produce some new species—only changes within the same species.
-
“No matter how far back we go in the fossil record of previous animal life upon Earth,
we find no trace of any animal forms which are intermediate between the various major
groups or phyla.”
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings. DNA studies have proven macro (Darwinian) evolution to be false. Absolutely no evidence of DNA creating a new species.Darwin’s natural selection.
And this “natural selection” has become the “answer to everything.”
Ever wonder why humans are the only “hairless” creatures of our “furry primate family”?
What we do know is that it must have happened through natural selection. But then there is
the scientific problem of why we retain such concentration of hair on our scalp, face, armpits,
pubic area (and Uncle Joe’s flowering chest). If our furry selves were naturally selected out,
why did hair in these areas remain, especially so ornately around the head?
We are left to speculate.
Ever wonder why men are nearly always taller, heavier, stronger than women?
That’s natural selection they say. Ever wonder why men don’t have a baculum?
Ever wonder why humans are the only “primates” that walk solely upright,
on two legs? Natural selection.
Why are human females the only mammals, aside from orca whales and pilot whales,
to go through menopause—living far beyond childbearing age?
Here’s one you may not have considered—what about blushing?
So how did this somewhat embarrassing trait come to be prevalent in humans?
Evolution, the fact. Natural selection, the theory—yet the answer to everything.
Is there no other way? These theories of natural selection go on and on.
-
What if man isn’t, in fact, part of the primate family, and thus could never have been
naturally selected from within it? What if he isn’t even a part of the animal kingdom,
and thus never could have been naturally selected from it?
Perhaps man was created after a different “species” (Genesis 1:24-26).
Perhaps he has hair around his head because it was designed as an ornament
(Proverbs 20:29; 1 Corinthians 11:15).
Perhaps men were designed to be taller, heavier and stronger in order to protect
and serve women and children (Proverbs 20:29; 1 Peter 3:7).
Maybe men don’t have a baculum because God intended sex among humans to be
more than just for success in occasional brute offspring reproduction (Genesis 2:24;
1 Corinthians 7:3-5).
Maybe mankind is the most upright appearing of any bipedal creatures on Earth
because that is the way his Creator looks (Genesis 1:26; Revelation 1:13-16)—
because it allows man to build and create things like his Maker.
Perhaps women continue to live after childbearing age because there are other roles
ordained for them in their later years (Titus 2:3-5). Maybe man exhibits physical
reactions, like blushing, to moral dilemmas because there was created in him the
ability to perceive morality (Titus 1:15; 1 Timothy 4:2).
Maybe man is the way he is because he was designed by a Creator.
Actually, not maybe. “Maybe,” “could be,” “possibly,” “perhaps,” ad nauseam,
are all for the realm of the evolutionary journals. The Bible states unequivocally
that this is the way it is.
In Genesis the 6 day timeline has all animals created in 1 day. No time for any evolving. The Cambrian explosion supports this. All of a sudden all kinds of species appeared at the same time.The science has shown that the time models do not work for the evolution of the eye to have occurred between the various species.
When I find the study I will post it.
How does a organism even know light exists or that sounds exists for that matter so that it mutates to receive it?
When kittens do not receive visual stimulation at birth they go blind, it has to be fully functioning with all the necessary components to work.
Oh so God is the deciding factor in how things evolved not natural selection, are you still talking about evolution?
Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg, a Messianic Jew and scholar of Biblical languages and times, debunks that concept. He states the language used in early Genesis is a historical narrative. Nothing is using the symbolic terminology. I take his word over whoever came up with this concept. Most likely those who are uncomfortable with the literal meanings stated.If tree of life is symbolism, then tree of knowledge of good and evil, talking snake, eve from adam's side, dust of earth etc. can be symbolism too.
Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg, a Messianic Jew and scholar of Biblical languages and times, debunks that concept. He states the language used in early Genesis is a historical narrative. Nothing is using the symbolic terminology. I take his word over whoever came up with this concept. Most likely those who are uncomfortable with the literal meanings stated.
You can take whatever word you choose over the tree symbolizing Wisdom, all you want. The facts are all scripture supports what I said. Proverbs, ex....... And the the Lord further expounds upon exactly what I said. 1 Sirach and Baruch so forth and so on. And I do not want to hear the Messianic's do not accept those books either, they are only following Protestant lead who converted them.Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Eyzenberg, a Messianic Jew and scholar of Biblical languages and times, debunks that concept. He states the language used in early Genesis is a historical narrative. Nothing is using the symbolic terminology. I take his word over whoever came up with this concept. Most likely those who are uncomfortable with the literal meanings stated.
Interesting, and at least you are pondering and think on the obvious.To me it sounds symbolic not because of the words used but the setting. A few points i have been wondering:
1. The garden of Eden and therefore the tree of life was on earth somewhere. When Adam and Eve were banished, an angel with a flaming sword was placed to prevent them from accessing this tree.
The question is- what happened to this tree? did it die like other physical trees? if it dies then it can not be the tree of life anymore can it?
2. The bible starts with story of this tree of life and also ends with this tree in Revelation again:
Rev 22:1 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.
In between Genesis and Revelation, there has been heavy symbolism of 'a tree that doesn't bear fruit being cut down'.
Could we be the tree? and being a tree that doesn't bear fruit is the heart that doesn't know God?
I'm not sure but in Revelation, we see symbolism of this tree come out clearly.
Not exactly. To begin with no prophesy of scripture is of any private interpretation.In the bible man was created and then death entered into the world.
So death was not "in nature" until the fall of man
All illness is from the original sin. Christ will conquer this in all who believe -TRULY BELIEVE IN HIS POWER. IF YOU HAVE FAITH IN HIM ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE.
I've heard this before. The idea that sickle cell anemia is somehow beneficial should never come from grown ups.
the father of the theory of evolution Darwin said, and I have his book, he said "If I can not witness signs of evolution in my lifetime then I will conclude that all my theories are false"
well guess what? He didnt witness evolution so according to the inventor of evolution theory it is false, yet so many still believe it....
https://www.newsweek.com/dinosaur-era-frilled-shark-insane-teeth-found-portugal-708764
Updated | The rare frilled shark is considered a “living fossil” because evidence of its existence dates back to at least 80 million years ago. This summer, researchers found one alive and thriving off the coast of Portugal, uncovering more clues about the resilience of this ancient sea creature.
The researchers who discovered the shark off the Algarve coast were working on a European Union project in the area, the BBC reported. The goal of the project was to "minimize unwanted catches in commercial fishing," the researchers told SIC Noticisas TV, as the BBC noted, but the team unknowingly unearthed one of the rarest and most ancient animals on the planet.
Scientists believe the frilled shark has remained the same, both inside and out, since the Cretaceous Period, when the Tyrannosaurus rex and Triceratops still roamed the planet. The creature, known by scientists as Chlamydoselachus anguineus, is incredibly simple and unevolved, most likely due to the lack of nutrients found in its deep-sea dwellings. A Japanese study of the shark found in Suruga Bay, Japan, revealed that its diet is 61 percent cephalopods—the class to which squids and octopus belong.
![]()
Not exactly. To begin with no prophesy of scripture is of any private interpretation.
To say that death was not 'in nature' until the fall of man not only contradicts the laws of nature but also contradicts the doctrine of Christ which establishes that (death) originated from the beginning of this physical world in the day it came into existence.