Three Earth Ages!

[Jordan]

(tim_from_pa;62506)
This is interesting Jordan, and I am definitely open to this provided scripture can be pieced together to make a definite case.First, let me make sure I understand the lineages as us old genealogists would say.There's at least three---- the "generic" man created the 6th day, Adam on the eighth and then the perverted Kenites between Satan and Eve, right?This makes the theology more interesting. But here's some questions then:1) If "man" was created in God's image and likeness, (which I always alluded to Adam,) but Adam was later formed, then could Adam claim the same properties (i.e. in his image) and what scripture backs that up?The possibility of three lineages do not bother me---- but then if we believe this, we have to make sure we assign the proper characteristics and scriptural promises to each one.2) What about Paul's reference to Adam and Christ? In Adam all die, in Christ all are made alive.Now I have no problem with accepting that death came to all creation because of Adam (c.f. Romans 8) so in that respect all men-like creatures also die, and then in Christ all are made alive. However, there is only a spiritual, not physical or genealogical connection with the original procreators of each lineage. I find in the bible that there is often both a physical and spiritual link.In the case of Luke's genealogy, Christ is traced back to Adam to show that Christ is the kinsman redeemer to all people, just as in Matthew he is the kinsman redeemer of the Israelites.I'll stop there with the questions, but here is another issue I ran into with the book of Jashar:The book of Jashar 1:1-4 states:1. And God said let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and God created man in his own image.2. And God formed man from the ground, and he blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul endowed with speech.3. And the Lord said it is not good for man to be alone; I will make unto him a helpmate.4. And the Lord caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam.....As you can see, the book of Jashar starts out with the creation of "man" and the wording is virtually verbatim to Genesis 2. Yet, this same man that he caused to fall asleep he called Adam. At face value, it very clearly equates the two. This is why apocryphal books shed light on the bible where something may not be all too clear.I always took Genesis 2 as the overview and chapter 3 as the specifics.You know me, I pride myself on believing the bible straightforward. For example, with the lost tribes, I often challenge the skeptics with Genesis 35:11 which speaks of many nations. Most Christianity today either ignores that or spiritualizes it by song and dancing around it.Likewise, I take things at face value. I have to be able to unquestionably defend the lineages by clear scripture otherwise I'd find myself song and dancing to explain something, (or answering contradictions) the very thing I say the critics do.Now, I have believed in the POSSIBILITY of pre-adamic man in the first earth age, now extinct, and that seems to be the consensus when I look on the Internet. Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 clearly shows something happened (that's obvious) but the details are sketchy except for other passages such as Jeremiah 4 that fills in a few precious details. Otherwise, I never used it to establish doctrine, and it bothers me not if someone believes it or not.As for Man and Kenites, I don't know much about them because there is precious little in the bible about the subject, but there is plenty on Adam's race and Israel. So in this case when I am not sure, I'll keep my mouth shut on the topic until further revelations come to me. However, I can teach and believe in what I do know for sure (I wish critics would likewise shut their mouths with topics like the lost tribes instead of arguing something they do not know about).

No offense to you Tim, but I hated it when someone quotes Jasher. As for Paul reffering to Adam and Christ I can answer that.After Cain murdered his HALF-brother Abel (Genesis 4:8)Cain said this.Genesis 4:14 - Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.Notice something in this very verse. God banished Cain from Adam and Eve, and... And there were other people before Adam was formed.Genesis 4:16 - And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.Genesis 4:17 - And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.Cain married a girl that existed before Adam and dwelt in a land of Nod which means the land of wander.So yes in Adam we all die......In the First Earth Age, there were no humans.

 

[tim_from_pa]

OK--- so let's say there's the 6th day man as opposed to 8th day Adam.God gave the 6th day man dominion---- that was the whole point of the creation was to replace Satan who had fallen and replace with one in God's image over this earth. Then comes Adam. Now we start off with two lineages? What's the point? Who's to rule as we now have Two Heads over this earth. Not to mention it messes up the genealogies. Yet Christ is only One Head. I can see biblical contradictions arising all over with that thought, and like I said, I don't song and dance.I know what was already said that Christ would have to come from a pure one, as in Adam, but genealogically speaking, a lineage can be preserved with branches shooting off, such as Abraham had Isaac and Ishmael. Isaac was chosen over Ishmael. Likewise the promised seed went to Jacob over Esau. And so forth. Yet all had origin in one man, Abraham. So in the originator we have the children of promise, the elect and the children of the flesh without having to resort to two different progenitors.And as for the translation of the Hebrew word Man, the base is Adam. If you look at Strong's after a few chapters later in Genesis we start seeing a different Hebrew word for man iysh.I don't know about Jashar, as I can only rely on the translation as is given to me, although it is mentioned in the bible. I can't just sweep that under the rug, either.However, I do know that the biblical passage:In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he himis referring emphatically to Adam. That's because "man" is translated âdâmaw-dawm'From H119; ruddy, that is, a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.): - X another, + hypocrite, + common sort, X low, man (mean, of low degree), person.

 

[Jordan]

(tim_from_pa;62551)
OK--- so let's say there's the 6th day man as opposed to 8th day Adam.God gave the 6th day man dominion---- that was the whole point of the creation was to replace Satan who had fallen and replace with one in God's image over this earth. Then comes Adam. Now we start off with two lineages? What's the point? Who's to rule as we now have Two Heads over this earth. Not to mention it messes up the genealogies. Yet Christ is only One Head. I can see biblical contradictions arising all over with that thought, and like I said, I don't song and dance.I know what was already said that Christ would have to come from a pure one, as in Adam, but genealogically speaking, a lineage can be preserved with branches shooting off, such as Abraham had Isaac and Ishmael. Isaac was chosen over Ishmael. Likewise the promised seed went to Jacob over Esau. And so forth. Yet all had origin in one man, Abraham. So in the originator we have the children of promise, the elect and the children of the flesh without having to resort to two different progenitors.And as for the translation of the Hebrew word Man, the base is Adam. If you look at Strong's after a few chapters later in Genesis we start seeing a different Hebrew word for man iysh.I don't know about Jashar, as I can only rely on the translation as is given to me, although it is mentioned in the bible. I can't just sweep that under the rug, either.However, I do know that the biblical passage:In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he himis referring emphatically to Adam. That's because "man" is translated âdâmaw-dawm'From H119; ruddy, that is, a human being (an individual or the species, mankind, etc.): - X another, + hypocrite, + common sort, X low, man (mean, of low degree), person.
Tim, neither do I song and dance. And no, there is no contradiction at all between the 6th day Pre-Adamic Races and "8th day" Adamic races. The most important part to look at is Adamic races. Satan went after Adam. The sixth day races is not that important to Satan. Satan knew that Christ would come from that MAN Adam.Don't get me started with Jasher. YUCK!

 

[tim_from_pa]

Jordan:Sorry. I did not mean that you song and dance. I meant that I would have to because I could find scripture that would seriously challenge the idea of a pre-Adamic man after the first earth age. Again, I have no problem with more than one race, per se. But it seems that promises are then split between them various ways when the bible should be a book about Adam's race just as it is a book about Israel.Let's approach it from this angle. What about Noah's flood? Would these have been wiped out? After all, Genesis 5 tells of the Generations of Adam and chapter 10 are the Generations of Noah which is commonly called "the table of the nations" and is a key chapter in understanding the different nations in bible prophecy (i.e. the genealogy). That can get off on a flood conversation.

 

[ActionJackson]

(tim_from_pa;62588)
Jordan: Sorry. I did not mean that you song and dance. I meant that I would have to because I could find scripture that would seriously challenge the idea of a pre-Adamic man after the first earth age. Again, I have no problem with more than one race, per se. But it seems that promises are then split between them various ways when the bible should be a book about Adam's race just as it is a book about Israel. Let's approach it from this angle. What about Noah's flood? Would these have been wiped out? After all, Genesis 5 tells of the Generations of Adam and chapter 10 are the Generations of Noah which is commonly called "the table of the nations" and is a key chapter in understanding the different nations in bible prophecy (i.e. the genealogy). That can get off on a flood conversation.
This whole topic has intrigued me for years. I do believe that God created each race distinct and unique. He looked upon His creation and called it "good." I do not believe that God created a single race and that all races stem from that race. To believe so would require that I accept the theory of evolution which I do not. I have found a problem in definition between the "man" created on the sixth day and the "man" formed on the 8th. Here's why. The word "man" in Genesis 1:26 (6th day) is identical to the word "man" found in Genesis 2:5 (8th day). Both words are Strong's #120 and have an identical meaning. The word means "aw-dawm" which literally means to be ruddy or to have the ability to blush. This description fits one race of mankind. However this presents a dilemma. The 6th day man and the 8th day man have the same physical characteristics. I have heard some varying explanations as to the difference between 6th day man and 8th day man. Some believe that the 6th day man was the creation of all the souls that would ever exist and that the 8th day man was the actual formation of the physical body in which the souls would be placed. I've also heard that only the 8th day man had the spirit breathed into his nostrils which made him a living soul. I happen to accept the first explanation. The other peoples were created on the 5th day along with all the living creatures. I can't say that I am dogmatic on this issue because the information we have is very limited. As for Noah's flood? Noah was told to take two of every living creature aboard the ark (7 each of all the clean animals). That would mean that Noah took two of every race with him on the ark. Just my two cents.

 

[Jordan]

(tim_from_pa;62588)
Jordan:Sorry. I did not mean that you song and dance. I meant that I would have to because I could find scripture that would seriously challenge the idea of a pre-Adamic man after the first earth age. Again, I have no problem with more than one race, per se. But it seems that promises are then split between them various ways when the bible should be a book about Adam's race just as it is a book about Israel.Let's approach it from this angle. What about Noah's flood? Would these have been wiped out? After all, Genesis 5 tells of the Generations of Adam and chapter 10 are the Generations of Noah which is commonly called "the table of the nations" and is a key chapter in understanding the different nations in bible prophecy (i.e. the genealogy). That can get off on a flood conversation.
Dear Tim,The genealogy you study is from the Adamic race in which Christ come through. There is two genealogies. The race of Adam (starts at Genesis 5) and the race of the Kenites through Cain from Satan. (Starts at Genesis 4)However there is extremely little mention of the other races after Genesis 1:26-28.As for Noah's Flood,Genesis 7:15 - And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of allflesh , wherein is the breath of life.Genesis 7:16 - And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the LORD shut him in.Is not men flesh?Genesis 6:3 - And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years....Genesis 7:23 - And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark....So you see here God saved 8 souls from the Adamic races and 2 of every other races (that goes pretty much unmention in the bible) and 2 of the Kenite races through Cain from Satan.

 

[tomwebster]

(ActionJackson;62591)
.... I have found a problem in definition between the "man" created on the sixth day and the "man" formed on the 8th. Here's why. The word "man" in Genesis 1:26 (6th day) is identical to the word "man" found in Genesis 2:5 (8th day). Both words are Strong's #120 and have an identical meaning. The word means "aw-dawm" which literally means to be ruddy or to have the ability to blush. This description fits one race of mankind. However this presents a dilemma. The 6th day man and the 8th day man have the same physical characteristics. I have heard some varying explanations as to the difference between 6th day man and 8th day man. Some believe that the 6th day man was the creation of all the souls that would ever exist and that the 8th day man was the actual formation of the physical body in which the souls would be placed. I've also heard that only the 8th day man had the spirit breathed into his nostrils which made him a living soul. I happen to accept the first explanation. The other peoples were created on the 5th day along with all the living creatures. I can't say that I am dogmatic on this issue because the information we have is very limited. As for Noah's flood? Noah was told to take two of every living creature aboard the ark (7 each of all the clean animals). That would mean that Noah took two of every race with him on the ark. Just my two cents.
I am not sure if you read my post below. The word for man in each is H120 as you say, the difference is the addition article and particule in Genesis 2.
It is 'eth-'Ha adham in Gen 2. The Gen 1 adam is 'adam (no Article) which means a generic man or mankind, humans
They are the same type of man but Gen 2 is singling out one particular man that was formed for a specific purpose, to be a farmer.The created man on the sixth day was generic human beings, of all the races of mankind, and they again were given the jobs of hunting and fishing. 8th day man was not special; except for the job he was given. It is this 8th day man that becomes the primary subject of Scripture from here on. Scripture is basically his story, the attempt of Satan to defeat him and his seed.
I have heard some varying explanations as to the difference between 6th day man and 8th day man. Some believe that the 6th day man was the creation of all the souls that would ever exist and that the 8th day man was the actual formation of the physical body in which the souls would be placed.
God created all souls in the first earth age, (Ezekiel will talks about the 1st earth age). Satan deceived 1/3 of them to follow him, there was a war (this is the one mentioned in Rev 12, by the way). Satan and his army were defeated. God could have destroyed them all but He loves His children, instead He destroyed that heaven and earth age, and created this one, the 2nd heaven and earth age. All the souls created in the 1st age were to come through this age in a flesh body, and each would decide if they love Him or Satan. That is why we are in the flesh.By the way, in the first heaven and earth age, we were not in flesh bodies but in "spiritual bodies." The same body we will put back on when we die. More on this later

 

[tim_from_pa]

(ActionJackson;62591)
This whole topic has intrigued me for years. I do believe that God created each race distinct and unique. He looked upon His creation and called it "good." I do not believe that God created a single race and that all races stem from that race. To believe so would require that I accept the theory of evolution which I do not. I have found a problem in definition between the "man" created on the sixth day and the "man" formed on the 8th. Here's why. The word "man" in Genesis 1:26 (6th day) is identical to the word "man" found in Genesis 2:5 (8th day). Both words are Strong's #120 and have an identical meaning. The word means "aw-dawm" which literally means to be ruddy or to have the ability to blush. This description fits one race of mankind. However this presents a dilemma. The 6th day man and the 8th day man have the same physical characteristics. I have heard some varying explanations as to the difference between 6th day man and 8th day man. Some believe that the 6th day man was the creation of all the souls that would ever exist and that the 8th day man was the actual formation of the physical body in which the souls would be placed. I've also heard that only the 8th day man had the spirit breathed into his nostrils which made him a living soul. I happen to accept the first explanation. The other peoples were created on the 5th day along with all the living creatures. I can't say that I am dogmatic on this issue because the information we have is very limited. As for Noah's flood? Noah was told to take two of every living creature aboard the ark (7 each of all the clean animals). That would mean that Noah took two of every race with him on the ark. Just my two cents.
I like your 2 cents, actually. You seem to have a balanced view as to what happened. From a personal perspective and belief, I have no problem with the other folks believing in other lineages or generic man vs Adamic man. However, what I was saying is that I do not understand the significance. God would have to have a purpose for each lineage which nobody seems to know what it is. Verses like I Corinthians 15:22 become problematic because Paul said that in Adam all men die and in Christ all will be made alive. Now, if there are other generic men running around, then God has no obligation to do one or the other for them since they are not in Adam. I have no problem with them running around, but then we have to find a way to distinguish them because I do not want to say to an unconverted soul that they are dying because they are in Adam when indeed they are from another race.In addition, I like to read the apocryphal books (as I also did some genealogy both in the bible and family). None of them suggest a pre-Adamic race other than if it was before the 2nd earth age, but those men are all extinct. For example, the book of Jubilless talks about Cain marrying his sister Awan, so we do not need a pre-Adamic race for him to find a mate (c.f. Genesis 5:4).The ancient Jewish thought had some fantastic stories about Genesis 6, and waste and desolation, but never did they seem to claim there was a parallel race to Adam nor did they suggest that Cain came from the Serpent. However, they did say that demons (e.g. Genesis 6) mated with human women (I am aware that some think these are from the righteous lineage). But these were wiped out with the flood.I believe in a worldwide flood---- (sorry my friends). Besides scripture, there are scientific and logical and historical reasons I believe the flood was worldwide. If that's the case, then that is the reason for Genesis 10 with the nations that descended from Noah. To suggest that some other people made it or that some were smuggled aboard the ark seems to severely dummy down the severity of God's judgment. When my God judges, that includes everyone---- nobody escapes.

 

[tim_from_pa]

Dear Tim,The genealogy you study is from the Adamic race in which Christ come through. There is two genealogies. The race of Adam (starts at Genesis 5) and the race of the Kenites through Cain from Satan. (Starts at Genesis 4)However there is extremely little mention of the other races after Genesis 1:26-28.
First point: I agree with Genesis 5. That's Adam's race. Cain's race, I also agree. However, I am open to the possibility that Cain married his sister from Adam (the book of Jubilees), so as I already posted, that does not need a generic race to find a mate for Cain.As for the little mention of this same race, that's my point. So why were they created? Seemingly they are created also in God's image, but now compete with Adam for the headship of this earth? Why would God create two lines that do the same thing (i.e. to rule)?I'll let this quote with you from Herbert W. Armstrong about Adam:The first human, Adam, was created with the potential of qualifying to replace Satan, the former Lucifer, on earth's throne, restoring the GOVERNMENT OF GOD.But it was necessary that he resist, and reject Satan's "GET" way, which was the foundation ofSatan's evil government, and choose GOD'S WAY of his law--the way of LOVE (GIVE), thebasis of God's government!His Maker talked first to Adam and Eve--instructed them in the GOVERNMENT and SpiritualLAW of God--though in Genesis 2 only the most condensed summary of God's instruction tothem is revealed. Satan was restrained from any contact with them until god first had taughtthem.Now, if the generic humans were created also in God's image, then who gets the throne since "they" were also told to have "dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth"?There was intended to be One Head---- Adam was supposed to have become Christ had he taken of the tree of life. Likewise, Christ is the Head that Adam failed to be. Multi-linages definitely cause a problem here.

 

[Christina]

look at Cain he married from the land of Nod the idea it was his sister was myth from ancient Egypt, most likely Cain's work it was not in the scripture its only written in Catholic bible which was rejected my opinion was because it was added I do not believe God was so inadequate that he failed to plan for re population without insist being involved. Then we hear Cain has a child and builds a city ...for whom? and he names the city after his son. Then we hear there are all these people mating with fallen Angels where did they all come from? Where did the races come from? why did God make all the herbs and things to eat on the earth if he kept Adam and Eve in a garden. If He didn't tell Adam to replenish the earth who was he talking to? Just some food for thought

 

[Jordan]

(Christina;62642)
look at Cain he married from the land of Nod the idea it was his sister was myth from ancient Egypt, most likely Cain's work it was not in the scripture its only written in Catholic bible which was rejected my opinion was because it was added I do not believe God was so inadequate that he failed to plan for re population without insist being involved. Then we hear Cain has a child and builds a city ...for whom? and he names the city after his son. Then we hear there are all these people mating with fallen Angels where did they all come from? Where did the races come from? why did God make all the herbs and things to eat on the earth if he kept Adam and Eve in a garden. If He didn't tell Adam to replenish the earth who was he talking to? Just some food for thought
Exactly Christina.

 

[blessed1195]

Why don't we stick to GOD's word and see what he has to say:The fallen angels mated with the daughters of Adam, see Gen 6:2 " That the sons of GOD( the nephillim ,who left their place of habitation from Jude,from the prime napha=fallen)) saw the daughters of men (men here means sing. with the article, Ha adam= the man Adam, so it is describing the Adamic females only, not females from all races) that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose." If you continue reading to verse 4 this explains specifically that this mix caused the birth of the giants or gebhor. This was the another attempt of Satan trying to mess up the key of David, or the perfect geneology to the birth of Christ. Gen 3:15 was another attempt. The only problem is that GOD always has the victory, but Satan is so egotistical9 see Ezek 28) that he thinks that he should be the Messiah or even GOD, as he did in the katabole in the first earth age.I also believe that GOD's word shows us that most races, came from the sixth day creation when GOD created mankind (adam- without the article). The Adamic race was created on the 8th day in Gen 2. You really need to have or look at a Green's Interlinear to see the manuscripts with the article diffentiating the two meanings; Adam =mankind in Gen 1 vs. " Eth Ha Adam" =The man Adam, which TOM WEBSTER pointed out earlier. The Kenites, another race was created when Eve was wholly seduced(expatio in the Greek) by Satan in the Garden in Gen 3. See Gen 3:15 for specifics. I won't repeat what others have explained above about Gen 4 earlier that Eve had Cain then continued (the meaning of the word again inGen 4:2) in labor to give birth to Abel. Twins with two different fathers. In this earth age, Ultimately,Christ born again( =born from above in Greek, through the woman's womb/waters into a flesh body)coming from the geneology of Adam in Gen 2 vs. The Adversary, the Anti-( instead of )Christ (in Dan 9 and 11 and Rev.6,12 and 13) is Satan, who was never born again(from above) or into a flesh body. A cherubimthat covereth the mer cy seat, that got to prideful( Ezekial 28).GOD's word with understanding is so awesome, isn't it?

 

[Christina]

Heres a link that may help herehttp://www.ultimateriddles.com/genesis-bible-lesson-02.html

 

[Sola_Scriptura]

Dear beloved friends,I have not been on Christianity Board for a while now, but I remember a few people that guided me along in the belief of the three Earth ages. I have learned a lot about it. Yet, perhaps, I have not grasped the whole belief yet. But my heart is open to learning more about this belief.

Peace and blessings to all through our God and His Messiah.

 

[Carico]

(Jordan;62109)
I assure you that God did not create the world starting with sin, nor is the Earth is 6,000 years old.Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.Isaiah 45:18 - For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.II Peter 3:5 - For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:Genesis 1:2 - And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.Jeremiah 4:22 - For my people is foolish, they have not known me; they are sottish children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.Jeremiah 4:23 - I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.Jeremiah 4:24 - I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.Jeremiah 4:25 - I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.Jeremiah 4:26 - I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.Jeremiah 4:27 - For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.II Peter 3:6 - Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:Genesis 1:3 - And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.II Peter 3:7 - But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.II Peter 3:8 - But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.Color coded for easier reading...
The earth as we know it today is between 6 and 10,000 years old. Now if you want to claim that a formless earth (which was nothing but water) is the earth, then that contradicts other scripture which talks about the earth as a circle.When God created the earth, he created it out of water. At that time, He created its dimensions. That earth is between 6 & 10,000 years old. So we must remember that the wisdom of the world is foolishness in God's sight so if we listen to secular scientists who are ruled by Satan, we will go beyond what is written and make up our own imaginary stories about the age of the earth which 1 Corinthians 4:6 tells us not to do.

 

[tomwebster]

(Carico;68564)
... That earth is between 6 & 10,000 years old. ....
This is the most foolish statement I have ever heard. How about all the dinosaur bones that are 100's of thousand's of years old? This earth age is getting on towards 13,000 years, the bones are far older than that.

 

[Carico]

(tomwebster;68567)
This is the most foolish statement I have ever heard. How about all the dinosaur bones that are 100's of thousand's of years old? This earth age is getting on towards 13,000 years, the bones are far older than that.

It appears that you think secular scientists are the infallible gods. Sorry friend, but finding animal bones in the ground and piecing them together to form creatures of one's imagination is called artwork, not science. And considering that scientists are always trying to improve their dating methods proves that they aren't very reliable.

There's no way to prove those bones all came from the same body any more than they can know what kind of skin those artisitic sculptures had without the hair and skin to prove it. Nevertheless, "scientists" put whatever skin they imagine on those beasts and pass it along to the public as facts. Paleontologists themselves even admit that they borrow bones from one skeleton and piece them into another when they don't have a full skeleton. As Hitler once said; "People are so stupid. it's not hard to fool the public." And no one knew better than Hitler how true that is.

 

[Jordan]

(Carico;68569)
(tomwebster;68567)
This is the most foolish statement I have ever heard. How about all the dinosaur bones that are 100's of thousand's of years old? This earth age is getting on towards 13,000 years, the bones are far older than that.

It appears that you think secular scientists are the infallible gods. Sorry friend, but finding animal bones in the ground and piecing them together to form creatures of one's imagination is called artwork, not science. And considering that scientists are always trying to improve their dating methods proves that they aren't very reliable.

There's no way to prove those bones all came from the same body any more than they can know what kind of skin those artisitic sculptures had without the hair and skin to prove it. Nevertheless, "scientists" put whatever skin they imagine on those beasts and pass it along to the public as facts. Paleontologists themselves even admit that they borrow bones from one skeleton and piece them into another when they don't have a full skeleton. As Hitler once said; "People are so stupid. it's not hard to fool the public." And no one knew better than Hitler how true that is.

No, dinosaurs existed before we were humans. It was at the time when we were in our spirit bodies. (Job 40:15-24)I still don't see dinosaurs at all being human, the only thing I saw was dinosaur bones at the museum.

 

[Carico]

No, dinosaurs existed before we were humans. It was at the time when we were in our spirit bodies. (Job 40:15-24)I still don't see dinosaurs at all being human, the only thing I saw was dinosaur bones at the museum.__________________
Sorry but again, since you see secular scientists as infallible gods, you are now contradicting the WHOLE bible. The animals and beasts were created on the 5th day. And if you claim a day is a million or a gazillion years, that would make Adam, who was created on the 6th day, MILLIONS of years old by the time of the fall when the bible says that he was 120 years old when Seth was born. So believing that secular scientists are gods now means you have to not believe in Adam and Eve (which you don't anyway from your earlier posts), which means you can't believe in original sin and thus no need for redemption.So when you try to change even one verse in the bible, you have to change the whole bible. I therefore suggest you understand that the opinions of humans (which includes scientists) are and always will be FALLIBLE. Unless you do, you will be duped by every passing theory they invent.

 

[tomwebster]

(Carico;68569)

It appears that you think secular scientists are the infallible gods. Sorry friend, but finding animal bones in the ground and piecing them together to form creatures of one's imagination is called artwork, not science. And considering that scientists are always trying to improve their dating methods proves that they aren't very reliable.

There's no way to prove those bones all came from the same body any more than they can know what kind of skin those artisitic sculptures had without the hair and skin to prove it. Nevertheless, "scientists" put whatever skin they imagine on those beasts and pass it along to the public as facts. Paleontologists themselves even admit that they borrow bones from one skeleton and piece them into another when they don't have a full skeleton. As Hitler once said; "People are so stupid. it's not hard to fool the public." And no one knew better than Hitler how true that is.

Job 40:6 Then answered the LORD not a secular scientists, but THE LORD. unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Job 40:7 Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me. Job 40:8 Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous? Job 40:9 Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him? Job 40:10 Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty. Job 40:11 Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him. Job 40:12 Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place. Job 40:13 Hide them in the dust together; and bind their faces in secret. Job 40:14 Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee. Job 40:15 Behold now behemoth,do you think this is a hippopotamus? Look at the disciption God gives of this animal, does a hippo have a tail like a cedar? which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Job 40:16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. Job 40:17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. Job 40:18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. Job 40:19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Job 40:20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. Job 40:21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. Job 40:22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. Job 40:23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. Job 40:24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares. How about the mammoths that have been found deep under the ice and snow in northern North America and northern Eurasia with the best preserved in Siberia. Some of them these are full carcasses found with buttercups still in their mouths, and radiocarbon dating determined to be about 40,000 years old. But I am not going to try to open your eyes, I can't. We will talk about it more in the millennium.