Mysteries of the Bible

I really enjoyed this documentary. I think it’s very interesting how modern scientific discoveries confirm what the bible says. I also enjoyed the images.

Ok here are my top five in order;

1. Star Wars Series George Lucas is the man.

2. Lord Of The Rings Trilogy One word…Awesome!

3. Matrix Trilogy Blew my mind!

4. James Bond Showing my age.

5. The Bible Fantasy Adventure at its best.

Angels: existed for all eternity or created by God? Hmmmm? Perhaps sheer fantasy?

ice

so your analogy is that if you can proof one thing in bible the rest is automatically true?

he was referring bible fantasy book as whole and you say becouse there is evidence of a man called jesus who claimed to be a prophet the bible is not fantasy?

cmon with that analogy if i would proof there is a man called clark kent it would mean super man is real too

If you can prove the facts in the video cited in my earlier post are not facts at all – then you can prove the entire bible to be nothing but fantasy. And Christ did not claim to be JUST a prophet… he claimed to be the “Son of Man” which has an entirely different definition.

The problem is that people have difficulty with understanding what was being written about. And I’ll bet you didn’t watch the video cited.

Your question is based on assumptions that you have neither proven or dis-proven. Is there a God that could have created angels?? You did not prove any hypothesis either way. Prove that Christ was not the “Son of Man” (and fulfilled all the prophecies) and you can prove the entire bible to be sheer fantasy. The entire bible is directly related to Christ – whether you want to believe that or not. So, prove He was nothing more than a man and a “fantasy” was built up around his life and you will have proven the bible to be “fantasy”.

Prove up or shut up.

WTC7, you are taking things out of context. Whether purposely or through ignorance I cannot say.

Nice link. Angelfire…. somebody’s homepage.

… and why question the link, why not answer the question?

That was a nice try, ice. And in your knowledgable opinion, how many times will the messiah have to come before all the prophesies are fulfilled? Because it seems that the Jews strongly maintain that the old testament doesn’t mention the second coming… I guess you wouldn’t claim that their religious brains have not enough knowledge for the debate?

The old testament mentions 2 totally different versions of Messiah. It mentions a “suffering” Messiah and a warrior type Messiah that defeats the enemies of His people.

Answer me this: How can the Messiah suffer and die and yet be the warrior messiah that defeats the enemies of His people during one life span? If he defeats the enemies then how could he possibly “suffer” for their transgressions at the hands of those enemies? Not possible.

My “nice try” is rooted in much more knowledge then you have thus far demonstrated.

Remember this: The Jews TOTALLY REJECT CHRIST as the Messiah. They will not accept any doctrine that could possibly support His claim to be the “Son of Man”. Do you think that they do not react to this claim emotionally first and then attempt to logically explain and defend their position? This is what they attempt to do. And for all their knowledge they cannot overcome the facts. Haven’t you lived long enough to witness people persistently and unrepentantly defend a position… even though they are dead wrong? I’ve seen it many times. And when confronted with factual evidence of their error they still refuse to admit they are wrong. It happens all the time. Some people are just too proud to admit their error.

And the debate is going on full steam ahead between Jews that have accepted Christ as the Messiah and those that have not. Their are thousands of Jews in Israel that are “Christians”. Are you so daft that you do not realize the very first Christians were Jews?

Your argument is so flimsy that most wouldn’t bother to address this inane point you propose. For you to even propose that all Jews have rejected Christ and to totally ignore the fact that the first Christians were Jews is lunacy.

The arguments you make here lack substance and have no true validity. There are points that could be addressed but seem to be avoided (like the fact that there were some 500 witnesses to the resurrected Christ). Go, study and research so that you may find the knowledge that will lead you to the truth of the matter.

Ice: Looks like we’re posting at the same time. Be sure to read my question above if you didn’t notice it when you hit “enter” for your post. Thanks.

P.S. I’ve known several Jewish Christians; they’re some of my favorite Christians in fact as they have such a deep reverence for God that we Gentile believers take for granted.

Ah, that’s interesting. I would haven’t totally missed that aspect of the phrase. I thought it was his attempt to associate himself with minkind. We’re always learning something new and something deeper, aren’t we? How more lovely He becomes the more I know and understand and study; Jesusology is like an ocean blue and deep where a whale can play in it’s phathomless depths, but also so plain and simple that a child can wade it it’s simple truths and still understand. Thank you.

OH boy……….

Son of Man is a Semitic idiom. Greeks translated literally.
Back in NT biblical time it was simply another way of saying ‘human’.

e.g.

‘Dude’ is a modern idiom for ‘you’.
Hence; ‘Hey, dude’ means ‘Hey, you’.

Christ calls himself Son of Man. He is saying that he is a human.

Joe_nyc,

Sorry, you are in error. The term “Son of Man” is directly related to the Messiah. Christ was making a specific point by using the term. You can learn more about the term if you view “The Case for Christ” linked to above.

It is obvious that you did not research the issue before stating your “opinion”. Seek the truth and ye shall find it.

ICE

In book of daniel ‘son of man’ is used to represent ‘man’. Do you want me to give you specific verses and some basic bible lesson?

So now Joe is an expert that claims that “man” in general will be led before the “Ancient of Days” and that “man”, in general, will establish mans’ kingdom which will never be destroyed… not “Messiah”, mind you… “man”, in general.

“Son of Man” in Daniels vision is accepted by scholars to be the Messiah, not “man” in general. Allow me to quote an earlier post:

Daniel has a vision in which he describes one as “The Son of Man” being led into the presence of the “Ancient of Days”. So “Son of Man” does not refer to His humanity as “Son of God” refers to His deity. The “Son of Man” is to be given all Glory, Power and Majesty. It also says of the “Son of Man” that His “dominion is a dominion that will never pass away. And His Kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.”

When Christ used the term “Son of Man” He was stating His claim to be “the anointed one”, the Messiah. And the priests knew exactly what He was stating.

Yes, Messiah means “anointed one” but there is no clarification as to whether or not it means a “human”. Originally the term was used for anyone with a “divine mission”. In the First Temple period, Judaism was not a messianic religion and the term mashi’ah? did not have its later connotation… as you understand it today. [Mashiach: (mah-SHEE-akh) n. Messiah; The Anointed.]

There are many versions and languages of the Bible. I’ve seen a great deal of them. As a matter of fact, I have the NT in Greek and the OT in Hebrew… and a few other versions.

And where did you study to become such an expert that you are so willing to post your OPINIONS?? And your education in this field comes from where? I do not believe that you have had any formal education in this field. I have boxes of books, Concordance and Lexicons (which there is no room for upon my shelves) which have been of great assistance in my study and research over the last 3+ decades. But if you need “bible lessons” don’t look to me, I study theology. But I could suggest some reading material if you like.

ICE

Daniel 7:13-14

“I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man (??? ??? [kibar 'anash]), and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14 There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”

Let me make it simple for you.
“there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man” = (equals) “someone came with the cloud that looks like a human being”.
In other words, Daniel looked up and saw a person in the cloud. A Semitic idiom, son of man, was used to describe what Daniel saw.

Daniel 8:16-18

“I heard a man’s voice (???–???) between the banks of the Ulai, which called, and said, “Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision.” 17 So he came near where I stood; and when he came, I was frightened, and fell on my face: but he said to me, “Understand, son of man (??–??? : [ben-'adam]); for the vision belongs to the time of the end.” 18 Now as he was speaking with me, I fell into a deep sleep with my face toward the ground; but he touched me, and set me upright.”

It’s even more simpler here. Gabriel is calling Daniel with a Semitic idiom, son of man.

Do me a favour and drop the arrogance. For too long religees used your type of misinterpretation to lie to the people.

Joe: Let me also research this phrase “the son of man” a bit more. My gut instinct is that Ice is right. Let’s not loose sight of the forest for the trees! We have to remember that it’s not just how we interpret the phrase now, but how it was understood then in Jesus time. Thank you for at least doing a little self-study in Daniel. That’s more than most would do.

Peace.

This is correct:

“there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man” = (equals) “someone came with the cloud that looks like a human being”.
In other words, Daniel looked up and saw a person in the cloud. A Semitic idiom, son of man, was used to describe what Daniel saw.

And so is this:

61But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

62And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

63Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?

64Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

And what he meant by the “Son of Man” phrase is exactly as He stated here. And the Priests knew exactly what He was saying. This verse demonstrates that the phrase “Son of Man” is directly referring to the “Messiah”.

He came unto His own and they knew Him not. Do you honestly think that they will accept Him as the Messiah? I don’t see how prophecy could be fulfilled if they would have. And to this day the Christian Jews are a very small minority.

You claim that you just “read” and discover. I would suggest that you read a lot more and use a great many more sources.

BTW, I am Jewish.

I don’t find this documentary informative at all. Different views don’t add up to truth. People have to come to an understanding with a “free” mind. Then, look at a religious ceremony, in more than one community. I was drawn by God, not told to be anything by anyone.

“The Execution Of Jesus” 42:40 HUH?! Jesus was taken up to Heaven and sat at the right hand of God? I thought Jesus was God! How can God sit next to Himself?

I am repelled by the concept of God being so incapable of forgiveness and empathy that he required the torture death of of His son in order to allow believers to be saved!

Islam is a religion of success. Unlike Christianity, which has as its main image, in the West at least, a man dying in a devastating, disgraceful, helpless death.
Karen Armstrong

Religion is just as bad as a conspiracy , only assumption based on limited information come about for a weak need to justify and belong.

Try science, its much mor efficient and fact-holding.

Why religion? it just cuts off your ability to look further.

It’s nice to see supposed theologians blinded by their own faith.

The Bible is not a factual text, it is a compilation of oral traditions with heavily tailored documentation slapped on the end to suit the changing needs of the society it represented.

The Torah itself has nothing to do with Jesus, dealing with a period of history thousands of years before Christ and there is little to no evidence to support the claims found within.

The Gospels were written roughly 100-150 years after Jesus was supposed to have lived. Funnily enough, both sections of the Bible were compiled around the same time that the Jews were exiled from Israel, presumably as a means of keeping the faith alive and giving hope to the desperate people living through those times.

While you can argue semantics until Judgement Day, the context in which the Bible was written is where the truth of the matter lies.

It stands as one of the finest pieces of literature known to man, providing a much needed moral compass and source of hope to those who seek it. I would have thought you were all familiar with allegory though…

Oh, and Science is little more than a religion itself; a means of explaining the unexplainable and giving humanity a place within the universe. Time and again it has been proven wrong and updated. Until recently the only key difference lay in that science could be proven either correct or incorrect but with the recent addition of quantum mechanics and string theory, the line between faith and science blurs even more.

An assumption about faith? Terribly sorry, but when someone (read: you) proclaims they are Jewish it tends to remove any guess work. I guess you’ve just perfectly highlighted how people will ignore the truth laid bare before them when it suits their own needs, thanks for that.

The revised figures you give fit with the second Diaspora even better than the original 100-150 years that I was taught a few years back. Again, you have my thanks.

god is imaginary people..y waste so many words

Once upon a time, one of this earth’s earlier scientists pronounced, or enunciated, or he told a story, which was somewhat reasonable, of a flood, and of all the animals of this earth saved, as species, in a big boat. Perhaps the story was not meant seriously by its author, but was a satire upon the ambitious boat-builders of his day. It is probable that all religions are founded upon ancient jokes and hoaxes.
Other records of Noah and the deluge indicate stringing rafts together loading available herds as a massive pre-warned great storm of the era was building it’s momentum.
Ancients often used exagerated phrases in comunicating along with writing supernatural fictional stories. Then believed truth today. Dan Brown’s novel “The Bible Code” an un-truth taught in industrial churches as some truth.
Bible language transfer mistakes now moves into it’s new generations of believing mistakenly written words. Since the following herd witnesses no real God, more convincing selections from the Egyptian bible was copied to the first bible and passed down to the second for the new followers of the herd. As so for today is the existence of the slavery of man saved by the bible. It’s the ones who brought you a hell are the same ones who make you believe in a God.
Ancient script does not in any way deliver a positive ethical message that has significant pragmatic consequences for human culture in 2010.

Ice,

Well, yes if you say you are Jewish then you MUST be religious, since Judaism is in fact a religion.

Your Equivalence of American = Christian is incorrect since American is a nationality, and Christian is a religion.

… loving personal relationship with reality. LOL Welcome back Yavanna!

Too many words here are now censored. Sadly you guessed right. Stup1d people are so easily offended. *sigh*

Thanks Vlatko that makes perfect sense.

I cannnot understand how anyone can believe in god! But to each its own. They are just stories… Science will prove it soon enough i hope!
Too many religons with different gods and rules to live by, some religions can’t eat certain things but yet it was all put here for man to use????!! Some religions get 4 wifes and infinite mistress?????? whaaaaa,for real???? Adam and eve ???? Abraham ???? Who raised them ??? Snakes ??? How do you make offsping with ur sister or brother/mother!!! After a couple generations ur gene pool should look like a 4 armed/4 headed dragon!!!! Maybe the stories would be more realistic if they elaborated a little more like…….
So the whole 6.???? billion people on the planet are related to adam and eve….

C’mon i heard better stories at my daughters birthday parties!!!!

I have never belived in religion and i feel quite content living here on heaven/hell….(what most people call earth)
its all what you make of your life, not where you go when you leave your body and mind, but what you did with it while you were here!
poop happens!! alot!!!
You think looking up at clouds or a statue will change or reverse the outcome??? Ye poor souls!!!!!

“Yesterday’s are history/mystery, tomorrow could be the end of it all….. It’s all about you, and what to do today !!!! -Ryu- p.s N.L rules!

You have to be the most ignorant person concerning science that ever was… but that’s no surprise considering you are a person of faith. Do you know anything about cumulative selection? There is no leaps where organs slightly moving would have anything to do with anything. Each organism changes slightly, copying what it needs from the previous genetic code, and adding only slightly, over millions of years. It’s absolutely plausible that is how we came to be, and only a small percent (about 7% now I think) of the scientific community doubts this. Those people are most likely the faith trusting scientists who are using science to try to prove their faith, rather than just rely on empirical evidence – all of which points to the fact that the bible account of our creation is false. The evidence is overwhelming on the side of science – which you would know if you would stop relying on the bible for all of your information. To deny it is to remain ignorant by your own choice.

I must say I am impressed with your explanation. Your interpretation of the biblical time line is very thorough and does follow the bible correctly. It is all there in the bible, as you said. People often mistake Genesis for the actual beginning of the universe. This is incorrect according to what is actually written in the bible, just as you said. It is clear that the Earth was already created before the beginning of Genesis because the book describes the spirit of God hovering over the face of the water. What Genesis describes is merely a restoration of the Earth that was ruined in Lucifer’s angelic rebellion. I am also impressed that you believe in Christ and make the connection that it was He who restored the Earth.
Most people that I have met who adhere to the time line you are describing are Hebrew, as am I although I am Christian.
You are also correct that the angels must have been created prior to the events described in Genesis as the book of Job reads:
“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? […] What supports its foundations, and who laid its cornerstone as the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?”
What perhaps impresses me the most is your explanation about the dinosaurs. My church and I share the opinion that the dinosaurs came about due to the presence of Lucifer on the Earth. It is obvious to me that Lucifer perverted everything that was under his authority while he was in control of the Earth including the animals. It is not unreasonable to think that dinosaurs became the twisted ungodly creatures that they were because Lucifer slowly warped them over the ages.
You are also correct in thinking that the actual age of the Earth is not stated in the bible. Who knows how long Lucifer’s angelic rebellion lasted and how long ago the Earth was actually created?
What also amazes me is your explanation for the purpose of life. You are absolutely correct. The goal of every created being is to emulate the perfection of Christ and to strive to become like him. Everything is created to serve Christ and God the Father, whether they are aware of that or not. We are on this Earth to do His will and serve him. Hopefully one day we will be perfected like Christ. All true servants must take up their cross and be willing to suffer for God. Life is just a temporary phase for our souls. It is a simulation to see whether we will serve him. Those who prove unreliable are cast into the lake of fire. You are correct that the lake of fire is not what most people think it is. The lake of fire is clearly described in the bible as the “second death” where both the body and soul are destroyed permanently. In Matthew 10:28 it is written:
“Don’t be afraid of those who want to kill your body; they cannot kill your soul. Fear only God, who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”
The soul that is cast into the lake of fire is not present there forever according to the bible. That belief crept into the early church from Hellenistic mythology sometime in the third century.
I am honored to meet a fellow believer in Christ that is so like-minded as myself. My church has a small website that follows the beliefs I have described. Check it out sometime at http://www.thechurchoftheholylivinggod.org/untitled1.html. The new section of site is still under construction, but the old site is completely there. If you have any questions about the bible shoot us an email. The email address is given on the site. I hope to hear from you soon.

my goodness…..genesis says a snake talked….you believe that a sand man and rib woman were tricked by a talking snake to eat a magical fruit?!?!

evolution is a fact. maybe you should spend some of the time you use reading the bible, to actually learn what science does say rather than make yourself look completely ignorant on the internet….

why are people even allowed to be this simple?

@ Epicurus

The ancient agricultural transgression, to which you allude, is more serious than you think.

Mustn’t quibble with the bible, now, must we?

Hmm. Need to do more reading up on Lilith.

Wow, how and why is it that on anything religious the atheists always make themselves present??? Is it not solace enough that you dont believe in the metaphysical that you must patronize others to fill a void. Now I am not religious but a I am a theist. It really gets aggrivating when someone or some people are arrogant enough to think that with our limited understanding of everything in exsistance that you can say this and that does not exsist. You must remeber a few things the lack of evidence does not disprove something and the evidence of something does not prove it either ( circumstantial) one must also regard the scientific tentant of Occam’s razor when evaluating things. Also in the scientific realm many ppl forget about the unbiased part of the scientific method. Im just saying that the exsistence of god has not been disproven using the scientific method so one cannot say definitevly that it does not exsist.

well said.. we need to remain open in our quest for scientific exploration. Science is our tool to build the kingdom on earth. To find the essence of all being and matter. Google Shamans and scientists.. deoxy,org, oh, its out there!!!

Thats not Jack Perkins…it’s Richard Kiley!

Yes you are correct, we cannot prove there isn’t a god, but by science empirically proving a system to be naturally caused it gives less of a reason to include him. I am an atheist and you’ll never hear me say THERE IS NO GOD, but it just seems unlikely and not empirically proven.

If he’s ignorant, then what does that make you by attacking the person rather than what you’re debating about. And since you have a limited understanding of EVERYTHING, it doesn’t seem like to me this guy is the most ignorant person that EVER WAS.

It is said that science and maths produce facts which support or provide doubt about a theory. How can we rely on these figures – isn’t it because we believe there is such a thing as a fact (rules by which our world is governed)

How can this co-exist in a world in which we also try and ask the question ‘what is truth’ and try to say that there are no absolutes, no ultimate rules which we should live by and no God who has put the rules in place.

Regarding evolution – the question should be asked ‘were you there?’ when a star formed, when a planet came into being? Have you ever seen macro evolution take place? ‘has anybody seen any of this? no!!! They are not observable facts which can be proved or disproved by science but theories which have arisen from an ‘interpretation’ of present day physical objects and assumptions about how we find them in the condition in which they are in.

But these are not new questions. In the bible in Job ch.38 v 4 God asks the question of those who question him “where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.” Job ch. 38-39 is full of God asking man the questions about the world which he created to show how little we do know.

Who can truly say evolution happened cos I was there, I saw it.
Just because people don’t believe in God it does not remove Him from existence. As you say facts are facts.

Thank you for your politeness but I was not offended by your comments. I do not put myself forward as an expert in this area but I did not realise that that was a criteria for which to make a comment.

In regards to the ecoli experiment, please correct me I am wrong but isn’t it still a form of ecoli at the end as well as at the beginning of the experiment.

Even though I don’t like the term micro evolution I have no problem in believing in diversity within kind but to jump from that to one kind becoming another kind is another thing entirely. e.g fox, wolf, dog etc. could all be classified as one kind.

The information for the adaptation from ecoli which meant that citric acid was no longer harmful was already present within the cells and was able to be selected to suit the new environment. But new information is not produced. The same principle being applied in animal breeding.

Please can you reply with names of vestidual organs. I heard from someone that the appendix is one such organ – however it is now thought that it is highly involved in childhood immunity. Could you tell me other ones that you know of in humans please. What I cannot see either is the way that ‘simple cells’ discussed in evolutionary theory are in fact hugely complex with motors within the cells. (the motors had to have all the parts at the same time in order to work so the cell could operate). They are not simple cells at all but have so much complexity and information.

In regard to carbon dating I was under the impression that carbon 14 has a half life of thousands not millions so we cannot date long ages with this type of dating. With the other type of dating – isotope dating there are several assumptions needed in the equation before a prediction can be made as the estimated date. There are assumptions made about rate of decay, the atmosphere in that time period. These assumptions cannot be called factual. My father-in-law is a dr of geology in a university and he specialises in geomorphology. He agrees that the dating methods cannot be relied upon (even though he teaches evolutionary type theory eg. millions of years etc.) He just makes the assumptions – dates the rocks a few times and publishes the longest date or one which seems to best fit with everyone elses research and the geologic column. He also agrees that the geologic column uses circular reasoning (i.e date fossils by rock layer, date rock layer by fossils that are in them). He told us of a colleague who believe the evidence pointed to younger dates but when he published hgis findings he got the sack and his research was stopped. He was not a creationist as far as I am aware, neither a christian just a scientist who had doubts about what he could see from the evidence.

You want me to show you God but God is a spirit and has not a body like men. But the bible does say there evidence of a creator in creation. But God has revealed himself to mankind through his son, the Lord Jesus which is recorded in the bible. However most people don’t care to read the bible even though it has eternal significance. I propose that people are happy to believe in evolution as they believe that it means that they don’t have to believe in God. I would challenge anyone to read through the whole bible and educate themselves from God’s revelation to man with an open mind.

You said I need to educate myself regarding the issues on this subject of evolution but to be educated on the issues of God and his revelation to man would demand a hearing because of there life changing significance and to be prepared for not only this life but that which is to come.

Here are also some links to interesting articles
http://creation.com/15-questions
http://creation.com/its-not-science
http://creation.com/radiometric-dating-questions-and-answers
http://creation.com/vestigial-organs-what-do-they-prove

@job38
ok i went to your links. so you are a young earth creationist?
i will answer the first link (15 questions)
1 nothing to do with evolution
2nothing to do with evolution
3misinterpretation of evolution
4natural selection isn’t the creative process random mutations are
5lol irreducible complexity really?
6the fact it looks designed to creationists doesn’t make it so and if it was designed why do we have wisdom teeth,tailbones,hernias,and many other useless or harmful parts?
7cells didn’t learn they mutated and the best suited survived
8sex gives an opportunity to mix genes (diversity) and also provides two parents as opposed to one (asexual) which can provide benefits
9they aren’t all missing but please look up the conditions necessary and probabilities for a fossil to survive
10they have changed but not much because they are so perfectly suited to their environment
11evolution doesn’t say there is no god. or claim the meaning for life
12 ouch that one hurt the answer would be way too long please look up for yourself
13really ok vaccines, genetic engineering, hiv/aids treatment, and so on
14 yes you can do experiments to show evolution and we can test the evidence we have to test the past
15 evolution is not a religion sorry
link2
creationism isn’t accepted as science because it is not science. science studies the natural world and explains phenomena with natural causes religion (god) is supernatural so not science
which one of our worldviews are correct? i cannot prove 100% i am right or 100% you are wrong but i am willing to compare facts and see who has more
link 3 already answered
link4 vestigial organs don’t prove anything but when added to the growing pile of evidence it sure is convincing

done finally lol
ok i answered yours now for mine
1where did all the water come from for the genesis flood?
2can you give evidence for the universe being less then 10000 years old (i am assuming you are a young earther since all your links are from their site)
3if god invented everything then can you prove evolution wasn’t gods tool to make us?
4 if intelligent complicated life needs a creator who created god?

“In regards to the ecoli experiment, please correct me I am wrong but isn’t it still a form of ecoli at the end as well as at the beginning of the experiment.”

no, you are wrong.

“Wild type E. coli cannot transport citrate across the cell membrane to the cell interior (where it could be incorporated into the citric acid cycle) when oxygen is present. The consequent lack of growth on citrate under oxic conditions is considered a defining characteristic of the species that has been a valuable means of differentiating E. coli from pathogenic Salmonella. Around generation 33,127, the experimenters noticed a dramatically expanded population-size in one of the samples; they found that there were clones in this population that could grow on the citrate included in the growth medium to permit iron acquisition. Examination of samples of the population frozen at earlier time points led to the discovery that a citrate-using variant had evolved in the population at some point between generations 31,000 and 31,500. They used a number of genetic markers unique to this population to exclude the possibility that the citrate-using E. coli were contaminants. They also found that the ability to use citrate could spontaneously re-evolve in populations of genetically pure clones isolated from earlier time points in the population’s history. Such re-evolution of citrate utilization was never observed in clones isolated from before generation 20,000″

http://www.pnas.org/content/105/23/7899.abstract

they were markedly different, by having a different defining characteristic of that species and was thus a new species. given much much much more time and changing environments you will get a remarkably different species.

“The information for the adaptation from ecoli which meant that citric acid was no longer harmful was already present within the cells and was able to be selected to suit the new environment.”

no it was not. it was a mutation which was selected for because it lead to better survival rate.

” e.g fox, wolf, dog etc. could all be classified as one kind.”

and what was the original KIND? and did it just pop out of thin air by magic one day?

“Please can you reply with names of vestidual organs.”

Coccyx, Vomeronasal organ, Wisdom teeth, muscles attached to the ear, and on the eye there is the plica semilunaris, which is a remnant of the third eyelid which birds, reptiles, and fish still have.

there are also vestigial behaviours such as; palmar grasp reflex, and goosebumps. also that twitch that you have just before falling asleep is a motor reflex dating to the time when we slept in trees and if there was any dispersal of weight while drifting off to sleep the body jolted you awake to make sure you werent falling out of the tree.

and im not even going to get into the molecular examples such as junk DNA or endogenous retro viruses.

“What I cannot see either is the way that ‘simple cells’ discussed in evolutionary theory are in fact hugely complex with motors within the cells. (the motors had to have all the parts at the same time in order to work so the cell could operate). They are not simple cells at all but have so much complexity and information.”

this is a straw-man and also has false information in it. first of all the straw-man is because biologists do not consider a cell simple. a single celled organism is more simple than a multi-celled one. but they recognize that cells are complex.
now the misinformation is your description of “motor parts” in cells. there are amino acids and proteins that have methods of moving but it is all done by chemical interaction. we – being anthropocentric – attribute some kind of design like an engine, but its more chemical like water turning to ice in the cold. also what you alluded to was irreducible complexity and there has yet to be one single example of this. Michael Behe put out a nice attempt when he brought up the bacterium flagellum, however that was shown to be false after much peer review. the problem here is that you are getting all your information from creation mediums, whether your church or movies, or websites….and that is clearly bias.

as for dating techniques, many methods are used and the converging dates are the ones that are taken. when many lines of evidence point to the same conclusion and others have reasons why they would be flawed, we can be pretty certain of the dates. at least be certain by a few thousand years. we absolutely know the earth is MUCH MUCH older than 10,000 years. that is as undeniable as the sun being at the center of the solar system.

we have ALL of these different methods.
Radiocarbon dating – for dating organic materials

Dendrochronology – for dating trees, and objects made from wood, but also very important for calibrating radiocarbon dates

Thermoluminescence dating – for dating inorganic material including ceramics

Optically stimulated luminescence or optical dating for archaeological applications

Potassium-argon dating – for dating fossilized hominid remains

Numismatics – many coins have the date of their production written on them or their use is specified in the historical record

Archaeomagnetic dating – Clay lined fire hearths take on a magnetic moment pointing to the North Pole each time they are fired and then cool. The position of the North Pole for the last time the fire hearth was used can be determined and compared to charts of known locations and dates

Magnetic Properties of Lead used to establish dates. Chemistry Professor Shimon Reich, a specialist in superconductivity, has demonstrated a method for dating artifacts based on the magnetic properties of lead, a material widely used in Israel and elsewhere in antiquity. Reich and coworkers found that at cryogenic temperatures, lead becomes a superconductor, but the corrosion products formed from centuries of exposure to air and water (lead oxide and lead carbonate) do not superconduct. On the basis of magnetic measurements and comparison with artifacts that were known (using other techniques) to be up to 2500 years old, the group showed that the mass of lead corrosion products is directly proportional to an object’s age

Amino acid dating

Obsidian hydration dating – a geochemical method of determining age in either absolute or relative terms of an artifact made of obsidian

Rehydroxylation dating- for dating ceramic materials

do you really think there is a secret group of scientists out there trying to keep information quiet? what purpose would they have? science is driven by competition and every one is trying to show others theories wrong. that is the drive of scientists. if they are able to show a theory wrong they get lots of grant money to then formulate their own hypothesis and hopefully theory.

now about god and the bible. i have read the bible a number of times and the more i have the more ridiculous it seemed. The Jefferson Bible is a MUCH better moral book. if you can actually read the bible and believe the stories in it I have to say I deeply question your ability to be objective or unbias….what makes you think your holy book is the only correct one? have you read the quran or the bhagavad gita? have you read anything about shintoism or buddhism? do you know enough about these religions to know they are wrong? and do you not think that had you been born in another country you might belong to that nations religion just because that was what you were taught to think was normal?

@job38
take your time responding no problem. also please don’t take my word or the word of anybody else look it up yourself (from multiple sources) but when it comes to science listen to the experts not anybodies spin.

Just to answer over the edge’s q 1.
1. Where did all the water come from for the flood.
Genesis ch. 1v6-7 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

It is thought that this is speaking of a type of water canopy which God created around the earth. Interestingly it is thought that this canopy would have been protective and would cause people and animals to live longer. (Interesting that those animals in the fossil record which are the same as the animals we see alive today always seem to be bigger – just an aside).

In Genesis 7v11 it speaks of where the water came from as until this point there had been no rain but had mist went up from the ground every day to water it. but here in this verse when the flood came it says “all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened and the rain rained upon the earth forty days and forty nights.”

The water therefore came from the canopy above the earth and from the fountains under the earth.

It is believed that there would have been huge volcanic activity and tectonic plate movement during this time of flood.

Hopefully this link will help answer some of your criticisms. Your statements sounded like absolutes to me though so maybe you do not wish for a response from me.
http://creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf

Obviously the whole of the water did not all come from this canopy, as I mentioned also about the fountains of the deep opening up. Also in terms of where did all the water recede to? It cannot be assumed that the sea level and amount of land we see today was always the same.

I am surprised that you are so quick to throw the water canopy out of the window as the bible does not speak about how big, in what form, what distance from the earth and the composition of the water canopy.

But yes I agree that there was a lot of water on the earth as it covered every mountain and that from my small brain I would have to say that that water is still with us.

But can I just ask you? During the tsunamis of the recent past there were huge waves which swept over the land destroying all in their path and yet this water receded. These were only using the water already there and from just one earthquake. But imagine global numbers of earthquakes, volcanic activity, tectonic movements of catastrophic and lots of water from the fountains of the deep and from the sky.

We cannot even imagine the results.

We no longer have this water canopy and though modelling has been done to try and estimate what form this may have taken and the size and pressure that our present world could probably handle we are still making estimates for today and assuming all the variables of today are the same as the past. Historical science is different from experimental science where we already know all the variables. Also there are not the specifics in the biblical account (as far as I can see from a simple reading of the passage) about this water canopy so I would not write it it off on the basis that we don’t know exactly what form it took, how big it was, whether it was made of water vapour.

I believe the bible is true and accurate and lack of detail does not mean lack of truth.

Regarding over the edge’s original question 3 – How can I prove that evolution wasn’t God’s tool to make us.

I realise I haven’t answered q. 2 yet but will come back to this if that’s ok.

q.3. Answer.
A) The bible speaks about God creating the universe by speaking (not evolution) and only humans who were made in the image of God did he use tools to make (Adam – dust or clay from ground, Eve from Adam’s rib) ‘woman’ meaning ‘out of man’ (image of God = things about humans which are characteristics of God’s nature e.g. conscience, eternity, communion with God)

Humans are distinctly different from animals in this way. Animals are not made in the image of God but we are. God breathed into Adam and made him a living soul, he did not do this to the animals. That’s one thing.

B) The bible speaks about that everything was perfect and good when it was first created.
Evolution speaks about death and dying as good way in which the fittest survive and death is needed so the genes are passed on, mutations occur, diseased creatures die out and the best reproduces and the world develops.

The bible says that sin entered into the world through man’s disobedience of God and then death. Before this there was no death, disease, imperfection etc. according to the bible. So evolution = death before man, bible = death – by and through man (not before).

C) The bible speaks about creation in 6 days and a day of rest. 6 literal days??? yes, to say otherwise is to twist the text and insert gaps where there are no gaps. Also other places in the bible where this is referred to e.g. the 10 commandments refers to
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work..11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Exodous 20 v 9,11.

Should we therefore work for 6 million years and then rest for 1 million. Not trying to be cheeky but some people who wish to fit evolution into the bible try to take this sort of line. Genesis says the evening past, the morning came that was the first day.

D) The whole message of the bible or gospel (the good news of Jesus Christ) – who is the embodiment of the revelation of God is that God made man perfect and our sin brought imperfection, separation from God, death, and his righteous judgement on Mankind. That is why we need a saviour to bring us back to a right relationship with God in which his justice and mercy are satisfied (and we can be forgiven).

If evolution is true then death, disease and imperfection are just part of process by which we climbed from the slime pit to civilised human beings (using a general term of civilised as we humans are often involved in great ‘uncivilised’ atrocities). If evolution was true, we would not need a saviour, God is removed from the equation and hey…. (to take a biblical quote) “every man did that which was right in his own eyes”. Evolution should teach us that no rules apply, race to the top fittest gets there first, cheating accepted as cunning and intelligent. That means that those who are seen as weak – disabled, mentally infirm, those from tribal peoples who would not be seen as civilised could all be theoretically wiped out. But isn’t that what some historical dictators have done and we all stand aghast at their actions (and rightly so!!)

This is why I do not believe that evolution was a tool used by God to make us. I hope what I have said is clear.

There may be other things I could add to why evolution does not fit into the biblical account of how God made us but its getting late and I need some sleep. I believe the bible is the word of God, it’s his book written to us not our book to re-interpret and change because there are bits that don’t suit us. The bible itself says that it is the word of God and that every word of God is pure and that as a whole it is preserved by God. Near the beginning, the middle and the end it has verses which say that no-one should add to, or take away anything from this book. If we say we take most of it but cannot trust the first few chapters in Genesis then how can we trust the middle bits or the end bits, or the bits about Jesus, or about heaven and hell. This would not be logical or consistent.

I hope my comments will not annoy people. I hope to answer the other questions of ‘over the edge’ later. sorry it took me a while answer ‘over the edge’ – life gets busy.

Just to say I made 2 other posts before this one and they have not appeared, not sure why. I had links to websites, would that mean they need approval before they are seen here. I never saved a draft of them or anything so hopfully they will appear later (one was about the water canopy and one about the ecoli) If they don’t appear and you can go on creation ministries website and do a search for water canopy (whole chapter on it) and ecoli (shortish article on it). Will save me writing the posts again, if thats ok

belief in the end, no matter what ideas your faith dwells on is your God.