Genesis Provides an Argument for Evolution?

[loktai]

The Book of Genesis puts forward a strong case for evolution, let me explain.

We are all familiar with the story of Noah. It states in a conversation between God and Noah: Make an Ark of cypress wood. Make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and out with pitch. Make it in this fasion: the length of the ark shall be four hundred and fifty feet, the breadth of it seventy-five feet and the height forty five feet."

The maximum possible volume of the ark is 1518750 feet (450*75*45) - not allowing for the fact that it is a boat, and would lose volume as the bottom would have been curved.

Current research estimates that there are currently 8.7 million species of animals give or take 1.3 million. They also estimate that 1/4 of this total number live in the sea despite 70% of the Earth being covered with water.

So if we take the lowest number of the initial estimate 7.4 million species (8.7-1.3). Then remove one quarter of that number to account for sea creatures leaving us with an estimated 5.5 million species.

Of that estimated 5.5 million, not all of them are animals. Their estimate that the various forms of life on the planet included 7.8m species of animal, 298,000 species of plant and 611,000 species of mushrooms, mould and other fungi along with 36,400 species of protozoa, single-celled organisms, and 27,500 species of algae or chromists. The researchers did not venture to put an estimate on the number of bacteria.

Adding up all the categories that are not animals reduces the estimated figure by 972900 species - so to add in more of a buffer lets round that up to a million.

We are now down to an estimated 4.5 million species that would need to be on the ark. To be super conservative, lets chop that number in half again in case their estimates are wildy innaccurate - after all it is just an estimate!

This leaves us with 2.25 Million different species that would need to be on the ark.

This is only half of Noah's headache. He now needs to feed and water these creatures for 10 months (the period from when it started raining before they left the ark as stated in the Bible.)

Again to provide a conservative estimate, lets say that every creature could live off one grain of rice a day. I appreciate that there are many creatures that require less than this, and many that require much much more, I have tried to use an item that would provide a conservative estimate of how much food would be required.

The average size of modern day short grain rice is no greater than 5.2mm by 2.6mm. Giving a maximum volume of 35mm. (5.2*2.6*2.6).

One grain of rice, for 300 days (30 days in a month, for 10 months using today's calendar) for 2.25 million species, of which there will be two of every kind, one male and one female gives a total rice count of 1350000000 grains of rice. The volume of this is 47250000000mm or 508594ft.

This leaves us with 1010156 feet of space for the animals (1518750-508594).

2.25 million * 2 (for the male and female) give 4.5 million animals.
1010156/4500000 = 0.224 square foot per animal on board the ark with conservative calculations to account for all the species estimated to exist.

I'm not saying that my calculations are completely accurate, the numbers I have used are based on an article on the guardian (I can't post links but this google serch string should give you the article "Planet Earth is home to 8.7 million species, scientists estimate")

I have no idea how I would calculate the average size of an animal to verify if they would even fit however I do not think it is unreasonable to say that 0.224 square foot per creature, with no room to move at all is a bit on the unrealistic side, considering we have not even factored in how much water would be required to sustain those animals for 300 days. (it only rained for 40 days, so water could not be reliably collected from rainfall for the duration)

It would be much more likely that not all the species were on the arc and that they evolved form the animals that were on board. (Assuming that the Bible is a true account of creation)

I'm not saying one way or the other if the Bible is true or not - just pointing out that it does appear to put a good case forward for evolution which may be an interesting talking point for you all.

I hope you enjoyed the read and I look forward to reading the responses!

 

[Tolerant Skeptic]

You are trying to use reason. That is your error, as reason is not appreciated here.

 

[nuttypiglet]

I think the answer is simple, the clue is the word SPECIES, whereas the bible clearly talks about KIND. A simple question is, how many species of DOG are there? but a DOG is a single KIND, which came from the WOLF. So, you could just take a male/female WOLF onto the ark and leave the many thousands of DOG 'species' out of the equation. If you know the original KIND, you can leave out the millions of varieties because they will micro evolve to fit different niches. I think God knew the original KINDS. With regards to space, you wouldn't take fully grown adults, you would want young/fit examples, much smaller. Obviously no longer reliant on their parents, but not yet having had offspring.
Perhaps someone should do a re-count using KIND instead of the Human variant SPECIE. What is a specie anyway? I'm not sure anyone really knows?

 

[AndrewRyan]

I think the answer is simple, the clue is the word SPECIES, whereas the bible clearly talks about KIND. A simple question is, how many species of DOG are there? but a DOG is a single KIND, which came from the WOLF. So, you could just take a male/female WOLF onto the ark and leave the many thousands of DOG 'species' out of the equation. If you know the original KIND, you can leave out the millions of varieties because they will micro evolve to fit different niches. I think God knew the original KINDS. With regards to space, you wouldn't take fully grown adults, you would want young/fit examples, much smaller. Obviously no longer reliant on their parents, but not yet having had offspring.
Perhaps someone should do a re-count using KIND instead of the Human variant SPECIE. What is a specie anyway? I'm not sure anyone really knows?

Let me guess, you got this from a kent hovind video?

 

[DaisyDay]

I think the answer is simple, the clue is the word SPECIES, whereas the bible clearly talks about KIND. A simple question is, how many species of DOG are there?

One - Canis familiaris. Dingos are considered to be of the wolf species, dingo subspecies. African wild dogs, Lycaon pictus, aren't considered true dogs - not only are they not the same species, but they're not the same genus; this is also true of dholes, Cuon alpinus.

but a DOG is a single KIND, which came from the WOLF. So, you could just take a male/female WOLF onto the ark and leave the many thousands of DOG 'species' out of the equation.

It would leave out African wild dogs and dholes as well as various foxes who don't come from wolves but from some canid ancestor.

If you know the original KIND, you can leave out the millions of varieties because they will micro evolve to fit different niches.

They don't speciate as quickly as you seem to think. Wolves and dogs are still not fully speciated as they can interbreed quite easily even after tens of thousands of years.

I think God knew the original KINDS. With regards to space, you wouldn't take fully grown adults, you would want young/fit examples, much smaller. Obviously no longer reliant on their parents, but not yet having had offspring.

You would have to go back a lot further than Noah to find the common ancestor of the family of the canidae kind.

Perhaps someone should do a re-count using KIND instead of the Human variant SPECIE. What is a specie anyway? I'm not sure anyone really knows?

See Species - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, how do you define "kind"?

 

[miamited]

Hi loktai,

Just a couple of questions. You wrote: The maximum possible volume of the ark is 1518750 feet (450*75*45) - not allowing for the fact that it is a boat, and would lose volume as the bottom would have been curved.

Just curious why you think that design would 'have been curved'. I have seen wooden boxes float. Since the Ark did not have any steering or motor mechanism, but seemed to have relied solely on currents for its direction, why would its hull have to have been curved?

You also posted: Current research estimates that there are currently 8.7 million species of animals give or take 1.3 million. They also estimate that 1/4 of this total number live in the sea despite 70% of the Earth being covered with water.

Hopefully you do realize that 'species' is a manmade term defined by a manmade science. When God said 'kind' He may well have been separating the animal kingdom by which animals could and couldn't mate, naturally. We can also take out all sea creatures as they would not have necessarily died by the actions of the flood. 90% of what is left would probably survive as pairs in the space of a shoebox. So, I think it could be reasoned that there were more like thousands of animal 'kinds' on the ark, as opposed to millions and three floors of the size of the ark dimensions would hold many, many animals.

Now, as to food and water, well many animals, and God could certainly have made it possible, hibernate for a season and their food and water consumption dwindles to nothing. Bugs have always been able to provide for themselves food and water in most any environment. One thing is for sure. God knew how much room was needed and provided for it.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Papias]

More information on the many, many ways that a literal ark story would require constant miracles to work:


Problems with a Global Flood, 2nd edition


Kind is defined by Lev 19:19 as being pretty close to our biological idea of species. Thus, Daisyday and the OP are correct that an very rapid increase in evolution would be needed to get to our current number of species. I've heard creationists say that this means that hyper-evolution must have occurred.


Papias

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Interesting idea, but the supposed event of Noah and his ark is at best only 10,000 years ago, that was millions of years after the latest modern animal species appeared on the scene, like humans and rats and rabbits.

 

[Aman777]

It would be much more likely that not all the species were on the arc and that they evolved form the animals that were on board. (Assuming that the Bible is a true account of creation)

Dear Readers, The Bible's account of the Creation is True. It's the false TOE, which is completely wrong. The above is not Scriptural since the premise of how many creatures are on our Planet has ANYthing to do with the number of creatures on Adam's Earth, which was totally destroyed in the Flood.

It was some 10k years ago when Noah arrived on our Earth. There were already millions upon millions of species already here when Noah arrived, and they could produce offspring with the creatures Noah brought with him...including his own grandsons who had NO other humans to marry. Kinda cuts down on the number of creatures Noah brought with him.....Doesn't it?

In Love,
Aman

 

[nuttypiglet]

I'm confused? You are saying that Noah filled his ark, but when the ark landed there were already other animals for those to breed with? Where did they come from?

I think you are overlooking the whole purpose of the flood. Many life forms had been corrupted by Nephilim, their dna was no longer that which God had put into place. Those Nephilim created monsters, like the dinosaurs which most were killed in the great flood. If any survived, it was one of several kinds, not two which meant they couldn't breed any more. I think this is likely where the dragon legends came from from all over the globe. The fallen Angels who created the Nephilim were there at the creation, so they had great knowledge of DNA.
Of course we could all believe that they evolved from fish that climbed out of a river around 250 million years before dinosaurs existed. It still amazes me how science can honestly accept that so many 'chance' mutations from those fish led to us. HAHA. If I had that knowledge of luck I would be doing the lottery every week.

 

[Aman777]

I'm confused? You are saying that Noah filled his ark, but when the ark landed there were already other animals for those to breed with? Where did they come from?

Dear Nutty, Every living creature was created and brought forth from the water. (Genesis 1:21) on the 5th Day, which was some 3.7 Billion years ago, in man's time. Science knows that our origin was in the water. This happened on the first Earth, the Earth of Adam, and Cain married one of these people. This event also happened on our Earth which was NOT detroyed in the Flood.

A Global Flood would entirely destroy our Planet. The water would be trapped within our atmosphere and would not have anywhere to go. There would STILL be over 30k feet of water on our Earth, Today, IF our Earth suffered a Global Flood like Adam's world did.

Notice that when Noah sent forth the Raven, it did NOT return to the Ark. The dove was sent forth and returned, and was sent forth a week later. The dove returned with an Olive leaf in it's beak. Can you explain this riddle?

How did an olive seed implant itself in the mud which would have totally covered the Earth, germinate, (which takes weeks) grow into a tree, put forth brances, and leaves in just ONE week?

Someone out there, please explain this riddle. The answer is simple. Can anyone explain? It is hidden evidence of where the Ark arrived.

In Love,
Aman

 

[nuttypiglet]

Science knows we originated from the water? really? Well, I don't believe that mumbo jumbo. Mans interpretation will never outweigh the word of God in me. Science says that all land life started from a fish around 350 million years ago. There is no evidence that man came from a fish. As for the flood. The oceans are sitting in huge deep basins. Most of the water before the flood was under the crust, and the bible clearly says these broke free. The whole earth surface fractured and formed tektonic plates, forming mountain ranges. At the time of the flood the earth was much flatter, so it wouldn't take as much water to flood it. If the earths surface is smooth, you could flood the planet with the water in the oceans today. Where the water was, under the ground, the crust gradually sunk down into this, creating the basins for the water to recede into, forming the new oceans. Now the Raven. What do you mean it didn't return? Noah sent it out several times and it kept returning. To and fro means away and back again. The Raven would have feasted on rotting flesh from the flood if the water had receded nearby, and not returned. But it did. As for the olive leaf. From the time of Noah entering the Ark, and setting foot on dry land, a period of one year and ten days had past. If you look at biology reports about the Olive tree, you will see that during experiments it has survived under water and even grown leaves. Isn't it amazing how the right tree was picked in scripture. Your idea about a first creation is not a new one, and is based on false information. There was no first and second creation event on the Earth.

 

[Aman777]

Nutty:>>Science knows we originated from the water? really? Well, I don't believe that mumbo jumbo. Mans interpretation will never outweigh the word of God in me.

Dear Nutty, Scripture agrees with Science and so does your body. Genesis 1:21 tells us that "every living creature" that moves was "created" and "brought forth from the water" on the 5th Day.

Genesis 1:21
And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after His kind: and God saw that it was good.

Every cell within your body would die without liquid water, since you are mostly water, in agreement with Scripture and Science. That's God's Truth.

BTW, please don't tell me the verse is referring only to fish, since the winged fowl are also shown coming forth from Water.

Science says that all land life started from a fish around 350 million years ago. There is no evidence that man came from a fish. As for the flood. The oceans are sitting in huge deep basins. Most of the water before the flood was under the crust, and the bible clearly says these broke free.

That was Adam's world and not ours. Our Earth does NOT have water under the firmament. Scripture agrees with Science in that EVERY living creature that moves was created from the water, on our Earth.

The whole earth surface fractured and formed tektonic plates, forming mountain ranges. At the time of the flood the earth was much flatter, so it wouldn't take as much water to flood it.

False. The tektonic plates have been here for billions of years and the Flood was only some 10k years ago. The first Earth, which was destroyed in water, was much smaller than our Earth, and it didn't take as much water to destroy it as it would our Earth.

If the earths surface is smooth, you could flood the planet with the water in the oceans today. Where the water was, under the ground, the crust gradually sunk down into this, creating the basins for the water to recede into, forming the new oceans.

The water was beneath Adam's Earth and NOT ours. We were made the THIRD Day and water does NOT surround our world.

Gen. 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

The firmament, or the world of Adam, had windows in the top, which protected Adam's Earth from being destroyed by water. When the windows were opened, the firmament filled with water (since it had no other place to go) and sank. The Ark came out of the firmament of Adam's world into our world, into the mountains of Ararat.

Nutty:>>Now the Raven. What do you mean it didn't return? Noah sent it out several times and it kept returning.

Gen. *8:6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made: 7 And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.

The Raven did NOT return to the Ark.

Nutty:>>To and fro means away and back again. The Raven would have feasted on rotting flesh from the flood if the water had receded nearby, and not returned. But it did.

Noah was in the Ark for 5 months or 150 days, BEFORE he was released from the 1st firmament, which means that all the creatures would have already decayed by the time he sent the Raven forth. IF our Earth had 30k feet of water upon it, the water would STILL be here. Where could it go...except into Outer Space? The Raven simply flew to the shore of the Lake into which the Ark floated.

Nutty:>>As for the olive leaf. From the time of Noah entering the Ark, and setting foot on dry land, a period of one year and ten days had past. If you look at biology reports about the Olive tree, you will see that during experiments it has survived under water and even grown leaves. Isn't it amazing how the right tree was picked in scripture. Your idea about a first creation is not a new one, and is based on false information. There was no first and second creation event on the Earth.

Ok. I can understand your view, but please explain the following Scripture:

The 1st firmament was made the 2nd Day according to Genesis 1:6-8:

Gen. 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Then we are told of other Heavens which were made the THIRD day.

Gen. 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

Since the first firmament was made the 2nd Day, the heavenS made on the THIRD day, were in addition to the first heaven or firmament which was made the 2nd Day. Correct?

The traditional religious account will NOT stand when compared with what is actually written in Genesis. The traditional view is the THEOLOGY of men who lived 3k years ago and is NOT true to Scripture, Science, nor History. God's Truth agrees in every way with every discovery of Science and History. That's God's Truth.

In Love,
Aman

 

[nuttypiglet]

You are being confused with your cross references to Man's interpretation of life, i.e. Evolution. Are you saying God simply put a cell into the sea and said to it "now multiply and be fruitful and eat only the vegetation I have put there for you?" Of course not. He didn't just put a cell into the sea and wait billions of years for the results. He created complete life forms, and he names them. What difference does it make that the birds were created from the waters? Oh and it says God commanded the EARTH to bring forth the cattle etc.
Our Earth does not have water under the firmament? the last time I looked, water is heavier than air, so I would have to say that the seas are under the firmament. You do know what the firmament is right? it's not the Earths crust.
I repeat about the Raven. If I send a pet bird out of his cage to fly around the room, he then returns to the cage. He went to and fro.
Firmament is the expanse of air from the ground to sky, it's what we walk around in. It's what the birds fly in. It's what clouds float in.

 

[Aman777]

Nutty:>>You are being confused with your cross references to Man's interpretation of life, i.e. Evolution. Are you saying God simply put a cell into the sea and said to it "now multiply and be fruitful and eat only the vegetation I have put there for you?" Of course not. He didn't just put a cell into the sea and wait billions of years for the results. He created complete life forms, and he names them.

Dear Nutty, God spoke the words and Jesus physically did the work. Notice that God speaks and then His words are completed. Without Jesus was not anything made which was made. Jesus is Lord God (YHWH) of the Old Testament.

Nutty:>>What difference does it make that the birds were created from the waters?

Some people claim that the creation of "every living creature" includes ONLY fish and creatures which live in the sea. Birds were created from the water AND Jesus also formed them from the dust of the ground.

Gen. 2:19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Nutty:>>Oh and it says God commanded the EARTH to bring forth the cattle etc.

Amen, and Jesus made the cattle which Adam named, thus fulfilling the Father's command.

Nutty:>>Our Earth does not have water under the firmament? the last time I looked, water is heavier than air, so I would have to say that the seas are under the firmament. You do know what the firmament is right? it's not the Earths crust.

The "firmament" is the Boundary of the first world. It was clean dissolved in the Flood. It protected the Earth of Adam from the water into which it was placed. Gen. 1:6-8

Nutty:>>I repeat about the Raven. If I send a pet bird out of his cage to fly around the room, he then returns to the cage. He went to and fro.

He can go to and fro and fly right out the window too. Going to and fro over the face of the Earth is not flying away and then returning. That is your view which cannot be supported by Scripture.

Nutty:>>Firmament is the expanse of air from the ground to sky, it's what we walk around in. It's what the birds fly in. It's what clouds float in.

The firmament of our world is NOT surrounded by water and our firmament or boundary was NOT made the 2nd Day but the 3rd Day.

IOW, Our Cosmos did NOT have the same beginning as the world of Adam. We live in a Multiverse composed of a minimun of 3 Universes or Heavens. ll Corinthians 12:2

In Love,
Aman

 

[nuttypiglet]

Jesus did the work? What? Jesus did the creation? Let me give you another perspective on this, one which you can try to prove wrong scripturally. Jesus didn't exist before Mary and Jesus was not God. Why would Jesus talk to himself all the time, it is said he spent half his life in prayer. He thanked the Father for doing the miracles Jesus asked him to do. If Jesus was God, he would rely on nobody. Why did he say on the cross "father why have you forsaken me?" he would be saying "oh dear I've forsaken myself". If a Son is born to a Father and holds all his values dearly, will he not willingly follow his Father? Each time his Father asks him to do something, will he not do it? When Jesus saw his method of death, via the cross, he obviously wasn't happy because he questioned it, but also said "if there was another choice I would take it, but your will be done". He actually cried over this and was distressed, requiring support from Heaven to comfort him. I suppose it depends on what you perceive the 'WORD' to mean, what it is. Perhaps you can give your definition on this.

Back to that nuisance Raven. Neither view can be disproved, so let's just agree to disagree.

As regards to this firmament issue and water. It says in Genesis that God had not caused it to rain, but the plants were fed by a mist. We have an abundance of clouds around our Earth, above the firmament and this is water.

If you read the literature written by Enoch, it goes through all the Heavens. Our sky is called Heaven. Space is a Heaven. Gods realm is a Heaven, but called the invisible realm by God. Scientists have looked at Enochs journey and calculated he goes through 10 dimensions. Strange how science now believes our Universe may be made of 10 dimensions, linked with 'time' as the 11th.
If the flood was to destroy the Earth, and give Noah a way to enter a new Earth, then why did he need to wait for the water to recede? He could have just stepped off the ark as soon as it was high enough, and certainly not need to come to rest on a high mountain. Are you saying there was another earths crust around ours? and noah had to rise up to it in a floating ship? So below us, there is still the old earth? Or are you saying his ship went through space to another planet?

 

[Aman777]

Jesus did the work? What? Jesus did the creation? Let me give you another perspective on this, one which you can try to prove wrong scripturally. Jesus didn't exist before Mary and Jesus was not God. Why would Jesus talk to himself all the time,

Dear Nutty, The Pharisees were questioning Jesus. Jesus said:

John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day: and he saw it, and was glad. 57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily,(Truly) verily, (Truly) I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Jesus IS the Light of the first Day. Genesis 1:3

Nutty:<>>it is said he spent half his life in prayer. He thanked the Father for doing the miracles Jesus asked him to do. If Jesus was God, he would rely on nobody.

Jesus tells us that His Father is the invisible Spirit of Love.

John 1:18
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him.

Nutty:>>Why did he say on the cross "father why have you forsaken me?" he would be saying "oh dear I've forsaken myself".

Read Psalms 22 which tells you what Jesus was thinking as He was hanging on the Cross. It begins:
22:1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me? why art thou so far from helping Me, and from the words of My roaring?

It ends with Jesus praising the Father:

22 I will declare Thy name unto My brethren: in the midst of the congregation will I praise Thee.
23 Ye that fear the Lord, praise Him; all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify Him; and fear Him, all ye the seed of Israel.

Nutty:>>If a Son is born to a Father and holds all his values dearly, will he not willingly follow his Father? Each time his Father asks him to do something, will he not do it? When Jesus saw his method of death, via the cross, he obviously wasn't happy because he questioned it, but also said "if there was another choice I would take it, but your will be done".

Jesus was showing us how to be humble unto death and also revealing that He was also a man, a young man, who did not want to die, but showed us there was NO other way for us to live forever, with God, in Heaven.

Nutty:>>He actually cried over this and was distressed, requiring support from Heaven to comfort him. I suppose it depends on what you perceive the 'WORD' to mean, what it is. Perhaps you can give your definition on this.

Jesus is the Word of God. He was NOT born but was with the Father before the beginning. Jesus is the Image or only begotten Son of God, which means that in Jesus is ALL of the fulness of the invisible Spirit of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Jesus IS God physically. He is the ONLY God you will ever see.

Jesus is the Word of God because the Father said, Let there be Light and God Himself came into the physical world.

Nutty:>>Back to that nuisance Raven. Neither view can be disproved, so let's just agree to disagree.

As regards to this firmament issue and water. It says in Genesis that God had not caused it to rain, but the plants were fed by a mist. We have an abundance of clouds around our Earth, above the firmament and this is water.

The firmament is the Boundary of the first heaven. It was placed in the midst or middle of water and water was above and below the firmament. Picture a Snow Globe placed in the middle of water, with water above and below it and you will see the Biosphere which contained the entire first Heaven. Water was above and below it because it was surrounded by water. Genesis 1:6-8 It was NOT our Cosmos, but the first world of Adam.

If you read the literature written by Enoch, it goes through all the Heavens. Our sky is called Heaven. Space is a Heaven. Gods realm is a Heaven, but called the invisible realm by God. Scientists have looked at Enochs journey and calculated he goes through 10 dimensions. Strange how science now believes our Universe may be made of 10 dimensions, linked with 'time' as the 11th.

The boundary of the first heaven was the firmament.
The boundary of our Earth is our Atmosphere.
The boundary of Heaven is Eternity.

If the flood was to destroy the Earth, and give Noah a way to enter a new Earth, then why did he need to wait for the water to recede? He could have just stepped off the ark as soon as it was high enough, and certainly not need to come to rest on a high mountain. Are you saying there was another earths crust around ours? and noah had to rise up to it in a floating ship? So below us, there is still the old earth? Or are you saying his ship went through space to another planet?

Picture the firmament as a sphere made of clear plastic, with windows on top. IF the windows were opened, and they were, it would allow rain to enter the firmament which contained the world of Adam. As it continued to rain and the water from under the firmament was released into the clear plastic sphere, the sphere would begin to sink.

After 40 days of rain, as the firmament sank, the Ark would be released into Lake Van into which the first world was placed. The firmament would sink and the Ark, which was covered to protect it from the rain, would arrive in the Mountains of Ararat in our world.

That is one possibity but with God, anything is possible. One thing is for sure and that is that God's Truth does NOT agree in any way with the false assumptions of the Theory of Evolution.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Ophiolite]

The support of the content of Genesis is not required in order to accept the theory of evolution, since there is such a volume of evidence confirming it. Equally, nothing in Genesis precludes evolution, so Christianity should have no scriptural problem with the concept.

 

[Aman777]

The support of the content of Genesis is not required in order to accept the theory of evolution, since there is such a volume of evidence confirming it. Equally, nothing in Genesis precludes evolution, so Christianity should have no scriptural problem with the concept.

Dear Oph, I agree that you don't have to believe Genesis in order to accept the Godless Theory of Evolution. There is NO evidence of the evolution of human intelligence in Apes. It is a Lie of men, and easily refuted.

Genesis precludes evolution by showing that the FIRST living being made was Adam and he was made on the THIRD Day. Gen. 2:4-7

NO other living creature was made until the FIFTH Day. Gen. 1:21

The Big Lie of Evolution is that there is evidence of Apes becoming Humans. There is NONE, but only the False Assumptions of people who worship at the Altar of Evolution while force feeding their false beliefs to our innocent children in Public Schools.

Some of you have swallowed the fiction of Evolism and the LAST debate between God and Evols will soon take place. The poor, ignorant, devotees of Evolism will be "willingly ignorant" of God's Truth. God's Truth is:

1. The first world was totally destroyed in the Flood.
2. Our world will be burned.

Are YOU a Scoffer of the last days? Read ll Peter 3:3-7

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,4 And saying, Where is the promise of His coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

Why hasn't Jesus returned to this Earth, they ask? Nothing has changed since the Big Bang, for we still live on the first and only Planet where life is found, these scoffing Evols falsely teach.

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:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: (Greek-destroyed, totally) 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.

The world that THEN WAS is gone, destroyed in the Flood. Evols know nothing of that world, revealing that they are totally IGNORANT of how prehistoric man became Human. They don't know that Noah came to Northern Mesopotamia and spread the Human intelligence of Adam all over the face of our Earth. When you show them God's Truth, they become "willingly ignorant" of God's Truth, believing instead the Big Lie of Evolution.

In spite of this, Evols STILL spew their satanic venom to innocent children in the Public Schools of the United States, in violation of the Constitution which doesn't allow Evols to preach their false religious beliefs to these children . As a nation, we should be outraged, but after 150 years of teaching this Lie, most people don't even know what an evil it is. Do you?

In Love,
Aman

 

[Ophiolite]

Dear Oph, I agree that you don't have to believe Genesis in order to accept the Godless Theory of Evolution. There is NO evidence of the evolution of human intelligence in Apes. It is a Lie of men, and easily refuted.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Obviously apes have not developed human intelligence, since they are not human.

Genesis precludes evolution by showing that the FIRST living being made was Adam and he was made on the THIRD Day. Gen. 2:4-7

This is a unique interpretation you have. If you don't mind I shall go with the thousands of other Biblical authorities who would disagree with you.

At any rate the Genesis account is metaphorical, not literal. The Hebrews, like practically any other people routinely used literary devices to tell their stories.

The Big Lie of Evolution is that there is evidence of Apes becoming Humans. There is NONE, but only the False Assumptions of people who worship at the Altar of Evolution while force feeding their false beliefs to our innocent children in Public Schools.

I can quite understand that you might wish to challenge the evidence, however to deny the existence of it is rather an extreme and arguably foolish step. There is abundant genetic, anatomical, palaeontological and behavioural evidence to support the theory.

Incidentally, I know of no serious evolutionists who believe in evolution. Rather, they accept it because of the enormous wealth of evidence that supports it.

Some of you have swallowed the fiction of Evolism and the LAST debate between God and Evols will soon take place.

I haven't 'swallowed the fiction'. I have accepted the theory as the most satisfactory explanation, by a country mile, to account for the nature of life.

Are YOU a Scoffer of the last days? Read ll Peter 3:3-7

I try assiduously not to scoff at those whom I feel have unfounded ideas. That said, I am perfectly happy to scoff at inanimate ideas. The concept of Last Days, however, strikes me as too silly to merit scoffing.

Nothing has changed since the Big Bang, for we still live on the first and only Planet where life is found, these scoffing Evols falsely teach.

I recommend, if you wish to be taken at all seriously, that you get your facts straight. Scientists have established that a great deal has changed since the Big Bang. Contrary to your statement here there are a majority of scientists who strongly suspect life will be present on other planets, and a smaller group who rather doubt it. In short, your quoted statement is false.

Evols know nothing of that world, revealing that they are totally IGNORANT of how prehistoric man became Human. They don't know that Noah came to Northern Mesopotamia and spread the Human intelligence of Adam all over the face of our Earth.

Well here we can partially agree. Evols, do not know this, since there is absolutely no evidence for it.

In spite of this, Evols STILL spew their satanic venom to innocent children in the Public Schools of the United States, in violation of the Constitution which doesn't allow Evols to preach their false religious beliefs to these children .

Since a significant number of evolutionists are Christian and are fully accepting of evolution, this statement is also false.

As a nation, we should be outraged, but after 150 years of teaching this Lie, most people don't even know what an evil it is. Do you?

One thing I do know is that if there is a God of the type portrayed in the New Testament, that he would be appalled by the vitriol you heap on some of your fellow humans.

Finally, I should like to ask you a personal favour. In this thread you have impliclty accused me of being evil, a liar, willfully ignorant and satanic. Therefore I would appreciate it if, in any repsonses to me, you not end them with the words "In Love". I find them, under the circumstances, a trifle hypocritical.