Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

9,000 Year-Old Axe Unearthed at Culmore (Ireland)
icDerry.com ^ | 29 August 2003 | Ian Cullen

Posted on 09/01/2003 3:00:05 AM PDT by jimtorr

AN EXCITING archaeological discovery has been made at Culmore in Derry by two men who stumbled across a large stone artefact, which pre-dates the Egyptian Pyramids by a few thousand years.

When Frank Gillespie began work on his garden wall in Culmore he had little idea that just below his feet lay a large stone axe estimated to be around 8-9,000 years-old.

Frank's father Hugh Gillespie, of Lone Moor Road, had been digging the foundation for the wall when he unearthed the ancient tool.

"My father found it and left it to one side, paying little notice, but when I spotted it I knew it was some kind of artefact as it was chipped from work," said Frank

"We were in the back garden digging a foundation for a small wall at the time - we weren't looking for anything," added the electronics engineer.

The Clonliffe Park resident said that the future of the axe will now be left in the hands of the local archaeologists, Ian Leitch and Tommy Gallagher, who investigated and verified the find.

"The axe probably dates from the early or late Mesolithic period in Ireland, around eight or nine thousand years ago," Mr. Leitch told the 'Journal'.

The discovery of stone axes has not been uncommon in recent times with a number of artefacts uncovered during field surveying in the Culmore and Ballyamagard areas over the last number of years.

However, the large axe unearthed by the Gillespies was "unique" to the area because of its size, according to the local archaeologists.

And the artefact dates back to when Ireland's earliest settlers were still arriving in Northern Ireland from Scotland.

Mr. Leitch and Mr. Gallagher have confirmed that the artefact is made of "mud stone", and it was probably used by early hunter-gatherers for felling trees. The sharp stone would have been "hafted" onto a piece of timber , most likely oak, using animal hide.

"This particular stone axe may have been brought into the area through local trading, as this stone axe has no similarity, on record, to other stone axes, which have been found in the locality," said Mr. Leitch.

Frank and Hugh Gillespie permitted the axe to be handed over to the Environment and Heritage Services of the Department of the Environment which will observe and record the find.

"The axe will in due course be returned to Mr. Gillespie who may at some stage facilitate the axe being viewed publicly at the Tower Museum in Derry," added Mr. Leitch, who paid tribute to the Gillespies for passing the artefact to the authorities .

In January a find of ancient tools dating from the same period during the building of the Toome bypass yielded one of the most important insights to date into the lifestyles of the first Irish settlers.

That site included a number of flint tools thought also to be around 9,000 years old and yielded over 8,000 pieces of flint including small blades called microliths and larger tools used for hunting, and fishing.

It is believed that the first humans to reach Ireland did so as the remnants of the last Ice Age disappeared. The first immigrants came to the Antrim coast from western Europe via Scotland, with which there may have been temporary dry land connections left behind by the Ice Age.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: archaeology; ggg; godsgravesglyphs; history; ireland; stoneage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last
I posted this primarily because of the age of the axe in Ireland. I hadn't realized that people had been into Ireland so early.

I wonder if these would have been the Firmanaugh of Irish legend. Surely not the Faerie.

1 posted on 09/01/2003 3:00:06 AM PDT by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam
fyi
2 posted on 09/01/2003 3:13:25 AM PDT by John Beresford Tipton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: jimtorr
Orcs
4 posted on 09/01/2003 3:32:07 AM PDT by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
.....Firmanaugh.......

I think my memory is faulty on that one. That's the name of a county.

5 posted on 09/01/2003 3:50:48 AM PDT by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aunt Enna
Yeah, the date stamped on it was...6989 BC
6 posted on 09/01/2003 3:51:16 AM PDT by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: exnavy
I don't get the comparison of the axe to the pyramids specfically. An axe is a serendipitious invention, the sort of thing that you may arrive at when banging two stones together and one of them shears of and...BOOM you have a cutting tool. Gouge your knuckles a few time and add a handel. The pyrimids, on the other hand are marvels of engineering. I mean try banging rocks together and see how long this takes to produce a 400 foot high structure!
7 posted on 09/01/2003 4:24:24 AM PDT by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
I posted this primarily because of the age of the axe in Ireland. I hadn't realized that people had been into Ireland so early.

They weren't there that early. Reread the article, it is full of weasel language and disclaimers. The 8-9,000 years was pulled out of thin air because the vanity of Ian Leitch wouldn't let him say "I don't know.", which would have been the appropriate and correct answer. Stone does not perform well under radioisotope dating. The axe head is described as "unique" making it ludicrous to date it according to other guesstimates of similar material. The guy is showing typical deceptiveness of the evolution crowd. I can build a stone axe that looks like something used a long time ago, will it be described as being 8-9,000 years old? The rock may be old, but there is absolutely no way they can date the age of the craftsmanship. Suppose I was stranded somewhere and built some crude hand tools according to the survival books. Because it wasn't fashioned out of modern high strength metal alloys would it be considered primitive and thus if found one hundred years later be dated as a Stone Age artifact?

8 posted on 09/01/2003 5:27:42 AM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
Oh, please. The guy wants it to be a sensational find, so, the older he says it is, the better. Now he can have hundreds or thousands of visitors come by the local museum.
9 posted on 09/01/2003 5:42:04 AM PDT by Clara Lou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: exnavy
Yeah, the date stamped on it was...6989 BC

Thanks, I needed the comic relief when reading this.

It got me thinking about this whole scam of archaeology and the charlatans that are unquestioned in their authority.
Consider this scenario:
I go before an evolutionist and secular archaeologist and produce before them a college student and this stone "axe-head". I ask them, how old is this rock? The rock itself is as old as the earth, but the tool was crafted 8-9000 years ago. I ask them how old is the college student. They guess around 20 years old. I ask them which is more complex, the college student or the stone axe head. After long deliberation they decide that the college student is a more complex entity. I then ask about the origins of the college student and the evolutionist talks for hours about biotic soup, fish, amphibians, apes and neanderthal man, that the complexity of the eye came about by random chance and unguided mutation. Then I ask about the origin of the primitive and crude axe head. The immediate reply "Oh, it was designed and built by an intelligent being." (Certainly not by naturalistic forces)

10 posted on 09/01/2003 5:43:12 AM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
I do not find it incompatible to accept evolution and at the same time accept and believe in the Holy Bible.
11 posted on 09/01/2003 5:54:04 AM PDT by Dudoight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
The rock may be old, but there is absolutely no way they can date the age of the craftsmanship.

There are three ways that the age of stone artifacts are estimated.

1. The design and craftsmanship used in the artifact, along with the type of stone used and its source. This will often place it within a certain era when such techniques and sources were commonly used. Just because the size of the axe was "unique" doesn't mean that it does not show signs of workmanship and design that correspond to other tools.

2. The positon of the stone tool in sediments, the depth of burial, can give an indication of when the tool was dropped, lost, or abandoned. It is not clear in this case if this teqnique was used to determine the age.

3. Radio carbon dating of associated fire or plant materials can give an indecation of when the artifact was left at the site. This does not appear to have been done in this case.

It is misleading to say that Ian Leitch is being deceptive by using "weasel language and disclaimers". By saying "probably" and by using disclaimers, he is exactly admitting the difficulties in dating the stone axe. There is no reason to believe that the axe was of recent origin, and he is giving his opinion and the reasons for it. I don't see any deception there. In fact, he is doing exactly the opposite of deception. He is being as precise as possible.

12 posted on 09/01/2003 6:02:35 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: msdrby
ping
13 posted on 09/01/2003 6:19:54 AM PDT by Prof Engineer (HHD - Blast it Jim. I'm an Engineer, not a walking dictionary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight
I do not find it incompatible to accept evolution and at the same time accept and believe in the Holy Bible.

I can list hundreds of incompatibilities, you are better believing either all of Evolution or all of Creation because the syncretism of the two defies reason, science and the evidence.

James 1:8  he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

2 Pet 3:5-6  For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water,  by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.

14 posted on 09/01/2003 6:24:16 AM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
BTTT!
15 posted on 09/01/2003 6:26:33 AM PDT by Verax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr

"Its mine! Give it back!"

16 posted on 09/01/2003 6:28:30 AM PDT by KantianBurke (The Federal govt should be protecting us from terrorists, not handing out goodies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
"Its mine! Give it back!"

Aye, Master Dwarf, 'tis yours.

17 posted on 09/01/2003 6:31:24 AM PDT by Prof Engineer (HHD - Blast it Jim. I'm an Engineer, not a walking dictionary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
In fact, he is doing exactly the opposite of deception. He is being as precise as possible.

Being that the post-flood age of the earth is five thousand years, then are we talking about precision that can be off by 100%? That's honesty?

18 posted on 09/01/2003 6:32:07 AM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose; Dudoight
* Evolution says that Man evolved from animals. The Bible says that man is a special creation made from the dust.

I can list hundreds of incompatibilities, you are better believing either all of Evolution or all of Creation because the syncretism of the two defies reason, science and the evidence.

Why do you insist on putting limits on G_d? He is all powerful, not you.

The Bible was put to paper(papyrus, stone,etc) using the words of men, however precise(or imprecise) they were capable of at the time.

19 posted on 09/01/2003 6:36:14 AM PDT by Prof Engineer (HHD - Blast it Jim. I'm an Engineer, not a walking dictionary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: KantianBurke
This is Hugh?
20 posted on 09/01/2003 6:38:37 AM PDT by mtbopfuyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack
Newgrange is older than the pyramids.
21 posted on 09/01/2003 6:42:08 AM PDT by Gaelic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
Great! we finally find one Mick willing to bury the hachet and some damn fool digs it up!!
22 posted on 09/01/2003 6:47:46 AM PDT by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
Let's face it - Darwin is right.
23 posted on 09/01/2003 7:06:36 AM PDT by sandydipper (Never quit - never surrender!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
Probably dropped it during one of the silly marches they have.
24 posted on 09/01/2003 7:10:19 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
I take umbrage to that. Mcs do NOT bury the hatchet...at least not in the stinkin' soil. :)
25 posted on 09/01/2003 7:12:08 AM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I'm glad that at least one person who read the article has some understanding of archaeology.

Don't even try to reason with people who insist on the 5,000 year time-line.

For myself, I'm more inclined to believe that God (the word is only a term, like deity, not the name of any ancient deity) simply set everything in motion at once, with one simple act. Thus, the big bang was God's act of creation. Let there be Light!.....and of course, God does continue to act in the world.
26 posted on 09/01/2003 7:12:37 AM PDT by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
So, explain to use oh sage, how long ago the dinosaurs roamed? 9000 years ago? And I guess the mega tons of fossils sitting in museums are artifacts?
27 posted on 09/01/2003 7:16:23 AM PDT by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
explain to us
28 posted on 09/01/2003 7:17:08 AM PDT by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
And I guess the mega tons of fossils sitting in museums are artifacts?

Didn't you get the memo? The dinosaurs were created by Speilberg about 1990, then sent back in time using Einstein's Time Machine, lifted from Orwell, to various epochs to create the illusion

29 posted on 09/01/2003 7:21:15 AM PDT by Prof Engineer (HHD - Blast it Jim. I'm an Engineer, not a walking dictionary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
And I guess the mega tons of fossils sitting in museums are artifacts?

The fossil record tells us that they died. The Creationist says they were buried in the mud from the Flood. The Evolutionist tells many different tales that take as an article of faith selective uniformitarianism. We have the same evidence, its in the interpretation.

So, explain to use oh sage, how long ago the dinosaurs roamed? 9000 years ago?

Since neither of us were around 9000 years ago, and we don't have an eye witnesses around to interrogate, we must make use of the knowledge that we do have. Evolutionists ignore all personal witness and consider only speculation.

Since dinosaur is an evolutionist's term that refers to a critter found within certain rock layers that are imagined to be of a certain time period, it would be fallacy for me to use contrived definitions, in the same sense it would be for you to speak of the Holy Spirit's power and presence.

I can discuss the large animals that you subjectively call "dinosaurs" as being creatures that have been with man since the beginning of time. There are plenty of secular legends and stories of man's interaction with beasts that you might describe as dinosaur. But since you categorically deny the existance of dinosaurs in the past several thousand years, your self imposed limitations would make the conversation fruitless.

30 posted on 09/01/2003 7:31:51 AM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
"But since you categorically deny the existance of dinosaurs in the past several thousand years, your self imposed limitations would make the conversation fruitless."

Conversely, what you are implying is that you believe dinosaurs actually existed within the last ten thousand years. Tyrannasaurus Rex, triceratops, pterodactils, etc. Now, I think you need to tell the truth to the good people on this forum and let us know exactly when you think dinosaurs existed. My guess is 60 to 150 million years ago. Now it's your turn.

31 posted on 09/01/2003 7:43:54 AM PDT by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
****It got me thinking about this whole scam of archaeology and the charlatans that are
unquestioned in their authority.*****

It reminds me of when L.S. B. Leakey visited a southern California dig believed to be about 10,000 years old.

He, based on his superior knowledge of African artifacts, promptly declared the artifacts were about one hundred thousand years old.
No one believed him, yet no one disputed him either.
32 posted on 09/01/2003 8:09:44 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
I'm going to Ireland next week.

I'm definitely bringing a shovel!

33 posted on 09/01/2003 8:17:59 AM PDT by JohnnyZ (Robot robot robot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
To believe Evolution, you must say that Genesis 1-11 is allegory, poetry or myth

And why not? What makes allegory, poetry, or myth anything less than True?

34 posted on 09/01/2003 8:23:00 AM PDT by JohnnyZ (Robot robot robot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
Suppose I was stranded somewhere and built some crude hand tools according to the survival books. Because it wasn't fashioned out of modern high strength metal alloys would it be considered primitive and thus if found one hundred years later be dated as a Stone Age artifact?

No.

Stone artifacts, whether ancient tools, Greek Statues, or the supposed Ossuary of James are dated by the weathering of the surface. We know how fast each type of stone weathers in the open air and burried in different soils. Microscopic examination of the surface can tell how long ago that surface was exposed.

SO9

35 posted on 09/01/2003 8:23:48 AM PDT by Servant of the Nine (A Goldwater Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
When reviewing the lineage of Jesus Christ in Luke 3:23-38, at what point does the lineage turn from actual people into allegory, poetry or myth?

Everything up to the Genocide of the Caananites is bogus.

36 posted on 09/01/2003 8:44:01 AM PDT by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: John Beresford Tipton
Thanks for the ping. The axe probably belonged to the Fomorians.
37 posted on 09/01/2003 9:05:15 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
Conversely, what you are implying is that you believe dinosaurs actually existed within the last ten thousand years. Tyrannasaurus Rex, triceratops, pterodactils, etc. Now, I think you need to tell the truth to the good people on this forum and let us know exactly when you think dinosaurs existed. My guess is 60 to 150 million years ago. Now it's your turn.

Since neither of us was there, we must base our opinions on what we consider the best authority. If no credible authority exists, then it is foolishness to be dogmatic on any possible explanation.

I must, as an issue of faith and to be consistant with what I know to be true, have considered the Bible as the absolute authority on this topic. Fortunately, the evidence supports the Bible's claim. According to lineage, and the reasonable assumption that the lineages are consecutive, Usher's date puts the age of the earth at under seven thousand years. This of course makes 60 to 150 million years ago impossible. What evolutionists call evidence of billions of years of uniform environment, Creationists call evidence of a catastrophic global flood that we are told is only a several thousand years old.

The empirical evidence we have today that "dinosaurs" and man walked together is found in places like GlenRose Texas, granted the human footprints are large and are indicative of a very tall (or giant) people. No problem, the Antediluvians talked about a race of giants we call the Nephilim. (Imagine the NY Giants changing their name...heh,heh,heh). There is also the chinese legends and the south american pottery, and north american and european cave art that features in convincing detail certain large creatures evolutionists would label "dinosaurs" if they were only dead 60 million years previously. Job was reminded of a great Behemoth, that theistic evolutionists have tried to pass off as a hippopotamus (despite the tail described as a mighty cedar, and the "tightly knit" thighs ). John Allen Watson, a geologist here in Austin wrote a paper titled "Behemoth" that describes in detail why this creature was probably a sauropod. According to Dr Look, French Congo tribes today still talk about (and apparently worship) a sauropod like creature that lives in the waters and occasionally capsizes their canoes (with men in it) with its "trunk".

So I base my opinions on Scripture, and also on the empirical observations made by archaeologists, and the numerous claims of disparate cultures around the world to co-exist with these "dinosaurs". There is even certain European lore of "dragon slayers" as recent as the Medieval ages. Nessie within the confines of Loch Ness? Is absence of evidence evidence of absense?

38 posted on 09/01/2003 9:42:18 AM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Prof Engineer
Why do you insist on putting limits on G_d?

OK, I'll bite. What limits am I putting on G_d? Is it because I take His Word concerning origins literally? For those who feel that G_d can't possibly create the universe within a week's time and therefore declare by fiat that Genesis 1-11 is something other than truth, what is the explanation for Exodus 20 where the basis for establishing a Sabbath Day of rest was modelled off the belief that Gen 1-11 was true? For those who believe the NT (or certain portions of it) as truth, why is it that Jesus Christ Himself can believe in a Genesis 1-11 as literal and true but to those who doubt G_d's power say that G_d had to use death and carnage for hundreds of millions of years before He could actually mutate man into existance?

He is all powerful, not you.

And your point would be...? (who around here is saying that they are as/more powerful that G_d? Are you hearing voices in your head?)

39 posted on 09/01/2003 9:52:15 AM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
The axe probably dates from the early or late Mesolithic period in Ireland, around eight or nine thousand years ago,"

The operative word here is "probably." What do that stake their claim on? The word behind "probably" is "assumption." They give no objective means of dating this axe.

40 posted on 09/01/2003 9:56:14 AM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mtbopfuyn
Re: This is Hugh?


"I am Hugh"

41 posted on 09/01/2003 10:00:12 AM PDT by ChadGore (Kakkate Koi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
AMEN and mega-dittoes.

I have not been in a college science class for quite awhile, but do they teach "weasel-wording" and "supposition-ing" in those classes now? Discovery Channel has become the science fiction channel. Everything is based on presuppostions which have no basis in fact. All of their stories are the work of fiction writers with great imaginations!

42 posted on 09/01/2003 10:01:20 AM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
Did they find any wiskey next to it?
43 posted on 09/01/2003 10:01:41 AM PDT by bmwcyle (Here's to Hillary's book sinking like the Clinton 2000 economy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
According to lineage, and the reasonable assumption that the lineages are consecutive........

A friend of mine was born and raised Jewish. He studied at what he says was the top Yeshiva (rabbinical school) in New York, and graduated at the top of his class. He says that his studies led him to conclude that Jesus is indeed Messiah. I worshiped God with him for 14 years, and trust his knowledge of scripture and the history of the Jewish people.

As it turns out, it is not reasonable to assume that the lineages are consecutive. I'm told that that is not how the Hebrews did things. The official histories of Israel only include the annals of the kings and the accurate lineage of the Kings family to Abraham. No other lineage really mattered. In their long histories before Abraham, which were otherwise recorded faithfully, they tended to only mention men of note and important events. For instance, there seems to be a long gap between Noah's sons and Abraham.

Actually, I don't know what to think of Noah's story. I don't think that the evidence bears out a world-wide flood 4 or 5 or 6,000 years ago. Egyptian, Minoan, Chinese, Scythian and Indian cultures appear to be older than that.

My conclusion is that the writers and compilers of Hebrew scripture probably never intended to give an exact time-line of the world.

I don't intend to belittle your position in any way, but only to demonstrate that I too base my world-view on scripture history and the history of scripture. I only have a different opinion, based on scripture, known history and geology, on how God may have done things.

44 posted on 09/01/2003 12:03:29 PM PDT by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
My conclusion is that the writers and compilers of Hebrew scripture probably never intended to give an exact time-line of the world.

Given the OT has an economy of words, why do you suppose that the ages the patriarchs "begat" the next in line and why the age the patriarch died? If it was not for studius back tracking of time, then could you conceive of any other legitimate purpose for chronicling such otherwise useless detail?

45 posted on 09/01/2003 5:40:39 PM PDT by Dr Warmoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
The warrantee probably expired.
46 posted on 09/01/2003 5:43:12 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
Please give me the exact scripture which states that this earth is 6000 + or - a few years old.

Your IIPeter 3:5-6 also says that this was the world that then was, talking about the same flood that Jeremiah 4 talks about. Not talking about Noah's flood Peter talks about that flood in the previous chapter.
47 posted on 09/01/2003 5:48:20 PM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dr Warmoose
OK, I'll bite. What limits am I putting on G_d? Is it because I take His Word concerning origins literally?

So why are you so certain that when G_d created the world, he didn't create it with all the geologic and fossil evidence in it? I have always wondered why creationists have been willing to go to great leaps of conspiracy theories to explain the existing evidence rather than accept this one simple notion.

If G_d created the world, he could have created it as we find it, or the fossils and geologic evidence could simply be remnants of his creation process in 6 days. Why are you unwilling to accept that as a possibility? I see no contradiction between it and the Bible accounts. No where does the Bible say that it is telling us everything.

It appears to me that you are limiting G_d by limiting his actions to those specificly mentioned in the Bible, that is how you are limiting him!

48 posted on 09/01/2003 6:02:58 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Prof Engineer
Thank you, exactly right. The bible was brought down through the centuries by man. Sure it has many references to historical events we can either prove or have a lot of evidence of. The fact is, the flood story is prevalent in most of the cultures across the world. It is a part of cultural history retained by many groups and religions across the world pagan and otherwise. The "version" of the bible that is commonly pushed is the King James version. The version rewritten by an english king for his own political ends, or is king James now considered a prophet? I certainly believe in God, but I believe in a God who is great enough to have brought about the big bang, evolution and the other mysteries and wonders of the universe and would be ashamed at how man has perverted religion into such a narrow minded view (much as the muslims) that men are split into different camps that all say "my view is the only right view and all you non-believers will burn in hell". I find that the glory and greatness of God is in the amazing universe he created and allowed to evolve over the millenia. After all, if you truly believe, then God has no need for increments of time, he is forever and his creation needs no time scale to come about, only man needs time scales to put his own short existance into perspective.
49 posted on 09/01/2003 6:17:07 PM PDT by RJS1950
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RJS1950
I take issue with your statement from one perspective it is written that "I have foretold you all things" that being the case where is it that we have been foretold all things?

The King James which you seem to put down does not say that this earth is 6000 years old, as a matter of fact it does not tell us the age of this earth. "MAN" tries to make it say that by selecting a few scriptures here and there.

Time is very important to our Heavenly Father, but it is His time not time that we in the flesh think in terms of.
50 posted on 09/01/2003 6:25:25 PM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson