Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The half-life of DNA in bone:... [YEC takes a hit, DNA half-life only 521 years]
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2012/10/05/rspb.2012.1745 ^

Posted on 11/24/2012 6:27:53 PM PST by truthfinder9

[If dinos walked with man, there should be dino DNA, however, there is not.]

Claims of extreme survival of DNA have emphasized the need for reliable models of DNA degradation through time. By analysing mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from 158 radiocarbon-dated bones of the extinct New Zealand moa, we confirm empirically a long-hypothesized exponential decay relationship. The average DNA half-life within this geographically constrained fossil assemblage was estimated to be 521 years for a 242 bp mtDNA sequence, corresponding to a per nucleotide fragmentation rate (k) of 5.50 × 10–6 per year. With an effective burial temperature of 13.1°C, the rate is almost 400 times slower than predicted from published kinetic data of in vitro DNA depurination at pH 5. Although best described by an exponential model (R2 = 0.39), considerable sample-to-sample variance in DNA preservation could not be accounted for by geologic age. This variation likely derives from differences in taphonomy and bone diagenesis, which have confounded previous, less spatially constrained attempts to study DNA decay kinetics. Lastly, by calculating DNA fragmentation rates on Illumina HiSeq data, we show that nuclear DNA has degraded at least twice as fast as mtDNA. These results provide a baseline for predicting long-term DNA survival in bone.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Religion & Culture; Religion & Science; Theology
KEYWORDS: ageofearth; alteredtitle; creation; creationism; godsgravesglyphs; helixmakemineadouble; origins; sourcetitlenoturl
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 next last

1 posted on 11/24/2012 6:28:06 PM PST by truthfinder9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

If scientific evidence mattered to YE creationists they wouldn’t be YE creationists.


2 posted on 11/24/2012 6:36:38 PM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
Oh no....Don't tell me they're back to "let's rethink this"...and MORE GRANT MONEY.

These folks like to be wrong....it's more fruitful than being absolutely right.

3 posted on 11/24/2012 6:38:10 PM PST by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Would you explain what this means.


4 posted on 11/24/2012 6:39:17 PM PST by encm(ss)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

I think it is a policy here at FR that we quote verbatim the Titles.

That said, how do you get from exponential decay of fossilized bone DNA to ‘Young Eartherism taking a hit’?

Nothing in the Bible says the Earth is young and for all we know Adam and Eve lived as Spiritual Beings in the Garden of Eden for billions of years overseeing all lifeforms before they were tempted and chose to follow evil (Satan, the spiritual demon of death).

Are you going to use BCE in your reply?


5 posted on 11/24/2012 6:43:51 PM PST by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: encm(ss)

There is no amount of evidence from history, geology, physics, astronomy or biology that will convince a YE creationist. If a billion data points didn’t do it it is ridiculous to assume a billion and one will do the trick. Follow?


6 posted on 11/24/2012 6:51:46 PM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Why are you so emotionally invested in what varieties of creationists believe? Do you believe that God created “all this”? If so, what method do you think he used to create “all this”

Or are you simply an atheist antagonist, bent on being a jerk toward those who believe in the Creator?


7 posted on 11/24/2012 6:57:20 PM PST by Theo (May Christ be exalted above all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Ah, I see by your comments on other discussions that you believe God is either dead or impotent or aloof.

Note to self: Ignore “allmendream” when he comments on creation/evolution discussions.


8 posted on 11/24/2012 7:00:37 PM PST by Theo (May Christ be exalted above all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Theo

Why are you so emotionally invested in me? This isn’t about me.

I am a Christian and believe that God created through the laws of the universe. Right now stars are being created through gravity and nuclear fusion. Do you suppose God didn’t create those stars?


9 posted on 11/24/2012 7:05:39 PM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Theo

You saw that in three minutes? Do you suppose the Pope thinks God is dead, impotent, or aloof? My beliefs on the intersection of science and faith are nearly identical to his.


10 posted on 11/24/2012 7:10:44 PM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

First I’ll post a snippet of a larger article. Anyone interested can see the author and link at the bottom:

We may now summarize the weaknesses, nay, hopelessness, of all so-called scientific theories regarding the origin and age of our universe:

(a) These theories have been advanced on the basis of observable data during a relatively short period of time, of only a number of decades, and at any rate not more than a couple of centuries.

(b) On the basis of such a relatively small range of known (though by no means perfectly) data, scientists venture to build theories by the weak method of extrapolation, and from the consequent to the antecedent, extending to many thousands (according to them, to millions and billions) of years!

(c) In advancing such theories, they blithely disregard factors universally admitted by all scientists, namely, that in the initial period of the birth of the universe, conditions of temperature, atmospheric pressure, radioactivity, and a host of other cataclystic factors, were totally different from those existing in the present state of the universe.

(d) The consensus of scientific opinion is that there must have been many radioactive elements in the initial stage which now no longer exist, or exist only in minimal quantities; some of them - elements that cataclystic potency of which is known even in minimal doses.

(e) The formation of the world, if we are to accept these theories, began with a process of colligation (of binding together) of single atoms or the components of the atom and their conglomeration and consolidation, involving totally unknown processes and variables.

In short, of all the weak scientific theories, those which deal with the origin of the cosmos and with its dating are (admittedly by the scientists themselves) the weakest of the weak.

It is small wonder (and this, incidentally, is one of the obvious refutations of these theories) that the various scientific theories concerning the age of the universe not only contradict each other, but some of them are quite incompatible and mutually exclusive, since the maximum date of one theory is less than the minimum date of another.

From: The Lubavitcher Rabbi, Menachem Schneerson, ZT’L.

Link: http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/112083/jewish/Theories-of-Evolution.htm


11 posted on 11/24/2012 7:12:12 PM PST by Phinneous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: encm(ss)

There’s a bunch of pseudo-scientific knuckleheads who think they can take advantage of scientifically deficient Christians (those without training; and no, having a science PhD does not make one an Atheist, to the contrary it can fortify one’s faith).

So they take advantage of ignorant Christians and pronounce the Bible a fraud because starting with Adam’s age at death and tracing the lineage to the present yields about 6000 years or such.

The flaw in their web of nonsense is that Adam’s countdown of years started ***at the time he was cast out*** from the Garden and ***not from the time of his spiritual creation***.

Adam was an immortal spiritual being who was deceived to follow Satan into an existence that resulted in the death of his physical body but not his soul (spiritual force).

The flawed Adam was extremely sorrowful and begged God to let him back into the Garden. God seeing his sincerity felt pity and promised a savior of his soul, not his body.

Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of God’s promise.

Jesus Christ is the new Adam who came to conquer death (Satan’s work). He is the Savior of all those who believe in God and all those that believe Jesus is God come in the flesh.

You can’t prove God’s existence using the Scientific Method because all Scientific inference starts with a precedent as premise and there is nothing before God.

You can’t fake praying for a miracle expecting as in science to replicate results because God chooses who will perform His miracles.

Christ is the Alpha and the Omega in all of existence.

Faith is faith and science is science. God gave us talent for scientific reasoning to better understand how to fight disease, how to clothe and feed ourselves better, to increase in knowledge and to explore His creation.

In short the poster of this thread is laying an attack on the Church, pure and simple.


12 posted on 11/24/2012 7:12:56 PM PST by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
The average DNA half-life within this geographically constrained fossil assemblage was estimated to be 521 years for a 242 bp mtDNA sequence, corresponding to a per nucleotide fragmentation rate (k) of 5.50 × 10–6 per year. With an effective burial temperature of 13.1°C ...

Figure 1 (page 4729) of the linked article shows the '242 bp mtDNA sequence' survival rate going to zero at 4000 years, and Table 1 (also page 4729) shows temperature effects on half-life: A 6X drop in half life if the 'storage' temperature is increased from 15C to 25C...
The unknowns involved (e.g., storage at higher assumed temperatures for a good portion of time; exposure to moisture; effects of pressure; etc) don't lend themselves to profound conclusions.... Other than the one stated in the Tagline.

13 posted on 11/24/2012 7:19:08 PM PST by El Cid (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

It seems to me, if true that DNA has a roughly 500 year half life, then the discovery of Dino DNA would absolutely disprove that dinos have been extinct for millions of years. The absence of such discovery doesn’t conclusively tell you anything.


14 posted on 11/24/2012 7:25:52 PM PST by OHelix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Apples and oranges


15 posted on 11/24/2012 7:41:19 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

So you’re a heretic?


16 posted on 11/24/2012 7:44:20 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Do you consider the Pope a heretic for believing the same as I do about evolution?


17 posted on 11/24/2012 7:52:49 PM PST by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Well since I don’t know what he believes and I don’t care what you do its really a moot point.


18 posted on 11/24/2012 7:56:31 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; decimon; 1010RD; 21twelve; 24Karet; 2ndDivisionVet; ...

 GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach
Thanks truthfinder9.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.


19 posted on 11/24/2012 7:57:10 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; decimon; 1010RD; 21twelve; 24Karet; 2ndDivisionVet; ...

 GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach
Thanks truthfinder9.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.


20 posted on 11/24/2012 7:57:48 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
Thomasauras


21 posted on 11/24/2012 8:04:57 PM PST by bgill (We've passed the point of no return. Welcome to Al Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

I consider him a heretic for refusing to renounce the Council of Trent decrees.


22 posted on 11/24/2012 8:05:52 PM PST by Gil4 (Progressives - Trying to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand since 1848)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

Yea..I never got the 6000 years..the bible has nothing about 6000 years..the 6000 years comes from some preacher in the 1800’s If I recall correctly.....if you want to refute the bible at least be intellectually honest and read what you want to refute..


23 posted on 11/24/2012 8:12:45 PM PST by tophat9000 (American is Barack Oaken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

It was Eve that was deceived and Adam went along with it afterwards to fulfill God’s commandment to be fruitful and multiply. Without Eve that commandment couldn’t be fulfilled as she had to be expelled from the Garden in Eden.


24 posted on 11/24/2012 8:48:11 PM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000

Uh, no... you can simply add up the years in the bible to get about 4,000 years from Adam to Christ. In my figuring, the universe legitimately looks several billion years old. Then again, Adam has always been conceived of as having been formed an adult. Why would Adam be formed mature, why do scientists expect that the universe would not have been formed mature? And why do creationists expect that the universe should not look old?


25 posted on 11/24/2012 9:02:43 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

“Ye?” You mean “The,” of course. Believe it or not, uneducated moderns do not know that use of the letter “y” in the middle english “ye” was actually a printer’s type substitute for the old english letter thorn. Of course, you also mean to clumsily ridicule creationists as medieval,uneducated,unscientific,etc. If anyone wants to know about this, go look at the Wikipedia entry for “Thorn (letter)”


26 posted on 11/24/2012 9:33:40 PM PST by Pete from Shawnee Mission ("For a thousand years to Thee are like a day, or a watch in the night.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9

ping for reference. BTW, I have seen DNA decay as an argument FOR YEC. Some Japanese fellow claiming thermal decay predicts no DNA could survive more than about 10K years, even under the most perfectly protected conditions. Creation magazine (Answers in Genesis) touted this as a basis for being suspicious of dating any discovered dinosaur DNA to periods significantly beyond the 10K limit. And this new proposal on half-life does not seem to be inconsistent with that premise. Perhaps I am missing the point, but I do not see how this harms the essentials of the YEC position at all.


27 posted on 11/24/2012 10:11:20 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

Adam was 933 years old when he died; that’s 933 years from the time he was cast out of the Garden, not from the time he was created.

He was created a ***spiritual*** ***immortal*** being. For all we know he could have existed billions of years as a spiritual immortal being, inside the Garden.

Time is not a physical phenomenon. Physicists do not recognize time as anything physical; it is a linear measure that transitions to a nonlinear measure in the presence of singularities such as Black Holes, but it is just a measure that is used in the definition of mechanical parameters such as velocity, acceleration, power etc.

Time grinds to a halt when a body approaches the speed of light.

God is infinite, God is light. Time has no attachment to God; He is infinite, without bound.


28 posted on 11/24/2012 10:57:18 PM PST by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

It was also Adam. He was culpable, he was Master and he followed Satan because he knew that Eve was following Satan.


29 posted on 11/24/2012 11:00:35 PM PST by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: OHelix; SunkenCiv; All

The article referred to this a geographically constrained set of samples. So the 500 years pertains to those samples. On the other hand since temperature is an influence, I’ll bet that the DNA of some of those frozen mammoth carcasses is probably still in pretty good shape.


30 posted on 11/24/2012 11:11:12 PM PST by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer

Answers in Genesis? Ken Hamm is a buffoon who can’t be taken seriously in the creation-evolution debate.


31 posted on 11/24/2012 11:16:47 PM PST by Last of the Mohicans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Last of the Mohicans
Answers in Genesis? Ken Hamm is a buffoon who can’t be taken seriously in the creation-evolution debate.

Well, I've met Ken personally, and he seems a nice enough chap. BTW, although I was hoping against hope for something other than an ad hominem attack, your response was exactly what I have come to expect in these discussions. No substance, all bluster. I am not a professional scientist, and am willing to learn, but I have zero respect for non-arguments like name calling. They serve no one, and diminish the authority of anyone who uses them. IMHO.

32 posted on 11/25/2012 1:01:48 AM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

You are utterly incorrect. The Bible is very clear on the matter:

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
http://bible.cc/2_corinthians/11-3.htm

And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
http://bible.cc/1_timothy/2-14.htm

Eve’s own testimony confesses as much: And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

http://bible.cc/genesis/3-13.htm

Adam didn’t follow Satan, he followed God. God’s own testimony is clear on this matter as well:

And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

http://bible.cc/genesis/3-17.htm

So Adam didn’t hearken unto Satan, but Eve. Why would he follow the counsel of his wife?

1. She’s God’s created Helpmeet, that is a companion worthy of Adam. http://bible.cc/genesis/2-18.htm

Did God err? No.

2. Adam recognized as much and stated it thusly:
And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
http://kingjbible.com/genesis/2-23.htm

This is the purpose of Eve and women in general. To become married, one flesh, and a man should cleave to his wife. It is God’s purpose.

Adam, in partaking of the fruit, didn’t follow Satan, but God. You’re mistaken or have been mislead. There is a lot of false doctrine out there, but you can read it for yourself, now, and understand the truth.


33 posted on 11/25/2012 4:17:37 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Pete from Shawnee Mission; allmendream

Fascinating story and good to know, but you’re misunderstanding allmendream. YE in that post stands for Young Earth as in YEC where the C stands for creationist.


34 posted on 11/25/2012 4:30:38 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Heretic?

Heretics are people murdered for their beliefs by various Popes through the ages before freedom to think was established


35 posted on 11/25/2012 4:36:42 AM PST by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Present failure and impending death yield irrational action))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: bert

Heretics aren’t defined by their being murdered. They are defined as people who push false teachings of Christianity.


36 posted on 11/25/2012 5:24:43 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer

” BTW, although I was hoping against hope for something other than an ad hominem attack, your response was exactly what I have come to expect in these discussions.”

yeah amazing that happens when the OP starts insulting Christians in the very first post, shocking even


37 posted on 11/25/2012 5:28:12 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

-——people who push false teachings-——

or, who don’t conform to the party line, the theological consensus of the day


38 posted on 11/25/2012 5:49:38 AM PST by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Present failure and impending death yield irrational action))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Phinneous; Godzilla

Thanks. And before sin there was no decay, and when it did we can only speculate the aging that took place at that point. And then there is the “gap” theory.


39 posted on 11/25/2012 5:51:22 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin

The point of this article is, half the DNA vanishes every 521 years; half the remainder in another 521 years; etc.


40 posted on 11/25/2012 6:44:54 AM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

We believe in an actual, literal 6-day creation and a 5773-year-old world. The article I posted is to refute the ability of science to “prove” anything in an absolute sense.

I don’t know if our theologies match exactly but also in Judaism, man was (and is again :-) ) meant to live forever. In Judaism, after the giving of the Torah, the Jews’ bodies were again perfected and immortal...until the sin of the golden calf mucked that all up....


41 posted on 11/25/2012 6:45:52 AM PST by Phinneous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Phinneous
In Judaism, after the giving of the Torah, the Jews’ bodies were again perfected and immortal...until the sin of the golden calf mucked that all up

OK, you have just got to explain your line of thought here, please, as I cannot find this anywhere in the Bible.

42 posted on 11/25/2012 7:58:54 AM PST by chesley (Vast deserts of political ignorance makes liberalism possible - James Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: chesley

Jews believe in a vast tradition of G-dly works, the words of the prophets, the elucidation of scripture by saintly sages of the Talmud (and all the way up to the commentators of the 18th century,) mystical works such as the Zohar, and of course the Oral Law itself (which was given simultaneously at Sinai and explains the exact way in which Jews perform the 613 commandments given by G-d—for example, Numbers 15:38, “...Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘Throughout the generations to come you are to make tassels on the corners of your garments, with a blue cord on each tassel...” This is fulfilled by all Orthodox Jewish men (and not women) until this day...yet without an oral tradition, one would sooner attach an upholstery tassel to the lapel of his jacket than wear this over or under their dress shirts: http://lh4.ggpht.com/_6bpWnB8EmIM/TdJ8suwTV9I/AAAAAAAACBE/yPu8sW3HNlk/tzitzit%5B3%5D.jpg )

So in our traditions and writings we are told that after hearing the first two commandments from G-d Himself, the Jews’ souls departed and they were revived two times. The 3rd through 10th commandments were echoed by Moses, not causing the Jews to expire. After the experience, they were eternal like Adam before the sin. With the sin of the golden calf, the impurity of death returned to them. Bummer. When Moshiach comes, we will all be revived and live eternally.

An article explains: http://m.chabad.org/m/article_cdo/aid/627795


43 posted on 11/25/2012 8:43:13 AM PST by Phinneous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: gleeaikin; truthfinder9

Thank you for the reply. I read where they gave the specific conditions on which they based their conclusions.

I am still puzzled why the headline characterized it as a hit to YEC theory. If anything, it is potentially devastating to the “millions and millions of years” narrative of evolutionary theory.

Is there something I’m missing or is truthfinder9 taking a logical mulligan?


44 posted on 11/25/2012 8:55:00 AM PST by OHelix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bert

The Bible is my party line, perhaps you have an issue with it?


45 posted on 11/25/2012 9:18:56 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Phinneous

Thanks for the info


46 posted on 11/25/2012 9:23:13 AM PST by chesley (Vast deserts of political ignorance makes liberalism possible - James Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
Adam was 933 years old when he died; that’s 933 years from the time he was cast out of the Garden, not from the time he was created.

Marking his age from his expulsion and not his creation is an arbitrary assumption with no evidence in the text, unless I have missed something. The danger in positing such "gap" solutions is it makes the ordinary sense of the text so flexible as to be meaningless. One could sidestep the direct and obvious meaning of anything if one could always resort to redefining anchor concepts (like birth, age, death) at will. If the text provides a basis for an alternate meaning, well and good, the meaning is preserved. But without such a justification here, there is simply no reason to believe Moses was referring to anything but 933 years, start to finish, of Adam's physical being, as in the ordinary sense.

Time is not a physical phenomenon

That is open to interpretation. Special relativity implies a spacetime manifold in which time is merely the measure of location in a four dimensional grid, or as some call it, a tesseract. To the extent any of the grid's dimensions are physical, impliedly the entire grid is physical, including time. This is a useful way to see the experimental data on variable aging depending on frame of reference (e.g. time dilation, you leave earth at near light speed and return five years later in earth time but minutes later in your time, and the difference is real in a physical sense).

Bottom line, I've seen arguments for both a physical and a nonphysical view of time, and I remain bewildered. I lean toward the physical view because I do not see how time distortion based on gravitational distortion etc. can be excluded from the realm of physical being. But it is not a closed book to me.

47 posted on 11/25/2012 10:04:22 AM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

I believe Hostage is correct in concluding that Adam was culpable. I would dare say Adam was more culpable than Eve, precisely because he was NOT deceived. He therefore knew the serpent was lying, and it was he who had the last best chance of avoiding rebellion against the command of God, and yet he disobeyed, knowing full well it would result in his condemnation before God.

Jesus confirms that knowing disobedience is a greater sin than misguided disobedience:

Luke 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. [48] But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

And but for Satan’s inducement of Eve, Adam would not have sinned. Therefore Adam, in knowingly joining his wife’s rebellion against God, aligns himself knowingly with the ultimate purpose of Satan, to reject God’s authority over His own creation. This is the great disobedience that threw humanity into sin, and according to Paul it is Adam who killed us all:

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Notice he say “by one man,” that is, he looks to Adam as the conduit of sin and it’s curse of death to the rest of us. It is interesting to speculate what might have been if Adam had not followed Eve in her rebellion. Would God have condemned Eve and given Adam another of his ribs transformed? Who knows?

Nevertheless, rebellion it was, because though she was deceived, she also knew full well the command of God (she even misquotes it to Satan) and still chose to use Satan’s lie as a justification for her sin anyway.

But you argue that God would not give Adam a helper that would ever steer him wrong. But if that were true, then God is not at all justified in punishing Adam, which He clearly did, which would imply that God is unjust, which is impossible. God is righteous in all His judgments, and He condemns Adam justly. Adam sinned. He rebelled against God at the inducement of Satan, only not on the basis of a false promise, but knowingly, choosing companionship with his wife in sin over obedience to a clear, simple command of God.


48 posted on 11/25/2012 10:51:50 AM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer; Hostage

Oops! Ping to #48.


49 posted on 11/25/2012 10:53:28 AM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD; Hostage

1010RD, when I read your post, I came away with the perception you are saying Adam didn’t sin against God because he was following Eve’s counsel as commanded by God.

Is that what you are saying?

May God the Father lead us all to His truth, BVB


50 posted on 11/25/2012 11:26:51 AM PST by Bobsvainbabblings
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-77 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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