Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Genetics Research Confirms Biblical Timeline
Institute for Creation Research ^ | Jan. 9, 2013 | Jeffrey Tomkins

Posted on 01/09/2013 1:57:52 PM PST by fishtank

Genetics Research Confirms Biblical Timeline by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D. *

Exciting research from the summer of 2012 described DNA variation in the protein coding regions of the human genome linked to population growth. One of the investigation's conclusions was that the human genome began to rapidly diversify not more than 5,000 years ago.1,2 This observation closely agrees with a biblical timeline of post-flood human diversification. Yet another study, this one published in the journal Nature, accessed even more extensive data and unintentionally confirmed the recent human history described in Genesis.3

Differences in human DNA can be characterized across populations and ethnic groups using a variety of techniques. One of the most informative genetic technologies in this regard is the analysis of rare DNA variation in the protein coding regions of the genome. Variability in these regions is less frequent than the more numerous genetic differences that occur in the non-coding regulatory regions. Researchers can statistically combine this information with demographic data derived from population growth across the world to generate time scales related to human genetic diversification.4

What makes this type of research unique is that evolutionary scientists typically incorporate hypothetical deep time scales taken from the authority of paleontologists or other similar deep-time scenarios to calibrate models of genetic change over time. Demographics-based studies using observed world population dynamics do not rely on this bias and are therefore more accurate and realistic.

In a 2012 Science report, geneticists analyzed DNA sequences of 15,585 protein-coding gene regions in the human genome for 1,351 European Americans and 1,088 African Americans for rare DNA variation.1,2 This new study accessed rare coding variation in 15,336 genes from over 6,500 humans—almost three times the amount of data compared to the first study.3 A separate group of researchers performed the new study.

The Nature results convey a second spectacular confirmation of the amazingly biblical conclusions from the first study. These scientists confirmed that the human genome began to rapidly diversify not more than 5,000 years ago. In addition, they found significant levels of variation to be associated with degradation of the human genome, not forward evolutionary progress. This fits closely with research performed by Cornell University geneticist John Sanford who demonstrated through biologically realistic population genetic modeling that genomes actually devolve over time in a process called genetic entropy.5

According to the Bible, the pre-flood world population was reduced to Noah's three sons and their wives, creating a genetic bottleneck from which all humans descended. Immediately following the global flood event, we would expect to see a rapid diversification continuing up to the present. According to Scripture, this began not more than 5,000 years ago. We would also expect the human genome to devolve or degrade as it accumulates irreversible genetic errors over time. Now, two secular research papers confirm these biblical predictions.

References

Tomkins, J. 2012. Human DNA Variation Linked to Biblical Event Timeline. Creation Science Update. Posted on icr.org July 23, 2012, accessed December 31, 2012. Tennessen, J. et al. 2012. Evolution and Functional Impact of Rare Coding Variation from Deep Sequencing of Human Exomes. Science. 337 (6090): 64-69.

Fu, W, et al. Analysis of 6,515 exomes reveals the recent origin of most human protein-coding variants. Nature. Published online before print, July 13, 2012.

Keinan, A and A. Clark. 2012. Recent Explosive Human Population Growth Has Resulted in an Excess of Rare Genetic Variants. Science. 336 (6082): 740-743. Sanford, J. C. 2008. Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome, 3rd ed. Waterloo, NY: FMS Publications.

* Dr. Tomkins is a Research Associate and received his Ph.D. in Genetics from Clemson University.

Article posted on January 9, 2013.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: bereshith; creation; genesis

From the article.

1 posted on 01/09/2013 1:58:00 PM PST by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Our oldest common ancestor would be Noah.


2 posted on 01/09/2013 2:02:37 PM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
IF these ‘smart’ people are claiming that all God's children are the offspring of the Adam and Eve then they are out to lunch. Did not happen, no matter their apparent elevated over the rest IQ’s.
3 posted on 01/09/2013 2:02:36 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

What about animal DNA?


4 posted on 01/09/2013 2:04:37 PM PST by bunkerhill7 (o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73
Our oldest common ancestor would be Noah.

Genetically speaking that would be impossible. Are we really suppose to believe that genetics are like rolling the proverbial dice.

5 posted on 01/09/2013 2:05:13 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

OK, you’ve stated an opinion. Are you able to defend it, or otherwise contribute to the conversation? Are you saying that we don’t all share a common ancestor?


6 posted on 01/09/2013 2:06:41 PM PST by Theo (May Christ be exalted above all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

“... genetics are like rolling the proverbial dice.”

What’s that even mean? I have no idea what point you’re trying to get across, sincerely.


7 posted on 01/09/2013 2:07:49 PM PST by Theo (May Christ be exalted above all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73

I think a few ancestors knew how to tread water.


8 posted on 01/09/2013 2:11:05 PM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

God created the universe - nothing is impossible with God.

Or - do you think everything came into being from nothing and nothing was the catalyst for this event?

That’s much more far-fetched than the Biblical version.


9 posted on 01/09/2013 2:14:50 PM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73

Since Noah himself is a descendant of Adam, the answer would be Adam.


10 posted on 01/09/2013 2:14:58 PM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

From www.nature.com/.../past-5-000-years-prolific-for-changes-t...

“Of 1.15 million single-nucleotide variants found among more than 15,000 protein-encoding genes, 73% in arose the past 5,000 years, the researchers report.
On average, 164,688 of the variants — roughly 14% — were potentially harmful, and of those, 86% arose in the past 5,000 years. “There’s so many of [variants] that exist that some of them have to contribute to disease,” says Akey”

The Flood would represent a genetic choke point and the evidence supports this.


11 posted on 01/09/2013 2:23:52 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Actually more people can trace their ancestry to Ghengis Kahn.


12 posted on 01/09/2013 2:25:02 PM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

13 posted on 01/09/2013 2:29:09 PM PST by A Formerly Proud Canadian (I once was lost but now I'm found; blind but now I see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bunkerhill7

You might consider the chetah with its genetic sameness from one individual to another.


14 posted on 01/09/2013 2:32:31 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

And not to his father?


15 posted on 01/09/2013 2:41:05 PM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

“Since Noah himself is a descendant of Adam, the answer would be Adam.”

Right - I should have said our “most recent” common ancestor - I think that would be Noah.


16 posted on 01/09/2013 2:50:05 PM PST by Psalm 73 ("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here - this is the War Room".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Theo
OK, you’ve stated an opinion. Are you able to defend it, or otherwise contribute to the conversation? Are you saying that we don’t all share a common ancestor?

My opinion comes from the WORD. There are two accounts of creation of flesh beings in Genesis. I have no clue who was the first that decided to claim that the accounts which are totally different are just a rehash of the first account. God created and He said it was 'good'.... but then flesh science decided reality would not fit the actual evidence. Then of course there is Peter's account.

17 posted on 01/09/2013 2:52:58 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73
God created the universe - nothing is impossible with God. Or - do you think everything came into being from nothing and nothing was the catalyst for this event? That’s much more far-fetched than the Biblical version.

But of course God created the universe... He also had Moses pen that flesh beings were created individually... and there were two days at least two thousand years apart according to IIPeter 3 of the formation/creation of flesh bodies.

The Adam was NOT alive until the breath of life which literally means 'soul/spirit intellect' was breathed into his nostrils. Where and when did the Adam's soul get created. Moses does not describe this event, but other places in the WORD it is said that ALLLL souls belong to God. How do souls belong if they are not already in existence?????

The WORD really does tell more than what many allow to have taught.

18 posted on 01/09/2013 3:00:40 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian

Is this an image of yourself????


19 posted on 01/09/2013 3:01:36 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

“I think a few ancestors knew how to tread water.”

For forty days and nights? I’ve tread water for fifteen minutes, and that was bad enough.


20 posted on 01/09/2013 3:02:50 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
II Peter 3 does not indicate that a thousand earth years equals one day for God.

What it does indicate is that time means nothing to God--whether it's 1000 years or a single day. It's all the same to Him.

21 posted on 01/09/2013 3:03:41 PM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce; Psalm 73

Yes, I think he meant most recent common ancestor, not oldest.


22 posted on 01/09/2013 3:04:03 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
II Peter 3 does not indicate that a thousand earth years equals one day for God. What it does indicate is that time means nothing to God--whether it's 1000 years or a single day. It's all the same to Him.

I am sorry, but I read that a day with the Lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day.... Interesting now isn't it that Methuselah only live 969 years, not quite a day with the LORD. Peter does in fact tell us how God keeps time, why else would God have Peter write down this tid bit of information given the 'days' of creation which is the subject of IIPeter 3?????

23 posted on 01/09/2013 3:07:09 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Merely a reflection of your comments.


24 posted on 01/09/2013 3:24:05 PM PST by A Formerly Proud Canadian (I once was lost but now I'm found; blind but now I see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian
Merely a reflection of your comments.

YOUR reflection most certainly not based upon the evidence!!!!

25 posted on 01/09/2013 3:54:46 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Why is it that so many people take such great offence to confirmation of events in the Bible, if it is merely folklore? Very simply, they do not want to acknowledge God or His Word because they would then have to acknowledge their ACCOUNTABILITY to a Creator, God.

I believe that the Bible is God-breathed, so that if there is one falsehood in the Bible, then it can all be thrown out. As my field of work is accounting and finance, and I have had to do much research into many things, I have a mind that requires proof to believe in a theory. There are so many holes in theory of evolution, that it fails. It is a 'religion' by itself, as it is purely on 'faith' that people believe in it! Creation science As far as evidence of the Bible in the story of creation, please check these links:

Ian_Juby

Creation_TV

These are two links to creation science TV shows that appear on the Miracle Channel in Canada. I have not had the time to look into other, similar websites all over the world, but there are many!

26 posted on 01/09/2013 5:41:15 PM PST by A Formerly Proud Canadian (I once was lost but now I'm found; blind but now I see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

The words “is as” do not mean “is.”


27 posted on 01/10/2013 6:20:54 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Those first 2 chapters of Genesis always tripped me up until about 2 years ago. I use to tell peeps, how can I understand the Old Testament, when I can’t even get past that point. It wasn’t taught in my circles. Then I came across a TV program early one morning, and a man was teaching it the way I could finally comprehend it. It all began to make sense. All those unanswered questions I had were being answered. I can no longer see his program on TV now, because my antenna got bent on the roof from a big storm, but he’s on a small webpage on the net and I let it loop 24/7. The 6th day creation were all the races, and the 8th day creation was “eth ha Adam” (sp.?) where the pure bloodline of Christ Jesus/Yahushua ha Mashiach/Yeshua would come through, and that when Adam was put to sleep, it wasn’t a rib taken to make Eve, it was actually a Helix curve (sp.?) which is the DNA. I was totally amazed at how it all became clear then. Even that apple tree story didn’t make sense, and that man opened my eyes to the truth on that too. Adam and Eve were actually seduced - wholly beguiled in a sexual way by the serpent, that old dragon. That’s why there’s enmity between her seed and satans seed. Cain is satans offspring, and Abel was Adams. I was like (WOW!!!) ... this is the true WORD being taught now. Sorry for the length, I just get so excited about finally understanding it, and I didn’t even get into that Noahs ark theory about how many fleshes were really on board, because from what I gathered in my new learning experience is that it was more than just Noahs family. I can’t remember the passage of scripture, but when it said something about 7 or 8 of every other flesh, it wasn’t talking about animals. Those were other peeps of races on board ... smiles ... still learning and loving every WORD of it.


28 posted on 01/10/2013 6:37:10 AM PST by A child of Yah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

La Brea woman found in the Los Angeles tar pits has been construed from various lines of evidence to have ended up there from 9-10 thousand years ago.

It’s generally thought, also from various lines of evidence, that the migration of what became the North and South American aborigines took place appx 70,000 years ago, which essentially cut them off from other human populations at least until Leif Ericson sailed to northeastern North America nearly 500 years before Columbus.

Thus, prior to that, people on this side of the world had at least 70,000 years of DNA evolution exlusive of humans anywhere else. Thus it would seem rather foolish to set-up a case for exclusive DNA data in Africa and Eurasia limiting its peculiarity to merely the last 5,000 years.


29 posted on 01/10/2013 7:43:40 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug; fishtank
It’s generally thought, also from various lines of evidence, that the migration of what became the North and South American aborigines took place appx 70,000 years ago, which essentially cut them off from other human populations at least until Leif Ericson sailed to northeastern North America nearly 500 years before Columbus.

That's really not a reasonable statement... Clovis points span Europe and America... As does pyramid technology and astronomical knowledge. Sumerian writing has been found at (or around) Chichen Itza... The only known source of copper large enough to drive the European Bronze Age has to be the mines in the Eastern Great Lakes area.

While the linkage is not always there, the evidence is clear - There has always been trade between Europe/Asia and the Americas. The knowledge of 'what was beyond the sea' seems to be a recent aberration.

30 posted on 01/10/2013 8:20:31 AM PST by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
The words “is as” do not mean “is.”

And yet Methuselah lived 969 years not quite a 'day' with the LORD!!!... Peter was not given this instruction in how God measures time to play mind games. Notice how Peter instructs... IIPeter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing,

that one day is with the LORD as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Your argument and disagreement is not with me it is with the WORD and what exactly is being instructed.

Given then that the days of creation equal a thousand years each, and we are not told if Genesis 1:26 took place on the first day of the thousand years, then God rested the seventh day, before He formed the 'tiller of the ground', on the eighth day.

It really is not nearly as difficult to comprehend as so many make it. I remember in 'history' classes there being hunters and gathers long before 'farming' became a method of survival. History agrees with what God had both Moses and Peter put down on animal and plant products.

31 posted on 01/10/2013 8:42:48 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1
What you say is reasonable, based on lines of evidence if not documentation.

But again, I think my real pet peeve re this article is this seeming exclusivity of Old World DNA.

I'm an Old Testament fundamendalist, but also a science buff who sees no conflict between the two.

Maybe I'm missing something in the article, but I don't think so. It seems like an attempt to reinforce the idea that the Earth is actually some 6,000 years old when unification in all lines of physical science clearly indicate it is much, much older.

That said though, Gerald Schroeder in his The Science Of God demonstrates some nifty math based on relativity theory that actually brings both ages into close conformity.

32 posted on 01/10/2013 8:45:38 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian
Why is it that so many people take such great offence to confirmation of events in the Bible, if it is merely folklore? Very simply, they do not want to acknowledge God or His Word because they would then have to acknowledge their ACCOUNTABILITY to a Creator, God. I believe that the Bible is God-breathed, so that if there is one falsehood in the Bible, then it can all be thrown out. As my field of work is accounting and finance, and I have had to do much research into many things, I have a mind that requires proof to believe in a theory. There are so many holes in theory of evolution, that it fails. It is a 'religion' by itself, as it is purely on 'faith' that people believe in it! Creation science As far as evidence of the Bible in the story of creation, please check these links: Ian_Juby Creation_TV These are two links to creation science TV shows that appear on the Miracle Channel in Canada. I have not had the time to look into other, similar websites all over the world, but there are many!

I have no, none argument with what the Bible actually, literally states. There is not even a hint or suggestion this earth is young. However, the time wherein each soul/spirit intellect was placed in a flesh vessel is relatively young.

These flesh bodies are a temporary vessel to house the soul/spirit intellect through this flesh journey. Which Christ said was the first requirement to 'see' the kingdom of God. (John 3 where somebody decided to claim a 'born again' doctrine.)

I do not doubt 'genetics' demonstrate what they demonstrate. But given these flesh bodies will return to the dust from whence they were formed, ultimately Judgment Day is not about the linkage or lineage passed through genetics. One of the primary hallmarks of conservatism is individual responsibility, and that won't fly if 'genetics' become the excuse card for an immoral society.

I do not know how it is that a particular 'soul spirit intellect' was selected to be place in the womb at fertilization. I am curious how 'families' are linked by the Creator.

33 posted on 01/10/2013 9:03:05 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Your argument and disagreement is not with me it is with the WORD and what exactly is being instructed.

I am not disagreeing with the Word--I am disagreeing with your interpretation of it.

The original Hebrew in Genesis indicates the days are 24-hours days, just like we experience today. The Hebrew makes this abundantly clear where English may not be quite so clear.

Again--Peter is making the equivalence in terms of how God's patience works. Not making physical equivalence. That is why the "as" is part of that phrase. It's a simile.

34 posted on 01/10/2013 9:08:42 AM PST by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
I think my real pet peeve re this article is this seeming exclusivity of Old World DNA.

I don't mean to discredit your argument, but rather, it is that single statement of yours which caused me to rise.

I'm an Old Testament fundamendalist, but also a science buff who sees no conflict between the two.

I am close to you in this, though I do see conflict (it is my nature) - Whether it is in the interpretation of the Word, or in the assumptions of science, such conflicts will eventually be resolved - Albeit that they will predictably be resolved with the Word having been correct all the way along.

I am a cynic though, and I have spent my life looking at what others seem to ignore - That being the errata generated by any line of thought... It is unfortunate that the acolytes of both science and religion do not spend more time on the things that disprove their pet theories, because that which disproves is what shows falsehood - Even if it is a lowly bowl with Sumerian engravings found in-situ in South/Central America, or glyphs showing humans and dinosaurs together... Such things cannot be ignored because they don't fit the accepted theory... Rather, they don't fit because the accepted theory can't be true... These things deny it that ability.

Maybe I'm missing something in the article, but I don't think so. It seems like an attempt to reinforce the idea that the Earth is actually some 6,000 years old when unification in all lines of physical science clearly indicate it is much, much older.

That presupposes that scientific measurement is without flaw. Tell me what happens if one suggests that time itself is not a constant, but rather follows the predictable 'rate of decay' that all other things are subjected to? What happens to ALL scientific measurement if that one simple flaw was allowed to propagate?

That said though, Gerald Schroeder in his The Science Of God demonstrates some nifty math based on relativity theory that actually brings both ages into close conformity.

Thanks for that - I will look it up.

35 posted on 01/10/2013 9:26:37 AM PST by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: A child of Yah

Do you remember the link?.


36 posted on 01/10/2013 9:49:49 AM PST by winodog (Thank you Jesus for the calm in my life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: A child of Yah

I found this and it does make sense especially explaining the sacrifices. I have yet to search for the stuff about the rib

http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/sherry/cain.htm


37 posted on 01/10/2013 10:00:58 AM PST by winodog (Thank you Jesus for the calm in my life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1

Just as one example, we know that the Sun and planets contain elements heavier than Carbon that could not have been fused within the energy of solar confines. Therefore these must have been manufactured in events leading up to supernova generation in at least one, and probably two generations of more massive, earlier, preexisting stars, starting say...at least 7-10 billion years ago. There seems no other explanation consistent with what we know about nuclear phyics, which, although incomplete, is nonetheless substantial in that we have used this same nuclear energy in various ways.

I do not find this at all in conflict with Genesis however. On the contrary it only serves to strengthen my belief in God all the more.


38 posted on 01/10/2013 10:41:40 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
Just as one example, we know that the Sun and planets contain elements heavier than Carbon that could not have been fused within the energy of solar confines. [...] There seems no other explanation consistent with what we know about nuclear phyics, which, although incomplete, is nonetheless substantial in that we have used this same nuclear energy in various ways.

... And prehistoric giant dragonflies could not have flown (mechanically impossible). Yet, there they are...

Again, subjecting your example to degrading time (rather than constant time) would not only substantially decrease the timeline you mention, but would also effect the suppositions wrt the work involved in making those elements (time has it's portion in the measurement of work)... Since time is 'worth more' the further back you go (and exponentially so the closer you get to the 'beginning' of the graph), perhaps the calculations of the requirement to produce them are in error.

And it would also help to explain why giant dragonflies had wings which would otherwise be useless - Again, the work involved would have 'fuller' time the further back one goes - A second would still be a second, but would allow more within it... more work, as it were.

And it does nothing to 'near time' calculations, making current calculations wrt nuclear physics as accurate as they are (for today), as the measurement of time we use as constant is accurate today.

It isn't something I am welded to - But it does offer a field wherein another consistent explanation is possible - Again, it is the errata that matter. Your example is a good case in point, as are the dragonflies I present. Without the math working consistently for BOTH, the math is not correct, and we are left with suppositions like 'massive earlier existing stars' and 'air so heavy that these dragonflies could fly, but which would cause all life otherwise to cease (to include the dragonfly itself)... Or the wings of these beasts must have only been for mating ritual'.

My point is that the math remains inelegant. Ignoring the math, or extrapolating something on the edge of feasibility to allow and account for the errors is every bit as inelegant. Somewhere, somehow, the math has to work, and work perfectly. Until that is found, no theory can be proven, as no theory can be said to be accurately measured. Therein, as always, is the point where we find science's hubris.

39 posted on 01/10/2013 11:28:48 AM PST by roamer_1 (Globalism is just socialism in a business suit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: winodog

yes ... http://www.shepherdschapel.com/index.htm

I just click “site one” for Windows Media.
The broadcast will eventually repeat itself after so many hours in case you miss something said. I take many notes and each week the broadcast is updated from week to week I believe. Then on weekends they have archaeology studies, and also a Doctor who talks about the health laws and what to eat and such. They have many channels through satellite, but I don’t have cable or satellite TV. I just have my little old rusty roof antenna, yet I was so thankful to find them on the internet ... smiles ... and hopes this helps. I could probably find that list I printed too for what stations they broadcast on somewhere if needed. Let me know.


40 posted on 01/10/2013 1:22:21 PM PST by A child of Yah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: winodog

I checked out that web link and there were a lot of good points raised. But a couple of points didn’t sit well. The first one is that Cains offspring would be associated with the Canaanites, which I don’t think is correct. From what I gathered is that Cains offspring is actually the “Kenites”. There is a better spelling and I think the root word stemmed from “Qayin”. The “Kenites” are mentioned throughout scripture, even after the flood in the Old Testament, and I believe they even infiltrated the priest line, and scribes. They were even called out in the New Testament John 8:44, as being of their father satan. I also think they are the ones mentioned in Revelation chapter 2:9 and 3:9 as being the synagogue of satan. The “Kenites” (sp.?) are the ones I think we are truly up against because of that serpent seed line. They are always nipping at the heels of the children of Yah. Yet I do believe they have a chance to come to the Light also.

Now the other point I read at that link you gave raised the issue of “uncovering your fathers nakedness”. I don’t think it was a homosexual act, but actually Ham did sleep with his mother, Noah’s wife, and that’s when Canaan, Hams offspring became cursed, yet they are different than the offspring of Cain. Leviticus 18:8 and Leviticus 20:11 tell about what it means to “uncover your fathers nakedness”. It’s good to know that so many are keeping up with the research and study on all this. It’s almost like all the puzzle pieces are falling into place to help us understand the mystery of who is who, and why it is the way it is, and it will be just like in the days of Noah when this is all revealed. Remember the passages of Matthew 10:16 and on of what we are up against. Get the armor in Ephesians 6:11-17 on, and take comfort in Isaiah 54:17 and Romans 8:38-39. Wow, so many passages to share, and it feels like such little time ... smiles


41 posted on 01/10/2013 3:28:38 PM PST by A child of Yah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
On the one hand, you claim no "argument with what the Bible actually, literally states" yet in the next sentence you claim that "There is not even a hint or suggestion this earth is young". Well, which is it? Of course the Bible says the Earth is young! It was only within the past 200 years, that ‘scholars’ have challenged this! John Phillips published the first geological time scale in 1841 and claimed the earth to be 96 million years of age. The current secular estimates now run up to 4.5 billion years of age.

The Bible states that God created everything in six days and on the seventh, He rested. God does not need a day of rest; He took a day of rest as an example for mankind to follow, for our own health. Genesis 1 summarizes this history and God says that what He created was good. Genesis 2 then provides some detail about the creation of mankind, through our first parents, Adam and Eve on day 6. Genesis 3 provides detail on the fall and the results of sin including a reference to Jesus’ ultimate triumph over Satan (Gen 3:15). Genesis 5 details the genealogy and ages of Adam’s progeny to Noah and Genesis 11 details the genealogy and ages from Shem to Abram (Abraham). Genesis 15:13 states that God told the Israelites will be in Egypt for 400 years, to the time of Moses and the Exodus. Exodus 12 states a 430 year period in Egypt, representing 215 years of freedom and then 215 of slavery until the Exodus. Other OT books provide dates for those that followed Moses, dates that are verifiable through non-Biblical sources confirming the Biblical timelines.

Many Jewish and early Christian scholars have attempted to calculate the age of the Earth. According to Wilipedia, among the Jewish scholars, the Seder Olam Rabbah, compiled by Jose ben Halafta in 160 AD, dates the creation of the world to 3751 BC while the later Seder Olam Zutta to 4339 BC. The Hebrew Calendar has traditionally, since the 4th century AD by Hillel II, dated the creation to 3761 BC. Early Christians, following the Septuagint, calculated creation at round 5500 BC. (Clement of Alexandria-5592 BC, Julius Africanus-5501 BC, Eusebius-5228 BC, Jerome-5199 BC, Hippolytus of Rome-5500 BC, Theophilus of Antioch-5529 BC, Sulpicius Severus-5469 BC, Isidore of Seville-5336 BC, Panodorus of Alexandria-5493 BC, Maximus the Confessor-5493 BC, George Syncellus-5492 BC and Gregory of Tours-5500 BC) In 203AD, the Venerable Bede dated creation to March 18, 3952 BC. For me, suffice to say that we live on a young earth.

Christianity is not like a buffet table, choosing only what you like and leaving the rest. In Canada, you see this with some mainline Protestant denominations, particularly the United Church of Canada, which was a strong proponent of the social gospel. Unfortunately, socialists and communists have gained control of this denomination and now preach the ‘socialist’ gospel to the point that a former Moderator (leader) of the church doubted the deity of Jesus. Also, the current Moderator is a sodomite, having lived with a same-sex ‘partner’, also a 'preacher' for 30 years! Since sodomite marriage became legal in Canada in 2005, that means that they have then been adulterous also, for the 23 years previous to that. Where is the UCC Asherah pole?

The Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament, were divinely inspired and written by Moses. In Jesus time, Genesis read as it does today. He claimed to have come to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. (Matt 5:17) If any part were incorrect, would He not have corrected it? I must therefore, presume a young earth.

42 posted on 01/10/2013 4:02:20 PM PST by A Formerly Proud Canadian (I once was lost but now I'm found; blind but now I see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Real science always confirms the Bible.

So does just looking around at what we have.


43 posted on 01/10/2013 4:07:56 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian

Hi there... I know we weren’t conversing but I wanted to ask you about Genesis 1:2.

And the earth (776) was (1961) without form (8414), and void (922); and darkness (2822) upon the face (6440) of the deep (8415).

What’s your opinion on that Strongs #1961 and its true meaning?
From what I gathered, it should be -— “became”, and not “was”.

Meaning: And the earth “became” without form, and void.
Meaning: That “eon” or “earth age” became without form and void, as if in a destruction of those things that were already in existence. Not the earths destruction, but all the inhabitants destroyed in that “eon/earth age”. Just curious if you see that possibility???


44 posted on 01/10/2013 5:44:32 PM PST by A child of Yah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian
Genesis 1:1 Declares “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

There is no time stamp give as to when this took place. Then Genesis 1:2 continues “And the earth *became* without form, and void; AND darkness was upon the face of the deep. (deep what?)

“And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the (what?) waters.”

Genesis 1:2 describes what happened to this earth when the serpent, that old dragon, the deceiver etc., rebelled. Scholarly works notwithstanding.

This earth existed before the ‘environmental’ clean-up began as described in Genesis 1:3.

45 posted on 01/10/2013 7:49:18 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: A Formerly Proud Canadian
By the way Christ did in fact reference Genesis 1:2 in Matthew 13:35; Matthew 25:34; Luke 11:50; John 17:24; the translators used the word ‘foundation’, but if any one will check out this word, it's meaning does not mean founding or foundation it means casting down, or overthrow.

Paul knew about this event of Genesis 1:2 as Paul used the specific word katabole in Ephesians 1:4 describing when the ‘saints’ were elected/chosen. Paul again uses it in Hebrews 4:3, Hebrews 9:26 and 11:11. Peter as well in IPeter 1:20 and John in Revelation 13:8, 17:8 and the corresponding verb is used in IICorinthians 4:9 and Hebrews 6:1 and Revelation 12:10 .

What can be dated fairly accurately is how long ago God began the environmental clean-up after God cast down Lucifer from his appointed position of anointed cherub that covereth. Ezekiel 29:12-26 and Isaiah 14:12-31

Lucifer is first called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil... Well up to the point of this title everything God created was said to be good. So the serpent's existence pre-dated the formation/creation of the flesh vessels to house the soul/spirit intellect, as did all souls/spirits. Just as Peter says there are three different heaven/earth ages and we are nearing the end of the second heaven/earth age.

46 posted on 01/10/2013 8:28:19 PM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

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