Bible Discussion: Genesis

Genesis
Posts: 7

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1   (First | Last)

Ken
2004-09-18 07:49:19 EST
Hello,

I saw a small program (30 minutes) a little while, The professors was
describing in scientific terms Genesis from the bible. That with the red
shifting factor the first day was actually a thousdand years, the seconds 4
thousands etc... He had a very mathematical approach, everything starting
from the big bang.
I lost this short report (I had it on my computer). Can someone tell me the
title of this so I can find it again ??

thank you

ken
email: lerameur101@ yahoo.com




Zaphod
2004-09-18 08:55:28 EST

"Ken" <lera@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3hV2d.28623$0h7.2032652@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Hello,
>
> I saw a small program (30 minutes) a little while, The professors was
> describing in scientific terms Genesis from the bible. That with the red
> shifting factor the first day was actually a thousdand years, the seconds
> 4
> thousands etc... He had a very mathematical approach, everything starting
> from the big bang.
> I lost this short report (I had it on my computer). Can someone tell me
> the
> title of this so I can find it again ??
>
> thank you
>
> ken
> email: lerameur101@ yahoo.com
>
>
>

http://www.geraldschroeder.com/gbb.html
I found it quiet intersting, listened to a 1.15min lecture really enjoyed it



Pastor Dave
2004-09-18 10:18:39 EST
While skydiving off of the Empire State Building on
Sat, 18 Sep 2004 07:49:19 -0400, "Ken"
<*a@sympatico.ca> screamed out:

>Hello,
>
>I saw a small program (30 minutes) a little while, The professors was
>describing in scientific terms Genesis from the bible. That with the red
>shifting factor the first day was actually a thousdand years, the seconds 4
>thousands etc... He had a very mathematical approach, everything starting
>from the big bang.
>I lost this short report (I had it on my computer). Can someone tell me the
>title of this so I can find it again ??

It is not compatible with the Bible. The Bible clearly
states seven literal days. They are trying to make
room for evolution.

Where does God say in Genesis, that it wasn't really
Him, it was evolution?

The fact is, God said in Genesis 1:26, "Let US MAKE".

And in Genesis 2:7, it states clearly that God was
directly involved...

"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,
and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and
man became a living soul." - Genesis 2:7

"God formed man" And God, "breathed into his nostrils
the breath of life".

To believe in evolution, is to disbelieve the Bible.
And while evolutionists put God's world above God's
word, the fact is, that I do not believe that you can
be a Christian if you do not believe in the Creation,
as it is stated in the Bible.

You see, part of the message of salvation, is the
Creation and believing in the Creator. When Paul and
Barnabas preached to those worshipping nature, they
said to them; "...turn from these vanities unto the
living God, which made heaven and earth and the sea and
all things that are therein:" - Acts 14:15 Paul
believed it too.

Any statements about God and evolution being compatible
are built on a faulty premise, which is that one can
believe in Christ and in evolution. Scripturally, that
isn't possible. And when evolutionists say that it is,
they are trying to twist the first chapter of Genesis
to cover whatever they want to believe about Him, so
long as they believe He existed and died on the cross,
etc.. But that's the wrong question and frankly,
evolutionists are great at getting people to ask the
wrong questions. The real question is, What does it
mean to believe in Jesus Christ?". Believing in Jesus
Christ also means believing in what He said AND what
the Bible (the WHOLE Bible) says about Him.

So what does it say about Christ? After all, who is
He? Well, the Bible says He's the Creator.

John 1:1-3

1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God.
2) The same was in the beginning with God.
3) All things were made by him; and without him was not
any thing made that was made.
14) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,
(and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only
begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Now if He's the Creator, then He knows how it happened,
don't ya think? So the question then becomes, what did
Jesus consider "the beginning"?

In Matthew 19, Jesus refers to Adam and Eve as the
beginning of humankind. Theistic evolutionists will
try to tell me that I'm misreading the Bible and I'm
just inserting my interpretation. Talk about
misreading the Bible! Where does Jesus say, "Once man
and ape split off from a common ancestor and finally
developed into modern humans, then Adam and Eve..." ???
You see, it is evolutionists who are misreading the
Bible and twisting it. I'm simply reading it as it's
written.

Jesus also told us that Moses was speaking about Him.
And note what He said...

John 5:45-47

45) Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father:
there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye
trust.
46) For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed
me: for he wrote of me.
47) But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye
believe my words?

Now notice the last verse. If we don't believe what
Moses wrote about Him, then how can we believe what He
says? That's a very powerful statement.

So what did Moses write of Him? Well, a number of
things. Right now, we're going to focus on the
relevant passages. But let's first understand, that it
was Christ who was dealing with Moses. It was Christ
who spoke to Moses. It was Christ who followed them
out there...

1 Corinthians 10:1-4

1) Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be
ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the
cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2) And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in
the sea;
3) And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
4) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they
drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and
that Rock was Christ.


And what did Christ say about the Creation to Moses?

Exodus 20:8-11

8) Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9) Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10) But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy
God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy
son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy
maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is
within thy gates:
11) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the
sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh
day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and
hallowed it.

He said "six days". Now those who state that Jesus is
their Saviour either believe Him, or they don't,
thereby denying Him, period. Anything else they say,
is adding to the Bible, since the Bible clearly says,
"six days". Evolutionists can speculate about those
"six days" all they want to, but that's all they have,
is speculation. When they try to make it into millions
of years, they have a big problem. They know this and
therefore ignore what the text actually says. For
example, speaking of this seven day period (six days
and the Sabbath) and keeping the statement about this
six days in the context in which it is quoted from, did
God command man to work six millions years and rest for
one million years? No. It's clear that He is talking
about six literal days of Creation, when the passage is
taken in context. In order to make it anything other
than six literal days, you have to rip it out of its
context of the Sabbath day rest.

The fact is that "In the beginning, God created"...

And He did it in six days and said He did it in six
days (Exodus 20:11). Jesus believed that and
referenced it, in Matthew 19:3-8 and in other places.

Going back to Genesis, it is important to note
something about the word usage there in the original
language (Hebrew). The original Hebrew word for "day"
("yom"), is never used to mean anything but a literal
day in the Bible, when a numerical adjective is present
("second, third, etc.). Are we to believe that this is
somehow the one and only exception and that God would
start out His word with a deception?

We get to Heaven by Him telling us a complete
fabrication and then claiming that He didn't create
Adam and Eve the way He said He did and then claim that
Jesus was a made over monkey, who is supposed to be our
Saviour, yet couldn't be, because there would be no
original sin if that were true? I don't think so. God
would not punish man for doing what animals would do,
in the evolution scenario. To believe what
evolutionists do, which is that God used evolution and
then Adam was the first man who had a consciousness of
God, is saying that God created evolution, which
involves killing etc. and then when Adam had a
consciousness of God, he realized that killing was
wrong and then he sinned and God cast him out of the
Garden of Eden.

There are two problems with this scenario...

1) The Garden of Eden wouldn't have existed, which
means that it would be an allegory. Of course, if the
Creation is an allegory and the Garden of Eden was an
allegory, then we have no reason to believe that Adam
actually existed. If that's the case, then we can't
believe the lineage of his family, which blows apart
the real existence of many people after that and means
that the lineage given for Jesus is false and
therefore, we need to question whether or not He was in
the line of kings and whether or not He even existed.
In fact, it means that the whole Bible could be nothing
more than an allegory and we shouldn't take any of it
literally.

2) Man and animals did not eat meat before the Flood.
The Bible tells us so. This means that evolution could
not have been taking place, since evolution would
require this. But hey, let's just call the story of
Noah an allegory too. That way, we don't have to deal
with the actual text, we can just make up our own
history and claim the Bible and the history we want to
believe in, don't conflict.

Now people will try to tell me that God used language
that "ignorant, primitive man could understand".
That's ridiculous! First off, man was a lot smarter
then, than we give him credit for. Language, for
example, gets much more complex, the farther we go back
and it has taken scholars decades to even begin to
decipher some of them. The Egyptians had batteries
thousands of years ago, etc.. Secondly, what is so
hard to understand about God saying... "First there
were animals, including apes and God brought man forth
from these apes". No, it isn't difficult at all to
tell man in that time, that we came from apes.
Evolutionists may claim that man wouldn't understand
the mechanisms involved. Well, even if everything was
created in six days, as I contend, man still wouldn't
understand the mechanisms involved. In fact, we still
wouldn't, so what's the difference? No, that is a
misleading statement.

The Bible also makes it clear that no one died before
Adam.

"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all
be made alive." - 1 Corinthians 15:22

If that isn't true and man existed before Adam, then
the whole concept of Jesus as our Saviour is
ridiculous, since God would be holding everyone since
Adam responsible for their sin and no one before that.
And what about the other humans alive at the time, if
Adam was not the first man? And why would we need a
Saviour, if evolution is true? Man is an animal and is
simply acting as God made Him to act. Like an animal.
If there is no original sin from one man, then where is
the need for a Saviour? Yet the Bible makes it clear
that we do need a Saviour and that Jesus is, "the last
Adam".

"And so it is written, The first man Adam was made
a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening
spirit." - 1 Corinthians 15:45

As atheist Richard Bozarth said... "Evolution destroys
utterly and finally the very reason Jesus' earthly life
was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve
and the original sin and in the rubble, you will find
the sorry remains of the Son of God. If Jesus was not
the Redeemer... and this is what evolution means, then
Christianity is nothing."

I think he summed it up pretty well. Now if only folks
who state they are Christians and believe in evolution,
were honest with themselves. They claim that man came
from ape, yet the Bible tells us that Jesus was "the
last Adam", not, "the last ape".

What evolutionists believe cannot possibly be
reconciled with Scripture and it makes Jesus a useless,
made over monkey, without the ability to be a
sacrifice.

The Bible tells us that death came by sin and sin came
by Adam...

"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:" - Romans 5:12

The Bible tells us that Jesus believed in Adam and Eve
and after all, He should know, He was there.

"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read,
that he which made them at the beginning made them
male and female," - Matthew 19:4

And now, notice the next verse. While evolutionists
you try to put millions of years into the Creation
(which Genesis 1 & 2 doesn't support), what did Jesus
say about it?

"But from the beginning of the creation God made them
male and female." - Mark 10:6

Not just "the beginning", as if it were millions of
years ago, but rather, the beginning OF THE CREATION.
And where is that account found? In Genesis. Jesus
knew this, of course, as did those who were listening
to Him. They read the Scriptures and knew what they
said. Here, Jesus is confirming the absolute truth of
the Creation account, found in Genesis. Adam and Eve
were there, right from go, just like all other life,
separated only by a few days. And Jesus tells us that
it happened that way. Remember, in Mat 19:4, He
said... "Have ye not READ...". Now, is He talking
about Darwin's book here? No. As I said, He is
confirming the Genesis account.

So what conclusions can logically be drawn from this?
Well, it seems to leave us with three options:

1) Jesus was right and knew what He was talking about,
since He was there and it was done through Him. That
is the logical conclusion to draw from the text of the
Bible itself.

2) Jesus believed in the Creation, as described in
Genesis, but He just didn't know modern science, which
of course, means that He couldn't have been there at
the Creation and the Bible is lying about that. This
would disqualify Him as our Saviour, since our Saviour
has to be free from sin and error and therefore,
there's no point in an evolutionist saying that they
believe in Him as such.

3) Jesus was intentionally lying about who He was, or
intentionally misleading the people, even though He
knew evolution was reality, which of course,
disqualifies Him as Saviour and means that the concept
of original sin is a lie, which, once again, means that
God lied about it in His written word to mankind. And
no, the argument about them not being able to
understand it, is not a valid argument, as I pointed
out and even if He did say something like that in the
New Testament text, it would still mean that He lied to
Moses in Genesis. How can a liar be our Saviour?

You see, no matter what evolutionists do, they cannot
escape these facts. Either Jesus was right, or He was
wrong, or He was lying. One of those three. If it's
the first, then theistic evolutionists are liars, when
they claim to believe in evolution and call Jesus their
Lord and Saviour. It simply cannot be. They may not
have seen that and if it was unintentional on their
part, then so be it. But now they know, if they read
this message. As the Lord Jesus Christ said...

"If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not
had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin."
- John 15:22

And there is no more excuse for it. Now it is sin to
them, because they know better.

They can do what they want, but their way is the way
that, "misreads the Bible" and it is they who must
resolve the problems that their belief brings to the
table. As for me, I have a hard time believing anyone
is saved, who says that they believe in Jesus as their
Lord and Saviour and evolution, when in order to do so,
they must call Jesus a liar, or ignorant and try to
convince me that it's okay to say that they believe the
end and yet, they reject the beginning. As I said,
Genesis 1 & 2 do not allow for evolution. So my advice
is to pick a side, because it is impossible to pick
both. Not with any integrity. They are incompatible.
I hope all pick the side of God.

The funny part is, that science actually lines up with
the Bible. Man started in Africa, for example. And
instead of questioning how long ago that happened, they
choose to accept what unbelievers say and question the
Bible's time line. They may say they're not doing
that, but they are.

So tell me, where does the Bible say that man evolved
from ape? Theistic evolutionists can say that it isn't
a scientific book, but that doesn't solve any of the
problems. They still have the problems I mentioned
above and the fact is, that the Bible is accurate when
it touches on matters of science. The fact is, that
they consider what they believe to be true and yet, you
don't have any evidence for it. And then they try to
point your finger at others. That's hypocritical. The
fact is, they call their belief science and that binds
them to show scientific evidence.

They haven't even made a valid point.

Theistic evolutionists are out to please men,
rather than God. They claim to believe in a
virgin birth, people rising from the dead, water
turned into wine and yet, they don't believe that
God created the heaven and the earth in six literal
days, thereby making hypocrites of themselves. Why?
Because man says it isn't so and they would rather
try to please men, instead of choosing to believe
God and stand up for Him. Preachers who claim
theistic evolution are the biggest hypocrites of all
and are in the most danger. Why? Read Isaiah 9:16;
Jeremiah 23:1, 50:6. What do YOU stand for?
"...choose this day whom you will serve. ...as for
me and my house, we will serve the Lord." - Jos 24:15

To sum it up, if Genesis is not true, then lots of
things lived and died before Adam and Eve supposedly
lived and there is no original sin. No original sin
means no need for Jesus. No need for Jesus means that
He isn't who He said He is. Even in the letters of the
New Testament, we are told that death came by the sin
of one man (Romans 5:12) and that this one man was Adam
(1 Corinthians 15:22) and that Jesus is the last Adam
(1 Corinthians 15:45). If evolution, as they believe
it is true, then the entire Bible is false. It is not
a matter of just the first few chapters of Genesis, but
all of the Bible. The Christian faith relies also on
the Genesis account being literal and accurate.

The Bible says that death came by sin and sin came
by Adam (Rom 5:12; 1 Cor 15:21-22).

Evolution says lots of things lived and died before
Adam and Eve got here and therefore attempts to rule
out what the Bible says.

One or the other is right, but they can't both
be right.



Pastor Dave Raymond

"Were they ashamed when they made an abomination?
They were not at all ashamed, nor did they know
to blush. So they shall fall among those who fall.
At the time I visit them, they shall be cast down,
says Jehovah." - Jeremiah 6:15

"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17

/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\


"Species that were once thought to have turned into
others have been found to overlap in time with these
alleged descendants. In fact, the fossil record does
not convincingly document a single transition from one
species to another." (Stanley, S.M., The New
Evolutionary Timetable: Fossils, Genes, and the Origin
of Species, 1981, p. 95)



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

P.T.
2004-09-18 17:36:57 EST
Hi Ken,

You might be interested in a book called Genesis and the Big Bang Theory.

Patty

"Ken" <lera@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3hV2d.28623$0h7.2032652@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Hello,
>
> I saw a small program (30 minutes) a little while, The professors was
> describing in scientific terms Genesis from the bible. That with the red
> shifting factor the first day was actually a thousdand years, the seconds
4
> thousands etc... He had a very mathematical approach, everything starting
> from the big bang.
> I lost this short report (I had it on my computer). Can someone tell me
the
> title of this so I can find it again ??
>
> thank you
>
> ken
> email: lerameur101@ yahoo.com
>
>
>



Libertarius
2004-09-18 21:01:36 EST


Pastor Dave wrote:

> While skydiving off of the Empire State Building on
> Sat, 18 Sep 2004 07:49:19 -0400, "Ken"
> <lera@sympatico.ca> screamed out:
>
> >Hello,
> >
> >I saw a small program (30 minutes) a little while, The professors was
> >describing in scientific terms Genesis from the bible. That with the red
> >shifting factor the first day was actually a thousdand years, the seconds 4
> >thousands etc... He had a very mathematical approach, everything starting
> >from the big bang.
> >I lost this short report (I had it on my computer). Can someone tell me the
> >title of this so I can find it again ??
>
> It is not compatible with the Bible. The Bible clearly
> states seven literal days. They are trying to make
> room for evolution.
>
> Where does God say in Genesis, that it wasn't really
> Him, it was evolution?

===>Where does "God" say it WAS "him"???
The ELOHIM of Gen. 1 and YHWH ELOHIM of Gen. 2 ff.
are characters that say a lot of things, but I have never
seen them say that "it was really him".
Can you give us a quote? -- L.


John D Newport
2004-09-18 23:49:02 EST
This is not the one you are talking about but you may find it interesting
and maybe even more believable.
If you go to www.levitt.tv and find the link "Genesis One - A Physicist
looks at Creation", click on it, it will take you to
http://www.levitt.tv/media/links/ZLV-GenesisOne.ram .

"Ken" <lera@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3hV2d.28623$0h7.2032652@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Hello,
>
> I saw a small program (30 minutes) a little while, The professors was
> describing in scientific terms Genesis from the bible. That with the red
> shifting factor the first day was actually a thousdand years, the seconds
4
> thousands etc... He had a very mathematical approach, everything starting
> from the big bang.
> I lost this short report (I had it on my computer). Can someone tell me
the
> title of this so I can find it again ??
>
> thank you
>
> ken
> email: lerameur101@ yahoo.com
>
>
>



Ken
2004-09-19 12:18:25 EST
Yes , Thank you , This was the one I was talking about.
and thanks all of you , and I will read the book too Genesis and the Big
Bang Theory, I checked my librairy and they gave it .

ken


"John D Newport" <johndnewport@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Ok73d.4568$464.3366@trnddc01...
> This is not the one you are talking about but you may find it interesting
> and maybe even more believable.
> If you go to www.levitt.tv and find the link "Genesis One - A Physicist
> looks at Creation", click on it, it will take you to
> http://www.levitt.tv/media/links/ZLV-GenesisOne.ram .
>
> "Ken" <lera@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:3hV2d.28623$0h7.2032652@news20.bellglobal.com...
> > Hello,
> >
> > I saw a small program (30 minutes) a little while, The professors was
> > describing in scientific terms Genesis from the bible. That with the red
> > shifting factor the first day was actually a thousdand years, the
seconds
> 4
> > thousands etc... He had a very mathematical approach, everything
starting
> > from the big bang.
> > I lost this short report (I had it on my computer). Can someone tell me
> the
> > title of this so I can find it again ??
> >
> > thank you
> >
> > ken
> > email: lerameur101@ yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>



Page: 1   (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron