Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not is so many words, but in Genesis 1, the animals and Adam and Eve were created on the 6th day. Since, in Genesis 2, the Bible says that Eve was created after Adam had named all of the animals, one can only conclude that Adam named all of the animals in less than one day. Do you not agree?
No. It doesn't say Eve was created on the 6th day. Adam was created hermaphrodite. He was a he/she. Adam took care of the garden for many days. It was later, when he was lonely that God took the female reproductive part out of Adam and built the woman around it out of the soil of the ground. This is why, when a man and woman have sex, they are said to be "one" in that both parts of the sex organs are once again joined.
Adam could not have waited millions or billions of years for a woman to evolve from a single celled amoeba to a fish to a lizard to a monkey to a human.
No. It doesn't say Eve was created on the 6th day. Adam was created hermaphrodite. He was a he/she. Adam took care of the garden for many days. It was later, when he was lonely that God took the female reproductive part out of Adam and built the woman around it out of the soil of the ground. This is why, when a man and woman have sex, they are said to be "one" in that both parts of the sex organs are once again joined.
Adam could not have waited millions or billions of years for a woman to evolve from a single celled amoeba to a fish to a lizard to a monkey to a human.
So, in Genesis 1:27 when it reads,
"So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
you're suggesting that the "them" means the two sex organs inside of Adam, and that God spoke to the sex organs specifically and directly telling "them" to be fruitful and increase in number? And that the sex organs should rule over the fish, birds, and every living creature?
OTHER EVIDENCE AGAINST EVOLUTION
Other Evidence Against Evolution
With really tasty quotes from evolutionists against evolution. Read it and weep.
The only thing that makes us want to weep is this collection of rubbish from creationist apologists.
Even if any of it was worth a damn', we are back in the only business of
Not a shred of evidence for creation. Not a shred.
All the evidence is for evolution. Evidence of Macro -evolution, transitional fossils, evidence of the sequence - single cell -fish -reptiles mammals primates -all there -which you recite as though that somehow made it invalid, when it is simply your denial and your incredulity and your refusal to look at the evidence that is the problem.
All you can do is try to pick holes in evolution theory, and using the same old mined quotes, crummy non- science (1) and Jack Chick cartoons.
Eusebius old lad, you and the case for creationism, have had it and your attempts to discuss the Genesis myths are a waste of our time.
(1) you have already had the giraffe -neck argument debunked, but here it is again. Though I doubt you even read it, just posted it and pretended that it reduced us to helpless despair. Only at your intransigence and dishonesty, old mate, only that.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-05-2015 at 06:58 AM..
The only thing that makes us want to weep is this collection of rubbish from creationist apologists.
I doubt you are
Shame that you can't see the so called rubbish as being even moreso in the field of science in regards to the evolution theory which had been and always shall be in the abstract. That is the same thing as saying it is a fairy tale in the works, suffering rewrites and additions and omissions in getting it right without ever getting it right because it was never true in the first place.
The only thing that makes us want to weep is this collection of rubbish from creationist apologists.
Even if any of it was worth a damn' we are bac in the only business of
'not a shred of evidence for creation. Not a shred.
All the evidence is for evolution. Evidence of Macro -evolution, transitional fossils, evidence of the sequence - single cell -fish -reptiles mammals primates -all there -which you recite as though that somehow made it invaid, when it is simply your denial and your incredulity and your refusal to look at the evidence that is the problem.
All you can do is try to pick holes in evolution theory, and using the same old mined quotes, crummy science and Jack Chick cartoons.
Eusebius old lad, you and the case for creationism, have had it and your attempts to discuss the Genesis myths are a waste of our time.
The above is a typical response from an atheist evolutionist who, in spite of not a shred of evidence for evolution, says the creationist has not a shred of evidence for creation.
Notice ARQ said: "All the evidence is for evolution. Evidence of Macro -evolution, transitional fossils, evidence of the sequence - single cell -fish -reptiles mammals primates -all there." Yet he has not brought forth one shred of evidence, actual evidence which would stand up in a court of law, that there is evidence of going from a single cell to a fish to reptiles to mammals to primates. He says the evidence if all there. But it is only in the mind of ARQ. He says it, therefore it must be true. He wants us to believe his bologna based only on his say-so.
I never used any Jack Chick cartoons. Again, this type of "guilt by association" fallacy is all they have to combat creationism.
AREQUIPA, old lad, you and the case for evolution, have had it and your attempts to discuss the evolution myths are a waste of our time.
The link showed scientists who could not find a shred of evidence for evolution. Take it up with them.
"So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
you're suggesting that the "them" means the two sex organs inside of Adam, and that God spoke to the sex organs specifically and directly telling "them" to be fruitful and increase in number? And that the sex organs should rule over the fish, birds, and every living creature?
In a sense, the woman was in the man. He was a "them." "Them" is "dual" in Hebrew. Adam was created a dual person. This is also much like all Christians are "in Christ." Just as the woman, when taken out of Adam is his complement or that which fills him, thus also Christians are the complement of Christ. Christians are called "the body of Christ." We were chosen "IN" Christ before the disruption of the world.
The second chapter of Genesis deals more fully with the creation of Adam, and Eve being taken out of Adam.
No, a rib is not a sex organ. It was an angular organ God took out of Adam and built the woman around it.
Aren't you the same Eusebuis that said...........
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
No. It doesn't say Eve was created on the 6th day. Adam was created hermaphrodite. He was a he/she. Adam took care of the garden for many days. It was later, when he was lonely that God took the female reproductive part out of Adamand built the woman around it out of the soil of the ground. .
Doesn't Genesis 2:21 say.
:While the man slept, the LORD God took out one of the man's ribs and closed up the opening."
No. It doesn't say Eve was created on the 6th day. Adam was created hermaphrodite.
Brother Eusebius,
I know that we prophesy in part and know in part but there is a difference between speculating and saying what God had actually done as per His words.
Proverbs 30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. 6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
It did say that God created man and woman on the sixth day.
Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
I have made the same mistake in recollection that the land animals were created on the fifth day when they were created the sixth day. I had thought only man and woman were created on the sixth day and I was wrong.
Just as you are wrong now.
Proverbs 27:17Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.
It would be unwise to say that Adam was originally created a hermaphrodite. It is something we cannot discount as a speculation, but I highly doubt it, and you should not be presenting it as a matter of fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
He was a he/she. Adam took care of the garden for many days. It was later, when he was lonely that God took the female reproductive part out of Adam and built the woman around it out of the soil of the ground. This is why, when a man and woman have sex, they are said to be "one" in that both parts of the sex organs are once again joined.
It could not have been many days when woman was created the sixth day after Adam was made on the sixth day.
Again, speculation aside, one has to be careful in how we represent Him & the truths in His words.
But I agree with you that evolution theory is a myth running amok in the field of science when the evolution theory always had been favoured in the abstract, suffering rewrites, additions and edittings.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
