spiritman

Stealth friends MG Stealth friends

quote D-9 From a literary perspective, I don't see how Adam and Eve physically growing up would add anything to our knowledge or understanding; it would be unnecessary for that process to take place. This is a somewhat hard question for me because frankly, I don't think Adam and Eve ever existed. I just don't see the first few chapters of Genesis as literal history or scientifically inclined. So the only reason I can think of is that talking about Adam and Eve growing up, or starting off as infants, doesn't add and/or is unnecessary to get across the spiritual truths needed. Spiritman's response: Thank you for this response: D-9 If Adam and eve did not exist then you would have to wipe out the fact that there is sin. Because According to scripture Genesis 3:1-24, and Romans 5:12-14; The disobedience of Adam is why there is sin. Not to mention none of us would exist because we are all descendent's of Adam. Luke 3:23-38 talks about Adam and Eve's descendent's, including Jesus. Which to name a few were Noah, Joseph, Abraham, So we would need to wipe out those chapters of the Bible as well. And if there is no sin, then we better wipe out the chapters about Jesus coming to earth to save us from our sins, because Adam didn't exist to sin in the first place. And If Jesus didn't come to earth to save us from our sins, then we would have to call all those scripture that say He came to save us from our sins a lie. check out the following scripture: Gen 3:1-24 (NASB) Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" 2 The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.' " 4 The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die! 5 "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." 6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings. 8 They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 Then the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" 10 He said, "I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself." 11 And He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" 12 The man said, "The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate." 13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" And the woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." 14 The Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life; 15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." 16 To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you." 17 Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. 18 "Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field; 19 By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return." 20 Now the man called his wife's name Eve , because she was the mother of all the living. 21 The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them. 22 Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"— 23 therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. 24 So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life. Gen 3:1-24 (NASB) Romans 5:12-14 reads: 12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. Note Read all of Romans Chapter 5 Luke 3:23-38 (NASB) 23 When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli , 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, 25 the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Hesli , the son of Naggai, 26 the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josech, the son of Joda, 27 the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel , the son of Neri, 28 the son of Melchi, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, 29 the son of Joshua , the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, 30 the son of Simeon, the son of Judah , the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, 31 the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, 32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Salmon , the son of Nahshon , 33 the son of Amminadab, the son of Admin, the son of Ram , the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, 34 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu , the son of Peleg, the son of Heber , the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. You see to say that Adam and Eve didn't exist you might as well throw the whole Bible out.

From a literary perspective, I don't see how Adam and Eve physically growing up would add anything to our knowledge or understanding; it would be unnecessary for that process to take place. This is a somewhat hard question for me because frankly, I don't think Adam and Eve ever existed. I just don't see the first few chapters of Genesis as literal history or scientifically inclined. So the only reason I can think of is that talking about Adam and Eve growing up, or starting off as infants, doesn't add and/or is unnecessary to get across the spiritual truths needed. D9, thanks for your reply, I guess my comment was to bring about the point, that there is a lot of deception in nature. Camophlage is used in nature to defend against preditors, for example the octopus when under threat of attack, will camophlage himself to appear to be part of the background. There are also certain lizzards and other animals that camophlage themselves in the same manner. This is indeed a form of deception, however perhaps and I say IF God designed the Universe to appear older than what it is then perhaps it is not His intent to decive us but simply the way He designed it. If we look closer at the scripture that talks about God creating the stars which reads: 14 Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. 16 God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17 God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19 There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day Gen 1:14-19 (NASB) From what what I'm reading here in Genesis Chapter 1:14-19 God created the stars in one day, and that light was shining on the earth doing their job during that fourth day, not millions of years. When is the first time we see Stars mentioned in the Bible, where a descendant is actually looking at the light of the stars? Gen 15:2-6 And Abram said, Lord GOD, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus? 3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir. 4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir. 5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. 6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness So now all we have to do if to figure out the time frame this occured. Luke 3:24-38 talks about the geneologies of everyone from Adam to Christ, there is some debate about how long a generation is however most say about 40 years. my point is that Genesis chapter 15:2-6 God instructs Abraham to look at the stars, and there are not millions of years between the time of Adam and Abraham. Ok you do not believe in Adam and Eve, what do you believe in?

Hi D-9, Thanks for your reply, I agree with you the 6 days of work model is a good example of further proof, that the six days in Genesis are a literal 24 hour period. There is a joke I often quote to the Gap theorists when they tell me that each day represents long periods of time, in fact I use the 6 day work week. I usually ask them, what did the israelites do , work 6,000 years and take 1,000 off for a day of rest?

Your welcome. Yes, science is a passion of mine, and someday I hope to have a scientific career. The idea of Light somehow skipping over the distance is an interesting one that many people come across, however I don't see it as a real possibility. For one, and I think this speaks to a lot of Christians, is why the deception from God? God is supposed to be all about truth, not deception. Why create a vast universe with all the appearance of it being old when it simply isn't? Remember, this isn't a few thousand years off, rather we are talking orders of magnitude that I think are somewhat hard to grasp. Young Earth Creationism proposes that the universe is really more than 2 million times younger than what modern science says or what we can see from galaxies! Why didn't God just create the universe as literally understood by the ancient Hebrews, which had the Earth as the center and a firmament up in the sky instead of this massive deception? So for many, including me, such a major deception just doesn't make sense theologically. From more of a science angle, the heavens we see aren't static. We see stars explode, colliding, planets orbiting some, and others spinning very rapidly. We even see evidence of galaxies colliding with each other now and in the past. So it isn't just points of light we see, but real events taking (and have token) place. Also, starlight and galaxy-light isn't just light without any information; scientists can determine its wavelength, which for many objects it's proportional to distance because as the light travels it increases in wavelength due to the expansion of the universe. This is scientific evidence that light really does make the full journey. So God not only has to somehow make the light skip the distance, but also do it while making sure it retains properties as if it did make the journey. While I wouldn't say God can't do all this, I just don't see God doing it as such would be against His nature of being full of truth and giving us the ability/intelligence to understand His creation in a systematic way. May Christ be your shalom, D-9 Your point is interesting. So I would like your opinion on something, Why would God create Adam and Eve as full Adults, instead of making them go through the entire process of being cells, then infants, childhood teenager then adult hood? Is it possible, that God created the Universe in the same way, I mean at first making everything instantly appear as if it always was in it's full mature form, then from that point on Like Adam and Eve, conception, then infant, teenage, adult hood. I mean after all isn't that what scientists see in the stars now, stars that are born, they have a cycle, then die? Sounds like the Human life cycle doesn't it? The first star had to come from somewhere right?

Sure. First off, I don't think Genesis makes any scientific claims. The main purpose of the creation story is to establish that God is the creator and sustainer of all; we do not need to make sacrifices or worship any other god or spirit to make the Sun rise, or make it rain to grow crops etc. and the Creator proclaims that the creation is "good". In addition, we can glean off many moral laws (Noahide Laws) from the creation story. As to the days themselves, while the word used, "yom", is literally translated as an 'indeterminate period of time'. I think the context and usage makes it clear that it is talking about six days. Not six long periods of time as proposed by the gap-theory. However, I don't believe God was trying to give us a history or science book, so the events and days mentioned are not meant to be parallel to the actual events of Earth's history. And of course, the number of days are significant as it is the basis for the Sabbath. Hello D-9 Thanks for your response, sorry it has been a while, I have started my work week, and my replies may be a bit spotty. My position on the 6 days in Genesis, and why I believe this to be true is as follows. Just like in the English laugage, the Hebrew has words in it, that can be the same word but have a different meaning according to the context of the sentence for example: The word Run; My wife has a run in her stockings. Or Lets put on our jogging shoes and go for a run. Obviously we wouldn't use the meaning of the tear in a stocking when refering to a jog, or we wouldn't use a jog when refering to the tear in a stocking. Let's take for example Genesis 1:5 it reads; God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.Gen 1:5 (NASB) A lot of people get hooked up on the word Yom, which is fine, Yom can mean either a long period of time or it can mean a literal 24 hour period just like you pointed out. However in all of the Genesis context next to the hebrew word yom we have a number day one, day two day three ect ect, and also the terms evening and morning are used. The words for Evening and morning in the hebrew are : Evening: ‏עֶרֶב—Transliteration: ʿereb—This word is from another word in the Hebrew : ‏עָרַב—Transliteration: ʿārab: which means : to grow dusky at sundown :- be darkened, (toward) evening. The word Morning in the Hebrew is the word: בֹּקֶר—the Transliteration is : bōqer—properly dawn (as the break of day); generally morning :- (+) day, early, morning, morrow. BTW for anyone who is new at this the Transliteration just means that the Hebrew word is translated into english. So we have to look at the evidence, and we see that yom has two different possible meanings in the book of Genesis, However the context around the word Yom and the fact that Yom is surrounded by a number and the terms Evening and Morning in the English or ereb, and boqer in the transliteration means that there is no possible logic to coming up with the long period of time theory. So as you pointed out when the defintion in Hebrew is foggy because of the fact that there are more then one definition just look to the context of the words around the word.

It is much easier to explain and comprehend how we can know the universe is at least 13 billion years old with light received from the most distant quasars, than to explain and comprehend any other method I think. And outside of CMB and rate of expansion, I am unaware of anything else that pushes the age of the universe back further than these distant quasars (with the possible exception of seeing galaxies' light being 'warped' via gravitational lensing by the quasars that we see that are even further out than them! However I don't know anything else about these galaxies, and it is something that has just recently been discovered). I think that is a legitimate concern for people who aren't well informed on the topic. While I will concede that we can't know for certain that somewhere light isn't being transported faster than "c", any of this phenomena will have a very minute effect if it in fact exists. While we haven't physically explored the vastness of space, we can certainly observe it (and therefore know what is out there for the purpose of this discussion). It is a fact that light in a vacuum (this would include most of space) moves at a constant speed "c". The vast majority of normal matter (things made out of atoms) in the universe hydrogen with the second being helium, and this composes most of the 'space dust'. When light goes through these dust clouds it will slow down light through atomic excitation and decitation, however this slowness is negligible when talking about the age of the universe (if anything it will increase the lower limit of age). Other elements out there would be Carbon, Nitrogen, Beryllium etc, which too will only slow down light increasing the lower limit (in fact more so than hydrogen and helium through refraction). So even if this phenomena exists, it is not prevalent enough to change the current understanding of light traveling through over 99% of space. Also, in the last link you put up it talked about light being made to go 300 times faster than normal (I am skeptical of the claim). Even if we take the most distant quasars, and divide it by 300 (13 billion divided by 300) we still get over 43 million years, and that's assuming this phenomena was present throughout the entirety of the light's trip. There really is no way around it, through empirical observation the universe is quite old. To turn 13 billion years into 10 thousand years requires that light travels over a million times it's normal speed in a vacuum (the highest speed it can obtain under normal circumstances) on average. While there are other methods, I still think it is a reliable source for a lower limit. We would still have to show how such conditions are met in space in order for it to become a legitimate scientific proposition. As of now, no such proposition is being worked up as far as I know. Edit: P.S. There is this one video on youtube that shows that by increasing the intrinsic speed of light in the past, it doesn't work in the young Earth/universe favor. The video is by "shanedk"; just type in "creationist and the speed of light" and it should pop up as a tribute to cdk007. Something to consider. Thank you for that information, I will certainly ponder it. By reading your posts I believe you to be of a scientific mind set. I'd like to put forth another possiblity for you to ponder. In the book of Genesis, It reads where God made Adam and Eve fully Adult, skipping the adolesence phase when He created them, In your opinion is it possible that perhaps when God created the Universe, He created the LIght from these Galxaies, Stars, ect ect, to skip all those long distances and be instantly transported to the earth.?

I have always questioned the possible link between dinosaurs and the fabled 'dragons'. These stories appear in many cultures and are very similar. Who's to say that ALL dinosaurs went extinct 65,000,000 years ago? Only God knows for sure. Hi MG, I plan on doing some research on the stories of men or women in centuries past to see if any details of the dragons in the stories are simluar to that of Dinosaurs. Here is an interesting link of Saint George of the Roman catholic church who is said to have slain a dragon, to save a town and a princess. http://en.wikipedia....ki/Saint_George

Hi D-9, Thank you for your response, Just curious can you summerize how you interpet the six days in Genesis?

The first link talks about how the speed of light is slowing down over time. This is simply not true the way they describe it. The reason for such differences is quite simply bad technology. But instead of getting boggled down into that, we can stick with pure science when talking about the speed of light changing over time. We can actually measure the speed of light in the past by observing the spectral lines of distant quasars and comparing them with near stellar objects! The results are that over the past 13 billion years, the speed of light, "c", has changed less than 1%! Not this exponential decay of alarming rates as pushed by the first link. The second and third links talk about light being slowed down and even stopping! This is true, but when talking about the age of the universe derived from light, all it can do is push the age of the universe back making it older, not younger. The last link is the most interesting, although I would have preferred to read what a real scientific journal, like Nature, has to say on this (which you can find if you take the time to look). However, to say that these experiments show that the universe is young, one must show how space, which is mostly made up of nothing and hydrogen gas (which would slow light down, not speed it up), actually increases the speed of light. There is a reason why no serious scientist has proposed that the speed of light in space is able to speed up enough to change our ideas about the age of the universe to peer-reviewed publications. Such propositions literally make no sense with the evidence. Well, scientists don't actually measure the true age of the universe through light, just a lower limit to the age. We actually get the age of the universe from measurements from the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (CMB). Still, we can place a ton of lower limits from a myriad of sources, such as measuring the temperature of white dwarfs and observing content of globular clusters, both of which are completely independent of the speed of light, and both put the age of the universe into the billions of years old category. Interesting about measuring the age of the Universe through the use of CMB's and temperature measurements, I haven't heard this before, most chatters I've come in contact with use the speed of light measurement. I"d like to thank you for that input, this is something new to me that I will look into. However I'd like to point out, that a very small fraction of our Universe has been explored. And therefore for a scientist to say for certain, that between Earth and stars that are Billions of light years away , that there is absolutely no phenomena, that would speed light up has me raising my eye brow a bit. We simply don't know enough about what's out there to boldy make that statement. Therefore in my humble opinion since the speed of light can be altered by outside forces, it would no longer be prudent to use it as a measuring stick for the age of the Universe.

I listened to some of this guys presentation, and found it to be similar to most thiestic Evolutionists, in the fact that there is a lot of assumptions based on what they believe happened. For example He said " when all the creatures including the dionsaurs came out of the ark God told them to multiply" So he goes on to make the point that if the dinosaurs came out of the ark, then why are they extinct?. Perhaps the question here should be " When did they go extinct". For this we would have to look for any Biblical discription of a dinosaur after the Noah's flood, which took place after Genesis chapter 6. In the book of Job; 40:15 Job describes a land creature that fits the discription of a dinosaur. 15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. 16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. 17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. 18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. 19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. 20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. 21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. 22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. 23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. 24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares. Job 40:15-24 (KJV) Again in Job chapter 41 a creature is discribed that is similar to a dinosaur: leviathan Job 41:1 (KJV) Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down? 2 Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn? 3 Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee? 4 Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever? 5 Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens? 6 Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants? 7 Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears? 8 Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more. 9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him? 10 None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me? Job 41:1-10 (KJV) it is also possible that the legends of dragons is a reference to dinosuars. Indeed being instructed by someone who doesn't know the Bible all the way through is like no instruction at all.

http://www.reasons.o...s-statement.pdf Hal, Here is one of the problems with using the speed of light to determine the age of the Universe. It has been proven in scientific experiments, that light can be be sped up, slowed down, and even stopped, when light passes through certain gases and other phenoma. check out these articles. http://www.wnd.com/n...RTICLE_ID=39733 http://www.news.harv...2.18/light.html http://www.space.com...top_010119.html http://partners.nyti...sics-light.html The time when the speed of light is used to measure the age of the Universe should have come to an end. it no longer is viable.

Keith Green, I have one of his Albums. I love his music.

Hi Nebs, I have often struggled with that same question; " what is God's plan for my life?". For me it seems that God just wants me to light up the dingy little corner that I'm in with His love. Believe me the world is so full of darkness, and people around me that need to hear the truth of His love. While I'm witnessing about Jesus, He usually leaves me where I'm at until I'm finished with whom ever He wants me to talk to, then I'm off in another direction. I've stop trying to figure it out and just roll with the flow. Oh and I always look for the silver lining in everything, you say you are one year from being 40, well guess what be thankful, I'm a couple of years away from 50, but I'm thankful, I'm still breathing, and kicking, LOL. God Bless you Bob

thanks for the snaps nebs nice

I've been using the worthy tool bar lately. Thanks for the info nebs I'll have to check it out sometime

Not very conciliatory and I don't think very accurate either. Clearly, if they believe in prayer, God, Jesus, and the power of salvation through Christ, then it can hardly be said they are denying God. One of the other members had a link to a talk given by Dennis Venema. If you Google Human Genomics: Vestiges of Eden it should pop-up at the top of the page. I just watched it and thought it the most concise and convincing explanation of evolution I have ever encountered. The other point is Venem is a self-described Evangelical Christian. He is also a PhD in genetics. Interestingly, he was an evolution-denier even after acquiring his doctorate. That changed after he read a scientific paper comparing the human and chimp genomes. The paper persuaded him. Aside from now accepting evolution, his faith is strong. So on one Hand you say you believe in God, but since He plainly says in His word, that man was made from the dust of the earth, and you say that man came from another creature, then you are in fact calling God a liar. How can you believe in someone yet not believe what they say?

Where am I? Canada. However, I found a map at the following link: http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2007/04/0...ught-in-the-us/ It shows in which states "the teaching of evolution is unsatisfactory, useless or absent" within the US. There are about 16 states named. I may be off by one. You may want to check for yourself. The map would indicate that your presumption that evolution is taught in every state is incorrect. The greater point is that in many states, according to the map, evolution is poorly taught. I should speak to some teachers where I live. Maybe I am mistaken, but I don't thinks so. I just asked my kids again, to be certain. Neither took evolution in science. The youngest told me he was taught the Creation story in world history class, in highschool. The teacher then explained she had to mention evolution as well, but stressed that it was up to the students to make up their own minds about which they wanted to believe. My oldest said she was also taught the Creation story in history. Someone raised the question of evolution and the teacher shut down the discussion. Hi Marsh, I live in one of the states mentioned on your map; Ohio to be the exact, I began school in 1968 and I can say with all certainity that Evolution was required, and creation was a no no. You might wish to check your sources, sometimes sources can be slanted one way or another to prove the presenting sides point, for example, check to see, who presented this map, is it an Evolutionary group?

I agree she needs prayer

Well I guess I need to contact that rich uncle

Ok I believe it means this: You want to do A. But God wants you to do B. So you do B.

I guess when you cross the street better do it with your mouth open LOL. Hope the sensor comes out during meals

Lurker, First off the Book of Genesis is known to be written by Moses along with the other 4 torah books. Second; If you believe in an O.E (Old Earth Creation), then how do account for those passages that count down the lineages examples: Luke 3:23-38; listed here the last man listed is Adam. Genesis Chapter 5:1-32 the List starts with the first man Adam. Also see Genesis chapter 11 for more Chronolgies. Also another point: If Adam decended from another creature; then the account of Genesis chapter 2&3 are called into question. Not to mention if other life forms existed and died before Adam was even formed(like most evolutionist) claim, then there was death before sin. This would call into question Romans 5 specifically Romans 5:14, which states without error, that death came because of the sin of Adam. Continuing to verse 15 in Romans 5; we see that Jesus Christ came to pay the price of Adam's transgression. so if you take out these factors. then there would be no reason to believe any of the Bible. I can go on and on about Christ connection through out the Bible in the New as well as the old testament, and the fact that He (Christ) came to pay for Adam's Transgression. Indeed if we were to accept the evolutionary view; then : 1. Adam's sin did not cause death, 2. Jesus did not come to pay the penalty for Adam's trangression. 3. And If Jesus did not come to pay for Adam's transgression, then we are indeed as Christians Lost, and all of our belief is nothing more than fables. This is the very reason why true Christians, cannot and will not accept the theory of Evolution.

amen brother parker

Indeed, All Christians will have to go through Trials and Tribulations on this earth, Jesus promised this; however Christians will not have to go through the GREAT TRIBULATION!! this is a period of time, unlike any, this is the difference. Your point is a Generalization of trials and Tribulations vs a period of Time that God has appointed the unbelievers. Again the word Harpazo is quite clear in it's difinition we are to be snatched out of not go through.