Jump to content
IGNORED

Oldest evidence of human remains?


fromIslam2Christ

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  30
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  234
  • Content Per Day:  0.04
  • Reputation:   14
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  05/08/2009
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  06/16/1978

Here is an article published today that I thought would be of interest.

JERUSALEM - Israeli archaeologists said Monday they may have found the earliest evidence yet for the existence of modern man, and if so, it could upset theories of the origin of humans.

A Tel Aviv University team excavating a cave in central Israel said teeth found in the cave are about 400,000 years old and resemble those of other remains of modern man, known scientifically as Homo sapiens, found in Israel. The earliest Homo sapiens remains found until now are half as old.

"It's very exciting to come to this conclusion," said archaeologist Avi Gopher, whose team examined the teeth with X-rays and CT scans and dated them according to the layers of earth where they were found.

He stressed that further research is needed to solidify the claim. If it does, he says, "this changes the whole picture of evolution."

....
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  1,022
  • Topics Per Day:  0.16
  • Content Count:  39,193
  • Content Per Day:  6.10
  • Reputation:   9,977
  • Days Won:  78
  • Joined:  10/01/2006
  • Status:  Offline

Here is an article published today that I thought would be of interest.

JERUSALEM - Israeli archaeologists said Monday they may have found the earliest evidence yet for the existence of modern man, and if so, it could upset theories of the origin of humans.

A Tel Aviv University team excavating a cave in central Israel said teeth found in the cave are about 400,000 years old and resemble those of other remains of modern man, known scientifically as Homo sapiens, found in Israel. The earliest Homo sapiens remains found until now are half as old.

"It's very exciting to come to this conclusion," said archaeologist Avi Gopher, whose team examined the teeth with X-rays and CT scans and dated them according to the layers of earth where they were found.

He stressed that further research is needed to solidify the claim. If it does, he says, "this changes the whole picture of evolution."

....

I read this too, early today. I'm not sure the tooth is from our own species but it is definitely from one that very similar to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  10
  • Topic Count:  5,823
  • Topics Per Day:  0.75
  • Content Count:  45,870
  • Content Per Day:  5.95
  • Reputation:   1,897
  • Days Won:  83
  • Joined:  03/22/2003
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/19/1970

I hope to hear how the investigation progresses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  13
  • Content Per Day:  0.00
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/08/2009
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/28/1947

That article was interesting. The Israeli archaeologists or any other archaeologists that would proclaim such things are basing their viewpoint on non-Biblical evolutionary naturalism, and not on the Biblical proclaimation that God created mankind at a particular point in time. The idea that mankind was some other type of creature and then evolved to modern man cannot be proven and is in direct contradiction with science. A person or any simple cell creature that exists shows that within the creature there has to be information within the creature for its life existence. There has never been any verification nor can there be of any creature evoloing from a lower form to a higher form. The comments are mere speculation based upon an naturalistic viewpoint with no creator involvement.

One couild for sure understand that in making such claims they would not believe in the Bible Adam/Eve creation or the world wide flood of Noah. Now we know that anyone proclaiming evolutionary naturalism would not hold to these Biblical truths considering that the Biblical truth is in direct contradiction with naturalism, and indeed does poke holes in their theory. We only have to look at Romans 1:18 see how they come up with their theories.

An interesting book that I recently purchased is titled Cencored Science - The Suppressed Evidence by Bruce Malone which is a great discussion about creation and evolution ----- a good book to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  39
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  540
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   32
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  09/06/2010
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/29/1960

You are confusing methodological naturalism with philosophical naturalism. While many Christians don't view the accounts of Creation and the Flood as historical narratives, this does not mean that they reject biblical truths.

ALL bible is true! If you don't believe in the the flood, creation, donkey talking, horses and chariots with Elisha, and many more truths! You make God's word of no effect. You may be able to pick and choose what you believe with science but you can't do that with God's Holy Word. Then what is faith?

Hebrews 11

By Faith We Understand

1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good testimony.

3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  10
  • Topic Count:  5,823
  • Topics Per Day:  0.75
  • Content Count:  45,870
  • Content Per Day:  5.95
  • Reputation:   1,897
  • Days Won:  83
  • Joined:  03/22/2003
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  11/19/1970

And so the thread hijack begins....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  39
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  540
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   32
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  09/06/2010
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/29/1960

I see, so you believe that the sun moves relative to a stationary earth?

Additionally, an analogy is still true even if it is not a literal description.

Lurker

Scripture please.

B. The Variety of Stars

1. Jeremiah 33:22--"As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the seed of David, my servant." The invention of the telescope in the seventeenth century made men aware of the vast number of stars. Beforehand scientists had said the total number was only in the hundreds or thousands. Only about four thousand can be counted with the unaided eye. Today no one knows how many stars there are, but "with the giant telescopes now available ..., astronomers have statistically estimated that there are about 1025 stars (that is, 10 million billion billion) in the known universe. One can also calculate that this is about the number of grains of sand in the world" (Henry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984], p. 156; The Genesis Record [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1976], p. 384). The Bible is accurate when it states the impossibility of numbering the stars.

B. Geodesy

This branch of geology studies the size and shape of the earth.

1. The ancient views

a) The flat-earth theory

People in ancient times thought of the earth as being a flat disk, like a record, surrounded by a river called Oceanus. It was believed that anyone foolish enough to sail through the Pillars of Hercules (the Strait of Gibraltar) would fall off the earth into nothingness.

b) The Ptolemaic theory

Ptolemy, in the second century after Christ, proposed a spherical earth as the stationary center of the universe, with the sun and the other heavenly bodies revolving around it. Not until the sixteenth century with the discoveries of

Copernicus was this theory abandoned.

2. The biblical view

In contrast to the widely held ancient belief that the earth was flat, the Bible clearly teaches that it is round. Isaiah 40:22 says, "It is He who sitteth upon the circle of the earth." Job 38:14 says, "It [the earth] is turned like clay to the seal." That is a reference to the small cylinders used in ancient times to put one's seal on a clay document. Those cylinders had sticks through the center, like a rolling pin, and while the clay was still soft, they would be rolled across it, leaving the impression of the seal. The Bible tells us the earth rotates on its axis like a cylinder making a seal.

A. Wind Circulation

In the seventeenth century George Hadley discovered that the winds circulate around the earth. Thousands of years earlier the book of Ecclesiastes referred to this phenomenon: "The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to its circuits."

B. Air Pressure

Before the time of Galileo, it was not known that the air had weight. Evangelista Torricelli, a student of Galileo, invented the first barometer, proving the air has pressure. However, Scripture implied that thousands of years before. Job 28:25 says, "He imparted weight to the wind" (NASB).

A. Isostasy

Isostasy is a field of study within geology that deals with the balance maintained within the earth's crust. The differing weights of the various types of rock maintain a delicate balance; otherwise the earth would wobble in its rotation like a lopsided basketball. Isaiah 40:12 says, "[God] hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and measured out heaven with the span, and measured the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance." Psalm 104:5, 8 tells us that God "established the earth upon its foundations, so that it will not totter .... The mountains rose; the valleys sank down to the place which [He] didst establish for them" (NASB). The Bible teaches that the earth is balanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see, so you believe that the sun moves relative to a stationary earth?

Additionally, an analogy is still true even if it is not a literal description.

Lurker

Scripture please.

.

B. The Variety of Stars

1. Jeremiah 33:22--"As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the seed of David, my servant." The invention of the telescope in the seventeenth century made men aware of the vast number of stars. Beforehand scientists had said the total number was only in the hundreds or thousands. Only about four thousand can be counted with the unaided eye. Today no one knows how many stars there are, but "with the giant telescopes now available ..., astronomers have statistically estimated that there are about 1025 stars (that is, 10 million billion billion) in the known universe. One can also calculate that this is about the number of grains of sand in the world" (Henry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984], p. 156; The Genesis Record [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1976], p. 384). The Bible is accurate when it states the impossibility of numbering the stars.

1. The ancient views

a) The flat-earth theory

People in ancient times thought of the earth as being a flat disk, like a record, surrounded by a river called Oceanus. It was believed that anyone foolish enough to sail through the Pillars of Hercules (the Strait of Gibraltar) would fall off the earth into nothingness.

b) The Ptolemaic theory

Ptolemy, in the second century after Christ, proposed a spherical earth as the stationary center of the universe, with the sun and the other heavenly bodies revolving around it. Not until the sixteenth century with the discoveries of

Copernicus was this theory abandoned.

2. The biblical view

B. Air Pressure

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  39
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  540
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   32
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  09/06/2010
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/29/1960

snip massive cut and paste

Unless your name is John Macarthur you may want to take the following into consideration,

From the ToS:

  • No Plagiarism. You must have permission to post copy righted material. When you do have permission, all due attribution is to be posted as well. (Ex. 20:15, Lev 19:11)

As we are straying way off topic I'll be continuing this conversation in another thread.

Lurker

Thanks for bringing that to my attention. This is the source: http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/sg1348.htm

You are confusing methodological naturalism with philosophical naturalism. While many Christians don't view the accounts of Creation and the Flood as historical narratives, this does not mean that they reject biblical truths.

ALL bible is true! If you don't believe in the the flood, creation, donkey talking, horses and chariots with Elisha, and many more truths! You make God's word of no effect. You may be able to pick and choose what you believe with science but you can't do that with God's Holy Word. Then what is faith?

Hebrews 11

By Faith We Understand

1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good testimony.

3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

I just wanted to show some other biblical truths relating to science. The bible isn't a ferry tale like Atheists think it is. The prophets were inspired by God to write these words and I'm sure they had no knowledge of what it truly meant. It took hundreds of years for man to understand God's wisdom in scriptures. Man is still learning!

1 Corinthians 1:25

For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

There is good information in the bible verses if you think about what it's trying to say. Such as:

Romans 13:8-10 (New International Version,

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  4
  • Content Per Day:  0.00
  • Reputation:   0
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/28/2010
  • Status:  Offline

1. Jeremiah 33:22--"As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the seed of David, my servant." The invention of the telescope in the seventeenth century made men aware of the vast number of stars. Beforehand scientists had said the total number was only in the hundreds or thousands. Only about four thousand can be counted with the unaided eye. Today no one knows how many stars there are, but "with the giant telescopes now available ..., astronomers have statistically estimated that there are about 1025 stars (that is, 10 million billion billion) in the known universe. One can also calculate that this is about the number of grains of sand in the world" (Henry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis for Modern Science [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984], p. 156; The Genesis Record [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1976], p. 384). The Bible is accurate when it states the impossibility of numbering the stars.

It seems there is some false reasoning here. To the ancients, the stars in the sky were just as uncountable as they are now. With or without a telescope, the problem is still that there are stars that are fainter and fainter, until they can no longer be seen; in either case the number is uncountable. It is a much larger number with a telescope than without, but it certainly seems wrong to suggest that the ancients could not have known that they could not count the stars in the sky. So I see nothing remarkable about the Bible saying the stars are uncountable. And not to be pedantic (he said pedantically), but researchers at the University of Hawaii estimate the number of grains of sand as only 7.5 x 10^18, so when you say there are about the same number of stars as grains of sand, you are off by a factor of more than a million.

1. The ancient views

a) The flat-earth theory

People in ancient times thought of the earth as being a flat disk, like a record, surrounded by a river called Oceanus. It was believed that anyone foolish enough to sail through the Pillars of Hercules (the Strait of Gibraltar) would fall off the earth into nothingness.

b) The Ptolemaic theory

Ptolemy, in the second century after Christ, proposed a spherical earth as the stationary center of the universe, with the sun and the other heavenly bodies revolving around it. Not until the sixteenth century with the discoveries of

Copernicus was this theory abandoned.

2. The biblical view

In contrast to the widely held ancient belief that the earth was flat, the Bible clearly teaches that it is round. Isaiah 40:22 says, "It is He who sitteth upon the circle of the earth."

Actually, the earth is (nearly) a sphere, not a circle. There actually is a difference, you know. And when it says the earth is a circle, doesn't that mean it is exactly consistent with what you describe as the flat earth theory? "People in ancient times thought of the earth as being a flat disk, like a record, surrounded by a river called Oceanus."

Job 38:14 says, "It [the earth] is turned like clay to the seal." That is a reference to the small cylinders used in ancient times to put one's seal on a clay document. Those cylinders had sticks through the center, like a rolling pin, and while the clay was still soft, they would be rolled across it, leaving the impression of the seal. The Bible tells us the earth rotates on its axis like a cylinder making a seal.

This verse seems a little unclear; but by your description it is the cylinder that rotates, not the clay. So it seems clear that whatever this verse us saying, it is NOT saying that the earth turns.

Let us look at a few other translations of this verse, which may shed some additional light:

The earth takes shape like clay under a seal; its features stand out like those of a garment. (New International Version, 1984)

As the light approaches, the earth takes shape like clay pressed beneath a seal; it is robed in brilliant colors. (New Living Translation, 2007)

It is changed like clay under the seal, and its features stand out like a garment. (English Standard Version 2001)

It is changed like clay under the seal; And they stand forth like a garment. (New American Standard Bible 1995)

It is changed as clay under the seal; And all things'stand forth as a garment (American Standard Version)

The earth changes like clay stamped by a seal, and [parts of it] stand out like [folds in] clothing. (God's Word 1995)

It seems to me that these alternate translations make the meaning more clear, and nowhere is the meaning that the earth turns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...