The Fossil Record God Left For Us, Not to Darwinists

[HAZARD]

"tlechies wrote,

Ye are of {your} father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning
He was a murderer from the beginning. Is there a murderer without humans? "

Ask Jesus, He said it in John 8:44. Do you have a red letter Bible, look it up yourself.

[HAZARD]

8 hours ago, tleichs said:

Fossil record were not left for us or Darwinists. They are there because something happened on the Earth. Did you already thought how to make a fossil? An animal die and what happens? There are bacteries to deteriorated it, there are rain, wind, other animals, at the end no fossil or only some deterioted bones. How can it be that are so many fossils from ALL species? Everybody are amazed about the fossils of dinossaurs. But no  ones look about the fossils of all species...... Dinossaures fossils are 25% of the all fossils species found. And how to make a fossil?? you need to bury the animal at once! he will not die and wait for thousand years to get covered!  you need to dig deep, and put a loth of clay to conservate it. Or you need a great catastrophal event on the earth with a lot of clay to make fossils. And there are then 2 options. there were many catastrophal events with  clay on the earth that make trhough millions of years so much fossils. Or you need 1 event to make it all, like a overflut 

 

Science shows the truth, scientist are humans, and humans lie......

Exactly, and Noahs flood did not make the mountain's quake, or bury anything DEEP or covered the Earth long enough to do these things.

I have worked in the coal mines all my life and have seen fossilised trees buried in 25 foot high coal seams and also buried in solid hard-rock hundreds of feet deep. This did not happen during the flood of Noah.

Coal seams are about 360 million years old. Most of the coal in the world was formed in the Carboniferous Period, which occured 360 and 280 million years ago.

Also Noah's flood did not destroy everything, Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives, and all the animals and birds survived. Also the sun. moon and stars continued to shine.

MAN-MADE BELL FOUND IN LUMP OF COAL

In 1944, as a ten year old boy, Newton Anderson dropped a lump of coal in his basement and found that it contained this bell inside. The bituminous coal that was mined near his house in Upshur County West Virginia is supposed to be about 300 million years old! What is a brass bell with an iron clapper doing in coal ascribed to the Carboniferous Period?

And this,

Every once in a while archaeologists (and sometimes regular Joes) make some remarkable discoveries. Stunned, they are often unable to explain what it is they’ve found, how it came into existence, or ascertain its value. This is a comprehensive list of such artifacts; artifacts that many believe should have never existed given the discerned age/period of their creation.

In June 1936 (or 1934 according to some accounts), Max Hahn and his wife Emma were on a walk when they noticed a rock with wood protruding from its core. They decided to take the oddity home and later cracked it open with a hammer and a chisel. Ironically, what they found within seemed to be an archaic hammer of sorts. A team of archaeologists checked it, and as it turns out, the rock encasing the hammer was dated back more than 400 million year; the hammer itself turned out to be more than 500 million years old. Additionally, a section of the handle has begun the transformation to coal.  The hammer’s head, made of more than 96% iron, is far more pure than anything nature could have achieved without an assist from modern technology.

[HAZARD]

2 hours ago, Salty said:

You quoted a lot at the first of your reply in the previous post, but it was not directly relevant to the topic. It acted just as fodder. I see many post like that when they want to appear like they have a greater understanding than they actually have on a matter.

But here below... you are making the claim that Jesus' name is not associated with The Father, which of course is not true since Greek Iesous is from the Hebrew which means Yah has saved (Yah being The Father). Isaiah 9:6, and last verse of John 8 is also further proof of Jesus' direct associated with The Father in The Godhead.

....

Iesous. This is the Greek word for "Jesus" 979 times in the New Testament. It is the Greek form of the hebrew Yehowshua, rendered "Joshua" 215 times in the New Testament. Joshua of the Old Testament is called "Jesus" in the New Testament in Acts 7:45; Heb. 4:8. Jesus is never the name of the Father, or of the Spirit in either Testament, and it was not the name of the second person of the Godhead until He became man, and the Son of God about 1900 years ago. It is the human name of the Son of God.
....

The term "the Father" in the New Testament is not once applied to men or the Christ or to the Holy Ghost, but only and always to the first person of the Godhead, "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

 

I'm not making any claim at all, I'm stating a fact. Jesus was not the Father, or the Holy Spirit, and the Word was not called Jesus until the Word became a man.

[thilipsis]

1 hour ago, HAZARD said:

Exactly, and Noahs flood did not make the mountain's quake, or bury anything DEEP or covered the Earth long enough to do these things.

I have worked in the coal mines all my life and have seen fossilised trees buried in 25 foot high coal seams and also buried in solid hard-rock hundreds of feet deep. This did not happen during the flood of Noah.

Coal seams are about 360 million years old. Most of the coal in the world was formed in the Carboniferous Period, which occured 360 and 280 million years ago.

Also Noah's flood did not destroy everything, Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives, and all the animals and birds survived. Also the sun. moon and stars continued to shine.

MAN-MADE BELL FOUND IN LUMP OF COAL

In 1944, as a ten year old boy, Newton Anderson dropped a lump of coal in his basement and found that it contained this bell inside. The bituminous coal that was mined near his house in Upshur County West Virginia is supposed to be about 300 million years old! What is a brass bell with an iron clapper doing in coal ascribed to the Carboniferous Period?

And this,

Every once in a while archaeologists (and sometimes regular Joes) make some remarkable discoveries. Stunned, they are often unable to explain what it is they’ve found, how it came into existence, or ascertain its value. This is a comprehensive list of such artifacts; artifacts that many believe should have never existed given the discerned age/period of their creation.

In June 1936 (or 1934 according to some accounts), Max Hahn and his wife Emma were on a walk when they noticed a rock with wood protruding from its core. They decided to take the oddity home and later cracked it open with a hammer and a chisel. Ironically, what they found within seemed to be an archaic hammer of sorts. A team of archaeologists checked it, and as it turns out, the rock encasing the hammer was dated back more than 400 million year; the hammer itself turned out to be more than 500 million years old. Additionally, a section of the handle has begun the transformation to coal.  The hammer’s head, made of more than 96% iron, is far more pure than anything nature could have achieved without an assist from modern technology.

When I was looking into Creationism early on I found an Ansewers in Genesis article on the dating of the lava dome at Mt St Helen's. Steven Austin and some others sent a pulverized sample to a lab in Cambridge MA. They estimated a date from 360,000 to over 2 million years. They have repeated this exercise various places always the results indicate old age and at Mt St Helens it was only ten years old. 

They are supposed to be able to determine if sample has daughter isotope and estimate the approximate age. Of course you can't do that if all you know about the sample is what it's made of.

That kind of dating method has left me cold ever since.

Edited November 26, 2016 by thilipsis

[HAZARD]

One particular mine I worked at I was operating a Bucyrus E. 45R Blast hold drill to the main seam. While drilling I encountered.

1. 4 feet topsoil, 2. 30 feet solid rock, 3. three feet shale, 4. 4 feet coal seam split, 5. 60 feet solid rock,  6. 5 feet mudstone,  7. 90 feet solid rock, 8. 25 foot thick coal seam which includes a 2 foot split, then another 30 feet of coal.

Noahs flood never laid down this strata, topsoil, solid rock, shale, again coal, another layer of solid rock, mudstone, solid rock, coal, rock split again coal.

[Salty]

3 hours ago, HAZARD said:

I'm not making any claim at all, I'm stating a fact. Jesus was not the Father, or the Holy Spirit, and the Word was not called Jesus until the Word became a man.

The main difference between God The Father and Lord Jesus you're possibly thinking is how only God The Son (Jesus) was born in the flesh to die on the cross with The Father raising Him, and thus becoming our Savior and Mediator to The Father for us.

The important distinction Apostle John made about belief on Jesus Christ was believing that God came in the flesh as Jesus Christ, and not the humanist idea that Jesus was not God while in the flesh. Jesus was God before He was born in Mary's womb, and was God while He was here on earth, and is still God The Son today. His main distinction is His having been born in the flesh, suffering on the cross to offer those who believe on Him remission of sins and eternal life, and His becoming the firstfruit of the resurrection.

 

[ARGOSY]

On 11/25/2016 at 6:25 PM, Salty said:

"The Cretaceous–Paleogene (K–Pg) extinction event,^[a] also known as the Cretaceous–Tertiary (K–T) extinction, was a mass extinction of some three-quarters of the plant and animal species onEarth that occurred over a geologically short period of time^[2][3][4] approximately 66 million years ago.^[3] With the exception of some ectothermic species like the leatherback sea turtle andcrocodiles, no tetrapods weighing more than 55 pounds (25 kilos) survived.^[5] It marked the end of the Cretaceous period and with it, the entire Mesozoic Era, opening the Cenozoic Era that continues today.

Yes sure there were extinctions at the K-T boundary. Not as much as the P-T boundary though.   A reduction in species is not a gap in the fossil record.  

[siegi91]

On 30/10/2016 at 0:59 AM, Enoch2021 said:

Not so much...

Advocates of the gap theory maintain that “create” (bara’) and “make” (‘asah) have absolutely distinct meanings. If Exodus 20:11(“For in six days the Lord made [‘asah] the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them”) establishes that the chronological limitation for God’s original creation was six days, then any significant interval of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 would extend beyond the required “six days.” Therefore, either Exodus 20:11 is erroneous or some type of harmonization between Genesis 1:1 and Exodus 20:11 must be set forth. Since gap theorists have generally held to the inerrancy of Scripture, they harmonize the two texts by postulating that “create” and “make” have distinct semantic nuances. This is a necessary distinction if Genesis 1:1 (“In the beginning God created [bara’] the heavens and the earth”) is to be harmonized with Exodus 20:11. In light of this, the gap theory rises or falls on the distinctive meanings for “create” and “make.” If these two verbs are semantically distinct, then the gap theory may be biblically defensible. However, if these verbs are used interchangeably, then the gap theory cannot biblically stand. In reality, any concession to an interchangeable use of “create” and “make” irreparably undermines this theory. What, then, do gap theorists claim is the distinction between these two verbs?

According to gap theorists the verb “create,” (bara’) in Genesis 1:1, means to create “without the aid of pre-existing material” (Pember, p. 22), and “made,” (‘asah) in Exodus 20:11, means to restore (ibid., p. 23). Advocates of the gap theory point out that, outside of Genesis 1:1, “create” (bara’) is used in Genesis 1 as a reference to two other creative activities: the creation of animal (v. 21) and human life (3 times in v. 27). These three uses of “create” are the only places in this chapter where God did not use any preexisting material (see the old edition of the Scofield Reference Bible, p. 3, note 2). In contrast to this, the term predominately used in Genesis 1 is the verb to “make” (‘asah), and this suggests that God’s emphasis in this chapter is on reshaping the heavens and the earth from previously existing material that had previously been destroyed (Sauer, p. 232). Consequently, God originally created a perfect and complete heavens and earth out of nothing as Genesis 1:1 affirms. Because of Satan’s fall, God judged the earth as reflected in 1:2. Beginning with 1:3, God began to restore the ruined earth in six, successive literal days. The use of ‘asah in Exodus 20:11 reflects the same six-day period of restoration as is recorded in Genesis 1:3–31.

 

While we agree that “create” and “make” have distinct nuances, the gap theorist’s absolute dichotomy superimposed on these verbs cannot be consistently defended in the various creation accounts in the Bible. Of the two verbs, “create,” bara’, is used 48 times in the Old Testament (David J. A. Clines, ed. The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. 5 vols. to date [sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993–], 2:38 [hereafter cited as DCH]), and “make,” ‘asah, 2,627 times (New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, s.v. “hc[ (I),” by Eugene Carpenter, 3:547 [hereafter cited as NIDOTTE]). “Create” has a more restrictive semantic range than “make.” When the verb “create” is used in the basic Hebrew verbal form known as the Qal stem, the God of Israel is always its subject and the direct object never refers to the material used with the verb “create.” The verb ‘asah means “do” or “make,” and, judging by its general semantic nature, its range of uses is very broad. As we will contend, the verbs “create” and “make” are both used in creation contexts as references to God’s supernatural creative work. Though it is beyond the scope of this paper to present the consistent recognition by lexicographers of the synonymous nature of these two verbs (see the conclusive discussion in Fields, pp. 60–74), all of the Hebrew lexicons that I have examined unequivocally affirm that these verbs are used as virtual synonyms in creation contexts (DCH, 2:258; Koehler and Baumgartner, 2:890; NIDOTTE, s.v. “hc[ (I),” by Eugene Carpenter, 3:547; Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, s.v. “ar;B; bara’,” by Jan Bergman, Helmer Ringgren, Karl-Heinz Bernhardt, G. Johannes Botterweck, 2:246–48; Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, s.v. “hc[,” by J. Vollmer, 2:949–50; and Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, s.v. “hc[,” by Thomas E. McComiskey, 2:701). In demonstrating the synonymous nature of these two verbs, we will look at two items. First, the verbs “create” and “make” are each used to describe the same creative activities. Second, there are a number of passages where these verbs are used together.

 

The first item that we should notice is that the same creative activities are governed by both verbs. In Genesis 1:1 the verb “create” governs two objects, “the heavens and the earth.” In Exodus 20:11, God gave the Sabbath command. In this text Israel was commanded to work “six days,” and to worship and rest on the Sabbath. According to v. 11, the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them.” As in Genesis 1:1, God’s creative work includes “the heavens and the earth.” It is again affirmed that the LORD made the same two objects in Exodus 31:17: “for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth.” Though more details are given in Nehemiah 9:6, the same two objects of God’s creative work are included: “Thou alone art the LORD. Thou hast made the heavens, the heavens of heavens with all their hosts, and the earth and all that is in them” (see also Job 9:9, Pss 95:5; 100:3; Prov 8:22–23, 26). Though some of these texts include more details, my point is that “make,” ‘asah, quite readily fits into contexts dealing with God’s original creative activities in Genesis 1:1–31, rather than necessarily fitting into accounts of creation separated by millions or billions of years. These references suggest that “create” and “make” are used interchangeably.

 

To reinforce our point about “create” and “make” being used interchangeably in creation contexts, we need to consider a second item; viz., the use of “create” and “make” together in the same verse or unit of verses. Both verbs are used in Genesis 1:26–27: “Then God said, ‘Let Us make [‘asah] man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ 27And God created [bara’] man in His own image, in the image of God He created [bara’] him; male and female He created [bara’] them.” The interchangeable nature of “make” and “create” is obvious. Rather than accepting the prima facie evidence of this text, supporters of the gap theory circumvent the problem by insisting that man’s body was made (cf. with “formed” in Gen 2:7, and “made” in Pss 100:3; 119:73) from the dust of the ground, and his soul and spirit were created without the use of any preexisting material. In essence, God makes the material part of man from existing dust, and he creates out nothing man’s immaterial part (Pember, p. 23). Though what Pember and other gap theorists have taught is undoubtedly true, the problem is that vv. 26–27 are not setting forth what the gap theorists affirm. Due in part to their strong dichotomy, this type of reasoning results in an oversimplification of this passage in two ways. First, when God makes man in his image in v. 26, does this mean that God’s image in man is confined to his physical composition? Second, when God creates them male and female in v. 27, does this mean that the gender differences between man and woman are primarily metaphysical rather than physical? Genesis 1:26–27 will not tolerate an absolute dichotomy between these two verbs (see Custance’s convoluted explanation, p. 180). Genesis 2:2–3 is another text where only strained circumlocution could be used to deny the synonymous nature of “create” and “make”: “And by the seventh day God completed His work which He had done [‘asah]; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done [‘asah]. 3Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created [bara’] and made [‘asah].” The work done over the first six days of creation are summed up with “created,” bara’, and “made,” ‘asah. These two verses univocally communicate that “create” and “make” are virtual synonyms used for God’s supernatural creative activity on the first six days of creation (for other examples, see Gen 2:4; Isa 41:20; 43:7; 45:7; see also Fields, pp. 65–74). Consequently, the biblical evidence overwhelmingly establishes that “create,” bara’, and “make,” ‘asah, are used as synonyms in creation contexts, and, therefore, the gap theory is indefensible in contending for an absolute semantic dichotomy between these two verbs.

Dr. Robert V. McGabe : professor of Old Testament Studies and Hebrew at Detroit Baptist Theological Seminar.  

http://www.oldtestamentstudies.org/my-papers/other-papers/recent-creationism/what-about-the-gap-theory/

 

 

That's not what SCRIPTURE Says...

(Genesis 1:16) "And God made TWO GREAT LIGHTS; the greater light to rule the day, AND the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."

That's a BIG....."Two Great Lights" and.... "AND".

(Matthew 24:29) "Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, AND the moon shall not give HER light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:"

That's a BIG "AND"...."HER" Light !! (Clearly Possessive).

 

AND Scientifically: If the Moon is a Sphere (Convex), How in the World can it Reflect Sunlight/any light uniformly? It is impossible for a Convex Object (The Moon "allegedly") to uniformly reflect light equally in all directions (i.e., to have any angle of incidence), only FLAT or Concave surfaces can do so. If a surface is Convex, then every ray of light points in a direct line perpendicular to the surface resulting in ZERO Reflection!

 

Yes, and Anna Nicole married for Love and Pol Pot was her Florist.

Please Scientifically Validate this "Just-So" Story...?

 

regards

 

Please indulge my ignorance about Christianity tenets. Still trying to learn.

I have a question: is that really true that Christianity, or the Bible, entails that the moon does not reflect the light of the sun? From you post, it seems to be the case. 

 

If this is the case: does it mean that the moon emits its own light?

 siegi

 

[Salty]

6 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

Yes sure there were extinctions at the K-T boundary. Not as much as the P-T boundary though.   A reduction in species is not a gap in the fossil record.  

A mass extinction of three quarters of all plant and animal life in a short period definitely serves as a gap in the fossil record.

[SavedOnebyGrace]

22 minutes ago, Salty said:

A mass extinction of three quarters of all plant and animal life in a short period definitely serves as a gap in the fossil record.

The various "gaps" in the fossil record could have various causes.  The Gap Theory (Ruin-Reconstruction Theory) is only concerned with one.  If there were multiple gaps in the fossil record, multiple extinctions, multiple explosions of new life, etc., this is outside the Biblical record and has no part in our belief in the Gospel record.  My scientific mind finds the subject interesting, but my spiritual mind has God's word, as the Holy Spirit has illuminated it to me and others, as the paradigm and all that is necessary for my salvation.