www.islam-watch.org

"Charlatan Muslim" does not narrow the field; ALL Muslims are charlatans.

2nd Thessalonians , Revealation of John and other early scriptures all confirm that the early christians expected the Revealation to come very soon. Today, there are still always some (stupid) christians and (stupid) muslims who expect this to come very soon. But who would say that this will come in 500 or 600 years? Who would care? So it is ridiculous to think that the bible is referring to Muhammad, who, by the way, is misunderstanding the bible totally. Sister of Aaron! (House of Imran). This is a really beginners mistake!

I remember learning that in Islamic school. They are just trying to twist things to make it seem like a prophecy.

In general the qualified ones of the religious scholars think that the Gospel of John (which contains the quote that the Paraclet = comfort provider) does not provide any
historical quotes from Jesus. Most scholars think that the synoptic gospels by Matthew and Luke and maybe the apokryphical gospel of Thomas contain words really spoken by Jesus. While this is also disputed by others, these so-called Logia do not promise any Final Prophet.

Anyway, it is of np merit to declare that Mo or anybody else was the prophet promised by anybody if there is no evidence.And there is no clear evidence. Anybody can declare that sometimes somebody will come. Theres is not much behind it.

would anyone point out to me the page and number of part of the Bible that mentioned the word '' Ahmad " ?

I did not get it ...did it, or did not mentioned the word Ahmad?

I know, even if, it did ....The Bible was not talking about the Muhammad we all Know ...because the Muhammad we all know, is nothing but a human scum.

In the Gospel of John Jesus mentions a Parakletos to come.
This is, of course, in Greek. In Syrian language the translation sounds similar
to Ahmed which is supposed to be equal to Muhammad. So there is hardly any real relationship between the quote and Muhammad. It think Muslims do very often draw (wrong) conclusions like this. The reason is that they have nothing else in their brains but Islam, Muhammad and so forth, so they must always refer anything to islam.

The deeper reason for this is that they believe that the quran was written by god. If so, it must be a perfect book and they cannot accept that there are so many errors and inconsistencies in it. Because it is so easy and so nice to think that someone is superior because he is a muslim and nothing more it becomes unlikely that he wiill ever accept any criticism of his superstitious beliefs. Islam is so simple, easy and so cheap. It is much more difficult to stand the truth that everybody is responsible for his own and not depending on an almighty god.

Muslims have also tried this with Hindus in India, saying Mohammed is the 10th Avatar (incarnation) of Vishnu, and give a convoluted argument in favour of the same, purportedly written by someone named Upadhyaya. This person, the mail claimed, was a learned professor from Benaras. Where, not stated. No further clues. Just that he was a Brahmin (the surname does belong to the Brahmin community) so inherently qualified to make statements about Hindu religion, or so the sender or perpetrator of the mail believed.

Well, I asked a few simple questions to the man who sent me this:
1 Incarnations are not in line with Islamic tenets. Islam does not believe in the return of the same spirit. It does not believe that Moses
came back as other prophets in different times, eg; Moses was not Isiah / Jesus / Mohammed - with messages suitable to their times. All these were different people. Incarnation, in Hindu thought, is return of the same spirit, human or divine.
2 Incarnation of Vishnu implies a belief in the Hindu pantheon. Once again, it flies in the face of 'there is but one God'. Un -Islamic.
3 Does this not mean Muslims also believe in the previous 9 Incarnations of Vishnu? The 3rd Incarnation was Varaha or the Boar, or the
wild PIG!
Obviously, the person who sent me this mail stopped the subject.

Just who are these qualified scholars who say that the Gospel of John has no historical quotes from Jesus? From all of the Gospels they all have mostly the same quotes. So saying that one has no historical quotes makes it so that it is highly unlikely that any of them have any historical quotes. A real look at the real history of the Gospels ,and the entire Bible ,show that all of these books are completely historically reliable(I do NOT count the apocrypha as books of the Bible ,and a good look at what is written in them will give away why they are not really part of the Bible in the first place.). Even a great deal of secular scholars are realizing the historicity of the Gospels especially that of Luke. He is considered to be a great historian(yes he was a physician ,but he was also a historian). Even the darkness at the time of Christ's crucifixion was recorded by Thallus. The Gospels are internally consistent (as much as any real eyewitness can be since everyone has a different vantage point) ,while being verified historically as well. As more evidence comes to light more of the Bible is verified ,and it has never been opposed by real history, or archaeology. The Bible in it's entirety is completely trustworthy ,and this has been proven over and over through the ages. Unfortunately there is a lot of misinformation out there ,and a lot of people openly hostile to the Bible who will even lie to damage it's reputation.

You have no idea. If you had then you would not say that all Gospels in the bible have almost the same quotes. This is nonsense. It is a well established fact and everybody can verify this, that there are 3 synoptic Gospels (Mark, Matthew and Luke) which are closely related to each other, while the Gospel of John is of a completely different origin. Moreover, none of the Gospel can be regarded as historical accurate; we still do not know when Jesus was born and when he died. There are some Logia embedded in narrative elements and many quotes from the Old Testament. Luke tried to provide some historicity but this is only fiction. The way Pontius Pilatus is described is total nonsense. Pilatus was known that he slaughterd many people. The Gospel try to use the Jews as scapegoats while the Romans look innocent. This is what is being teached at almost all modern Universities in Europe as well as in the USA by renowned scholars. The Two Sources Theory, that there was a hypothetical source script of the Logia called Q is widely accepted, and then there are many other Theories without Q or with the assumption that there were other sources. The synoptics (Mark, Matthew and Luke) make use of Q and quote the Logia, while there are almost no Logia in the Gospel of John. Every student of theology knows this from the very first year or even earler before he starts. But of course there also many fundamentalists who know nothing but brainwashing.

Was Muhammad the Promised Final Prophet of the Torah and Gospels?

That's what muslims believe and what they interpret from the qur'an. A simple answer would be: NO!

Interesting how so few actually understand the Christian Bible. Muslims are notorious for their attempted corruption of same. Nevertheless, if you are looking for Biblical references to Islam, I can give you a few. The false prophet mentioned in the NT is a reference to Muhammed. The Comforter is a reference to the Holy Spirit. The word Ahmad appears nowhere in the Bible. And the Anti-Christ is none other than the Mahdi himself. The Dome Of the Rock is the abomination spoken of by Daniel the prophet. Enjoy your lies Muslims.

Wait a minute 9-11...The Islamic anti-Christ Ad-Dajjal can't be Mahdi because Mahdi and Isa (Jesus) are going to kill dajjal...Mahdi is not going to kill himself...Dajjal is mentioned something like 150 times between Bukhari hadith, and that of Muslim...You can run a hadith search and get some interesting reading, or you can google dajjal, and see what comes up...Mahdi and dajjal are two distinct and different characters...That Mohammad is mentioned in the Bible is Muslim speculation with no confirmation...Lots of people think lots of things...that is not always a sign of reality...

There are differences of style in the Gospels ,And there are some quotes that are in some that aren't in all of them ,but they are still in agreement with each other. They are after all 2 eyewitness accounts ,and 2 documents made from interviews of eyewitness accounts. If they were exactly the same they would be accused of collaborating. They are written from different perspectives ,some differences (they are minor ,and are not in conflict with each other) are expected. Except for these minor differences the Gospels are in agreement with each other. Besides I was mostly talking about the things in them that are actually supposed to have been said by Jesus.
The Gospels ARE historically accurate. Josephus ,Thallus ,Tacitus etc. all verify the Gospel account ,and this is just a few names. This has been proven over and over again.
Q is a myth. Not one single copy or even a reference to Q exists at all. With the increasing amount of lies being taught in universities it does not surprise me that some "scholars" are saying these things as if they were true. For more information of "Q" go to Tektonics Ministries website. They have an article called "On Q,Marcan Priority ,and the Relationship of the Synoptic Gospels".
Pontius Pilate is described only as not giving an innocent man a guilty verdict. Is that really that strange even if he did have many people executed? They could have all been guilty ,or they could have at least had enough evidence against them to be condemned. Why do you assume that the Jewish high council was innocent? Both the Romans and Jews persecuted Christians. Paul (formerly known as Saul) used to hunt them down ,and bring them in to be executed.So why is it so impossible that the Jewish High Council had hostilities towards Jesus?
Also we don't know the exact birth date of nearly every ancient figure in history ,this certainly doesn't mean that accounts of them aren't historical. If you go by this standard you are throwing out nearly all ancient historical figures.
I know that there are many "scholars" out there who claim these things ,but this is just an appeal to authority. There are "scholars" that claim scientific miracles in the Quran ,but does this make it true? I was asking for some specific references ,and maybe a chance to see what they really studied.
You likely only read works by skeptics ,so likely you will only ever hear that side of the story (and many skeptics are not beyond lying to push their agenda). I suggest you look at all sides of the story. It's the only real way to find the truth.

I am not a Christian but the message I get from the Bible is love, peace and forgiveness. Quran is more than 60% hatred and threats.
Yesterday on BBC's programme 'The Big Questions', a Muslim claimed that there are no inconsistensies and mistakes in Quran. He was challenged on two points, with the questioner telling him that there are numerous mistakes in Quran. One mistake pointed out was that Virgin Mary is not part of the Holy Trinity. The Muslim had a chance to reply but just sat there smugly, expecting people to believe his statement.
Of course people can make their own judgement.

The gospels are no accouts of eyewitnesses and they contradict in many points and aspects. I know many priests and teachers with university degree who told me that they do not really believe in the Virginity of Jesus and the Miracle stories and that the Sermon of the Mount never took place. Why? Because the gospels are lacking anything what is needed for a historical account. Where did Matthews Sermon on the Mount took place and whene? And why is there a similar, but shorter Sermon on the Field in Lukes gospel? Ancient writers already knew very well how to write historical records. Just have a look at the Books of the Maccabeans. And why did Paul never refer to the Gospel? Perhaps you will never believe me before it was even difficult to me at the beginning. But the more I studied these subjects the more I realised that there is a big difference between religious texts and history. Consider only the books of Moses with Pharao and others which are also rendered in or pasted into the quran. Sorry, but it would be unfair to criticise islamic fundamentalism and obscurantism without mentioning that there are contradictions in christianity and other religions too.

Quote from you: "The Gospels ARE historically accurate. Josephus ,Thallus ,Tacitus etc. all verify the Gospel account ,and this is just a few names. "

This is wrong and laughable. There is nothing really known about Jesus and even the quran only quotes all this miracle stuff from the bible but no historical facts. Tacitus, Josephus and so on have all nothing to say about him. Paul does not mention anything about Jesus. BTW, most modern scholars agree that many of his letters were forged, if not all, as well as many of the other letters. Fundamentalists should better realise that they are not believing in the words of god but in words written by humans with the intention to propagate their teachings.

Cerebrum must get tired of defending the same points over and over...So far I don't think he has convinced anyone...

You say that the Gospel of John has no historical quotes from Jesus.

This is not true. Almost the entire book, The Gospel According to Saint John, is quotes from Yahshua/Jesus. The word, gospel, is Old English and means Good News. Paul does not refer to anything called a Gospel, because the word did not exist until the four books/Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were translated into English.

Furthermore, the Letters that are attributed to Paul contain many references to Yahshua's teachings. In fact, they are all about his teachings. These letters refer to Yahshua as Christos, Greek meaning Messiah (Christ, in English translations), the Annointed One.

You also state: Most modern scholars agree that many of his (Paul's) letters were forged, if not all, as well as many of the other letters.

Please list these scholars and tell us who forged these letters and why!

As for these "books of Moses with Pharao and others which are also rendered in or pasted into the quran" what you really mean is the STORIES of Moses and Pharaoh, etc.
The qur'an contains versions of the story which are inaccurate and contain numerous false information. The same goes for the the Qur'an's story of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, and all the other stories that are Biblically related, as well as all the other stories and tall tales that are included. The author of the Qur'an was obviously uneducated, ignorant of history, a liar, an idiot, and a fool.

I agree with you that the Qur'an is the words of a human, or humans, with an agenda. And that agenda is world domination, by Arabs!

There are, however, many historical facts in the Bible, and there is much archeological evidence to support it. The Bible contains much information about the human condition that is relevant even in today's modern world. Much of Western culture is based on the Bible, so until you read it (with an open mind) you will have a great deal of difficulty understanding Western thinking, literature, judical systems, thought processes, democracy, morality, ethics, etc.

Good reading! I wish you well,
Yibel

Do you mean the Adam and Eve? or Noah? Or that Jesus walked on water? Modern historians think that Noah, Moses and many other actors from the bible never existed. The books of Moses were written much later and do not match the archaeological evidence. There was no Moses and no Exodus and the early jews were polytheists. Monotheism is a much later development and many Jews kept worshipping other gods for quitre a long time. There is evidence for that and the Bible is not unbiased. It is clearly biased and only rendering a colourful picture for naive believers. You can cal it Invented Tradition or even more simply fiction what is written in bible AND quran.

I am not fighting against islamic fundamentalism to replace it with christian fundamentalism. It is both the same ignorance.

I know that there are chrisitans who have brains. People who know the difference between facts and fairytales. Between historical accounts and propaganda.

Please list these scholars and tell us who forged these letters and why!

Modern scholars know that there were many forgers of religious script in the olden days, exactly what their names are and why they did it is lost to history...try googling,'Bible forgeries', and 'forged scripture' for more information...

Fundamentalists have a wrong approach. They think that the Holy Scriptures are right and that there can be no doubt about it. They do not accept that they have the burden of proof on their own shoulders. But how can we criticise the quran and point to its contradictions if we are not allowed to do the same with the bible? There can be no progress if we keep christian superstition since the quran is drawing most of its content from the bible. Matthew: Look at your own eye!

Concerning Paul there are the Protopaulines regarded to be written by Paul himself, Deuteropaulines and the Tritopaulines. Hebrew was not written by Paul. Some Higher Critical scholars and Radikakritiker think that all letters are written by Marcion and his followers. The Deuteropaulines are also called Pastoral Letters (Timothy, Titus) which are different in style and probably of later origin. Epehsians and Colossians are again differing and belong to the Tritopaulines. Thess II is regarded as a forgery as well.

This is widely accepted by modern scholars and can be found in any modern textbook. No need to list any scholars here because almost ALL renowned scholars who do not belong to the fundamentalists accept this. Try wikipedia and you will find more.

According to the bible, god is hating the Jews! This raises many questions: Is the bible a reliable source? Arent the jews the scapegoats instead of the Romans here as well in the gospels? Is this the way of a merciful god who loves all people to hate "the jews) which means "all jews" because only a few of them are regarded guilty for the execution of Jesus?

Quote from 1 Thessalonians:

14 For you, brothers and sisters, became imitators of God’s churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own people the same things those churches suffered from the Jews 15 who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to everyone 16 in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last.[d]

The Bible is a book with categories, real history is one category, imaginary history is another, real characters and imaginary characters are two more, then there is the chapter on fairy tales with a message, the chapters on law, and another on the symbolism of the cosmic drama...
Then there are the various entries about moral behavior and love, and methods for spiritual awareness and advancement...

The Quran is a book of real and imaginary history, with real and imaginary characters, it has chapters on law, and war, and on cosmic drama...
It has chapters on moral behavior, but none on love...The entire book is a fairy tale with no opportunities for spiritual advancement......

There is actually a great deal of evidence for Noah. The fossil record being a huge piece. In the fossil record we have marine creatures even found on the tops of mountains. We have a tale of a global flood from every civilization across the globe. We have studies done on whether or not the ark could survive such a storm ,and it's actually the most efficient shape and size for what was needed. It could also hold all of the animals ,food ,and people (not to mention the excrement from the animals). Adam and Eve we have some evidence for. Mitochondrial DNA shows that all people go back to ONE female ancestor about 6000 years ago (this fits perfectly with the Biblical chronology). Similar things can be found for the Y chromosome (as far as matching Biblical history) As for Moses the evidence is available in every Bible. He wrote the first five books (the Pentateuch). There is no real reason to reject Moses as the author other than an a priori assumption that he was not the author. As for archaeological evidence of Moses ,the Israelites weren't building any monuments to him ,and the bronze serpent was recorded to have been destroyed. In Egypt they are famous for destroying the records of anything they didn't like ,and what would be worse than their gods being humiliated ,and them having to release a massive workforce. Also if you try to get a correct chronology (not relying on things like carbon dating or some other method that involves unprovable assumptions) in Egypt ( I can't remember this Pharaoh's name ,but I will try to find it again) they had a very hard time (economical troubles and the like) in what would be the next Pharaoh's time(this would be expected after a loss as recorded in the Bible). The term "Jews" is anachronistic if you are talking about the early history of Israel. They would have been called Israelites ,or Hebrews. Also them reverting back and forth from polytheism ,and worshiping the on true God is thoroughly documented in the Bible itself. The term "Jews" in Thessalonians as pointed to above was in most likely a reference to specific "Jews" rather than all Israelites (this term was usually applied to people from the tribe of Judah ,and not Israel as a whole. There were often big disagreements between the Judeans and the Galileans). Even the OT talked about the Israelites incurring God's wrath for their rejection of Him ,but no one is going to accuse an OT author of anti-Semitism. In fact the faults of the Israelites were pointed out quite regularly. Even people like David had their faults highlighted ,and he was called "a man after God's own heart". I suggest doing some real research rather than just believing everything some "scholar" says.

I may not have convinced anybody yet ,but that is probably something that even if I did achieve I would never find out about. Also you yourself never gave a real refutation to anything I said with the exception of the word manuscript. All you did is whenever I gave you a new point you would switch to something else. You never looked at any evidence I gave ,you dismissed everything I said out of hand simply because you didn't want to believe it(maybe you simply dismissed it just because I was the one to say it which is highly possible). You were never able to give a real defense of anything you said either. You have ruled out the possibility of the miraculous(as long as it's from the Bible anyway) ,and have locked your mind into a box that will be very hard to open. I think that perhaps this quote should be considered Sherlock Holmes once said "... when you have eliminated the impossible ,whatever remains,however improbable,must be the truth"
You have only eliminated the improbable ,and not the impossible ,and as long as there is still one source that is improbable ,and not impossible then you are limiting your ability to find the truth. Only "scholars" with an agenda are ruling out the Bible as historical. The Bible has the best record of historicity on probable events out of any document ever. Why is it so hard to believe a trustworthy source when it says something that is improbable? Jesus once said to Nicodemus John 3:12 I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe when I speak of heavenly things?

@ Gnostic
I have a post for you being reviewed. I hope it shows up.

I don't chase fairy tales of look for rainbows with pots of gold at the ends...you see you and your fellow delusionists don't think it's possible to 'find the truth'. without help from you and your book...That's why you are a religious supremacist bigot...It just comes with the territory of, 'I am right, everyone else is wrong'...I know this cause the Bible tells me so...

'Only "scholars" with an agenda are ruling out the Bible as historical'.

Uh huh...That's about as weak an excuse I have heard yet...you have zero way of verifying that...Another loose statement...

You wrote:

The Bible has the best record of historicity on probable events out of any document ever.

Sorry, but if I would believe in prayers I would give you the advise to pray for yourself.
I do not believe that there is anything else that could help you.

God cannot send prophet after Jesus mentioned this : Matthew 7:15-19

There is actually a great deal of evidence for Noah. The fossil record being a huge piece. In the fossil record we have marine creatures even found on the tops of mountains.

So you accept fossil records of some marine creatures on the top of mountains, but you deny the fossil records of dinosaurs etc.

Applying science to only that wich can strengthen your believe, is not how it works.

You wrote: There is actually a great deal of evidence for Noah. The fossil record being a huge piece. In the fossil record we have marine creatures even found on the tops of mountains.

This is complete nonsense. The formation of mountains is a result of folding or volcanism. This is a process that spends millions of years and this is the reason that fossils of marine creature we can find on op of mountains are millions of years old, much more the time alleged in the story rendered in both bible and quran which are only fiction.

BTW, in this regard the quran also contradicts science. The quran teaches that mountains are like anchors thrown onto earth with the intention to keep the earth fixed. Complete nonsense!

In my view, if someone beleives in god, it must be regarded blasphemic to wrongly assert that god teaches wrong things. Think about it!

Cerebrum believes the planet is only 6/10 thousand years old...He rejects the word 'millions' (years)...Christians are interesting in that they reject the fantasy of the Quran and accept the fantasies in the Bible...That's probably what got Mahound mad at them to begin with...Quran 5:14 says that the Christians forgot part of the message, and so Allah cursed them...

I don't deny anything about dinosaurs in the fossil record. This is an unfounded assumption on your part. I deny that they are millions and billions of years old. All dating methods available are founded on unprovable assumptions. Even if C-14 dating was rock solid you could at a theoretical maximum date something at around 90,000 years old (this is if you have perfect technology that can measure every singly molecule of C-14). Even diamonds which are supposed to be billions of years old have C-14 in them making them younger than the theoretical 90k years. There is not one dating method available that doesn't base itself on an uniformitarian viewpoint (this view is that all processes happening now happened at the same rate throughout history.) this view runs entirely on assumptions ,and on very little real data. The loss of strength in the Earth's magnetic field makes current C-14 dating unreliable unless you take measures to account for this phenomenon. Most scientists don't even date fossils with these methods anyway (unless they can make it agree with their a priori assumptions) ,they usually date fossils by the rock layers in which they are found. They also don't usually even date the layers by these methods either they usually date them by what fossils they find in them (circular reasoning don't you think?). The massive amount of water during Noah's flood would have been accompanied by massive earthquakes and volcanoes. The Bible clearly describes most of the water as bursting forth from the "springs of the great deep". This shows massive amounts of water erupting from the ground. This being a global flood would cause massive amounts of geological activity. This could easily make things that normally happen very slowly happen very fast. Also the fossil record is that of sedimentary rock ,and this means it was laid down by water. The fossils found also account for rapid burial rather than millions of years of tiny layers being added. We have jellyfish fossils that would need to be buried very fast ,we also have trees that go straight up through several geologic layers. Folding and volcanism alone don't account for sea creatures being found on the tops of mountains around the entire world. Not unless the entire planet was submerged under water at one point or another during our history.

Yes that statement can't be verified. I was kind of poking at the above statement by Gnostic "almost ALL renowned scholars who do not belong to the fundamentalists accept this." You apparently recognize a weak excuse when an opponent uses one ,but when someone agrees with you you just ignore it.
I was asking for a few specific references ,and he wouldn't give any. He just claimed "ALL renowned scholars". This is like saying "ALL real scientists believe in evolution". This is patently untrue ,and more and more scientists are seeing evolution and it's blatant lies for what they are. I personally believe the only reason evolution has lasted this long is ,because of their massive propaganda campaign that has been filled with known hoaxes and lies. I think that the whole tell a lie so many times ,and people will believe it is at work too ,that and I believe that Hitler said something that the bigger the lie the more people you can get to believe it. I believe that these factors combined are what keeps evolution afloat.

You wrote: I don't deny anything about dinosaurs in the fossil record. This is an unfounded assumption on your part.

I did not write this. It was somebody else.

The rest of your comment consists of nothing but invented arguments against science by people who cannot accept science probably because they earn their livings by spreading all this nonsense. Maybe you are paid too, cerebrum, as this explains your persistence and the fact that you are looking well-prepared. But this does not change the fact that your comments are only nonsense without any support by scientists.

A simple look at Wikipedia is enough and cerebrums words are revealed as lies; no renowned scientist in the world would teach such stupid things.

Folding and volcanism alone don't account for sea creatures being found on the tops of mountains around the entire world









Folding and volcanism alone don't account for sea creatures being found on the tops of mountains around the entire world

You continue to write in loose generalities with few confirmations...What mountains 'around the world'? And if there are marine animal remains on one mt, they must be on all mountains...Miners in the Sierra Nevada Mountains and foothills, dug lots of holes, as deep 10,000 FT... and there is no common knowledge or evidence they ever went through a thin layer of silt with marine animal remains...Geologists missed the same layer.....

I just realised that Cerebrum talked bad about me @Duh. This is not genlemans like.
But I am committed to what I sayed. There is no renownded scholar or scientist who deals with the subject who does not accept the evolution. The evolution takes place every day and everywhere. If we use antibiotika in order to keep infectious deseases under control, some of the bacteria will survive because they found something that keeps them alive. The same with insecticides, fungicides and other things. Next generations become resistant and we must invent something new. Then the same thing happens again and again and again. Every scientist knows this and accepts this. The same happened with dinosaur and other creatures. With changing environments creatures changed as well; this happened, is still happening and will happen in future.

And what is Cerebrum teaching? He teaches that the story of Noah is true according to the bible (and quran!). In the bible it is told that Noah took animals from all species onboard.

There are around 5.500 Mammals, 10.000 Birds, 9000 reptiles, more than 1 million described insects and many other animals not listed here. Cerebrum asserts that the whole earth was under water and that this made it necessary to rescue all animals in the Arch.

Therefore, Noah is supposed to have forced all this animals including birds, Krokodiles, Elephants and so on into a DIY-boat! Even a pair of every species!

Does Cerebrum know that even a pair of each species would not be enough because inbreeding would cause damages to later generations?

BTW, there is nobody believing in this nonsense except America, where all the fundamentalists live, paid by some billionaires who are against taxes and against progress, who deny the existence of the climate change because they make their money with oil. oh, I forgot, there are also many muslim fundamentalists who teach the same nonsense for the same reason. Religion and Oil!

And you believe that the world is only a few thousand years old? Like the muslims do?

But we know the speed of light and we know that there are galaxies billions of light years away! We can watch what happened billions of years ago with our own eyes!

It seems you are belonging to a fundamentalist think tank only wasting its time with spreading doubts against science!

The human era might be approximately 100.000 years by now, but miilions years ago, mostly scientists believe 65, the dinosaurs got extinct and they lasted for more than 165 millions years. Billion years before that the earth was inhabitable and not suitable for life as we know it, it was one hot burning globe and later in history the whole planet was covered with 3 km thick ice. The planet earth has always been subjected to forces of nature and in this process, there is violence and destruction, but then again, it is creation at the same time. In the entire history of earth, it never was perfect in the sense that it was peacefull or anything like that. Believing that somewhere in time the earth was an eternal and heaven-like place like cerebrum is trying to say is simply not true. It takes time to realize it, i suppose.

The process of politics becoming religion started with the not so cultured desert civilizations. The Greeks, Romans and the Egyptians who had developed more in arts and science did not mix wars with religion. It started with Moses inventing that God gave him ten commandments. Because he had seen the behaviour of those tribes his sermons were about lying cheating and adultery. In order to give it the necessary strength he had to take the name of God. Then came Jesus who could not deviate much from the Jews because he would be completely rejected. But he tried to bring in some sense into the senseless tribal Practices. Mohammed saw an opportunity in this process and adopted the scheme to proclaim himself a prophet. Then started the wars of "My God is God, Yours is Devil". Luckily you don't see such religious wars in the Indian sub continent. There may have been skirmishes but no wars. Their philosophy was better. "You worship your God I will worship mine." "If you want you worship several Gods are none. I don't mind you not agreeing with me". Their rules are set by discussions and debates among people who were learned in their subject. I am not suggesting they were right in all their practices. But they were not fighting over whose God was true. They were only fighting for control of land and not control over God.
It is funny that Cerebrums, Cerebellums, and Pastors who have flushed their brains and filled it with fanaticism criticising Islam. Only those who agree that every man has a right to believe in his God or no God can criticise Islam. The desire to convert the entire world to MY religion is THE WORST BOMB
.

If two of each animal was loaded on the ark, where did the great wooly mammoth come from? Why are there two kinds of snakes, poisonous an non poisonous? Which ones were on the ark and how did they get to Australia? The distribution of animals from one central point could only happen if the ark story happened on the fabled Island of Pangaea, before it broke up into continents...According to the ages of the patriarchs the world was at least two thousand years old when the ark story happened...How long after the ark landed on Ararat, it took for Pangaea to break up is unknown, but according to that theory, it had a minimum of four thousand years to do it...The worlds oldest tree is 4800 years old...it is found in the Nevada USA desert...This tree cannot live under water, so it would have had to have been germinated sometime after the flood...This would place the flood at 1200 years after Adam was created , he lived to 930, that's only 270 years before the flood, according to the tree....But this is not possible because according to the story Noah was not even born 270 years after Adam died, and he was an elderly man when he built the ark...So this would mean that the flood happened in about the year 1200, on the 6 thousand year scale, but Noah was not around...Some how these numbers don't add up...the only one not telling fibs is the tree...

I apologize for the comment about dinosaur thing. I made a mistake in reading who posted. You are however incorrect about a great deal of the above posts. Distant starlight does not prove long ages. This is also a problem for people who believe in the time table of the Big Bang and the Big bang itself. The problem for the Big Bang is that temperatures throughout the universe are basically uniform. Even with the massive amount of time in this model it still does not account for the uniform temperatures. This is called the "horizon problem". One particular solution for a Bible believing creationist is gravitational time dilation. There is not enough space to go into all of this on here ,but I will give you some places to find the relevant material. One is a book called "Starlight, Time and the New Physics" by John Hartnett ,and "Starlight and Time" by Russel Humphreys. creation.com and answersingenesis.org are also places with explanations of these ways in which starlight could reach us in a young universe.
As for fitting all of the animals on the ark and for their current amount of variation the answer is very simple. The Bible says that Noah took 2 pairs of each "unclean" kind and 7 pairs of each "clean" kind. He did not take two of every species that are here now on the ark. The original createdkinds would have had a great deal of genetic variability (more so than they do now ,and they would not have been subject to the genetic damage you speak of since one kind cannot mate with a different kind). This genetic variability within kinds through natural and artificial selection eventually led to the very large number of what we call "species" today. There would have been far less animals on the ark than there are species today. The average is around 20,000 individual animals. I do not deny natural selection and variation ,what I do deny is the kind of evolution that with enough time a monkey will become a man. This is completely impossible. No matter how much time is available a monkey will never "evolve" into a man (it will ALWAYS remain a monkey). The problem is not with the amount of change (the whole micro macro evolution stuff) ,but with the kind of change. For a something to evolve (monkeys to man type stuff) you need additional information to be added to the DNA. The "engine" of evolution ,mutations and natural selection, would have to be able to produce brand new functional information to be added to the organism's DNA. What happens with these processes is ,however ,the exact opposite. Information is either shuffled, degraded , or completely lost. If these processes were going on for billions of years ALL life would be extinct by now due to a total degradation of the DNA.

You said that no renowned scientist (or scholar) believes the Bible to be true. This is patently false. There have been many great scientists , both now and in the past , that believe the Bible to be completely true. I will start with one who is alive now who has made an extremely helpful contribution to medical technology ,Dr. Raymond V. Damadian. He invented the MRI scanners that have been used to save many lives. Let's take a look at some of the earlier creation scientists. Francis Bacon ,Galileo Galilei,Johann Kepler,Athanasius Kircher,Blaise Pascal,Roberty Boyle ,Isaac Newton (who wrote more about the Bible than he did science), John Hutchinson ,Carolus Linneaus, Samuel F.B. Morse, Louis Pasteur, William Thompson Lord Kelvin (he believed in an older than the Bible allows ,but far younger than an evolutionary one),James Joule,Joseph Lister,George Washington Carver etc.
There is a much more comprehensive list on creation.com.
I made a mistake in my part 1 post that I would like to correct. I said that the early animals wouldn't be subject to the genetic damage you describe due to the fact that kinds can't mate with other kinds. This was from my misunderstanding your above post. I should have said that at this early time in earth's history there had not been enough time to build up enough damage to make the inbreeding as harmful as it is now.
Not one of your scientists for sure knows that the earth started out hot and then cooled. The Bible states almost the opposite (that it was covered in water and then God made dry land appear) ,and I trust the Bible much more than any fallible man's interpretations of the data.
I don't have a problem with science ,I have a problem with how the evidence is interpreted. Evolutionary scientists have the same evidence we do ,but they are interpreting it with their a priori assumption that evolution happened ,and that the universe is extremely old ,but the only place where I disagree with the interpretations is when it comes to historical science ,not operational science. Historical science deals with things that cant be observed ,and the current tests (radiocarbon dating) are almost entirely based on assumptions and not on fact.

There are two things you are assuming in your above about the ages. 1 You are assuming that 6,000 years is the exact age of the earth (it's only an estimate based on the Biblical genealogies) ,and 2 that the tree is exactly 4,800 years old. The general estimate for the age of the earth is usually between 6,000 and 10,000 years (I believe closer to the 6,000 years). Also while that tree is very possibly that old it is probably not an exact date either. The Biblical chronology has to take into account the fact that the Bible writers only used whole years ,and any day up to their birthday would still count as the year before. For the tree it is possible for multiple rings to grow in a single season if it is a very wet season.
For very good (and scientific)information I suggest you look at 2 different sites one is creation.com and the other is answersingenesis.org . They take a real look at a great deal of issues from Noah's Flood ,to distant starlight , to the amount of helium in earth's atmosphere.

You said that no renowned scientist (or scholar) believes the Bible to be true. This is patently false.

All those experts were Christians or Bible believers to begin with..They all operated on the 'assumption' that every word of the Bible is true...
These people were not immune to believing in fairy tales in spite of their scientific creditably...
You continue to make gigantic stretches to make your points...Being a Doctor or scientist does not guarantee a stable belief system...There are numbers of Muslim Doctors and scientists who believe in the Qurans fairy tales...What all you believers have in common is the desire to dispense with common sense and replace it with fantasy...

You say: There can be no progress if we keep christian superstition since the quran is drawing most of its content from the bible.

This is far from the truth. While the Qur'an does contain the names of a few people whose deeds and sayings are recorded in the Bible, there is little or no correlation between the stories in these two books.

You also state: quran only quotes all this miracle stuff from the bible

Again. NOT TRUE. The Qur’an does not “quote” miracle stuff from the Bible at all. The author(s) of the Qur’an made up a bunch of stuff using names from the Bible. The stories are NOT the same AT ALL. Some of the stories and information come from the Talmud, some from pre-Islamic Arabic poetry, some from heretics and other non-Biblical sources. And some of it he(they) just plain made up!!!

Futhermore, the Judeo-Christian origins for the Qur’an have been greatly exaggerated. There is far more evidence for the Qur’an (and Islam itself) having been derived from Mesopotamian and Egyptian mythology, and pre-Islamic paganistic rites and beliefs.

I would also like to take this opportunity to clarify another issue. Christians do not believe that the Bible is perfect or the absolute word of a God. But rather, history as people remembered it and inspired writings by sages who attempted to impart wisdom over the ages.

I agree with John Adams when he said:

I will insist that the Hebrews have done more to civilize men than any other nation (by propagating) to all mankind the doctrine of a supreme, intelligent, wise, almighty sovereign of the universe, which I believe to be the great essential principle of all morality, and consequently of all civilization. -- John Adams

You are right that the quran is drawing from many sources such as the Talmud, apokrypha, gnostic writings and other traditions. But it is also drawing miracle stories from the bible.

The Virgin birth of Mary. The quran writes that Jesus performed many mircles in clear reference to the bible. with the difference that this happened with the agreement of Allah Quoting that Jesus was the Messias, the Word (Logos!?), raised to Heaven and infected by the spirit. While the quran changes many details, it is clear that the origin is the bible.

Considering the Old Testament there are even more parallels. Adan, Noah, Joseph and Musa, Amran and others appear and many of their stories are very similar to the bible.

I agree that they are not the same but similar with alterations in some details, which maybe important or not. Even later christian tradition such as the Seven Sleepers were adapted with its miracles.

I also agree that christians usually believe that the bible was written by humans. Thus, there maybe errors and contradictions.

But there are people like cerebrum who insist that the bible has absolutely no errors. Please blame him and not me.

I also know that many modern christians know that not everything in the bible is historically true. Universities in Europe do not teach such things any more. They have modern approaches while the islamic scholars are still living in the past. They do think that the quran was written by god and think it makes sense to memorize and recite it over and over again. However, some christian fundamentalists are not better. They sitll believe word for word and do not accept that modern science knows better. Many of them even understand the bible in a way far away from the original intention. It is not an easy task to explain what the original intention was but this is also the job of the scholars. I mean things such as Harmaggeddon or many words from Jesus or other characters which must be seen in its respective historical background.

This is also very important for islam. Many claims of the Islamists are ridiculous because they have no idea how to understand ancient scriptures.

Many claims of the Islamists are ridiculous because they have no idea how to understand ancient scriptures.

That's true enough, they don't put any effort at all into ancient scriptures other than their own...

Scripture and mans tendency to write them, and the tendency for other men to like them (a lot), is responsible for millions upon millions of people to be murdered, and abused, and robbed...The whole idea that scripture is holy is a huge lie and delusion...All scripture is false, because most of it is about 'God', but is not God...Everything that is not God, is a duality that will suffer the same fate as all dualities, corruption, decay, entropy and evil...Most religions have a concept of oneness of God or merging with God, or being 'with' God, knowing God etc...there is nothing religiously or spiritually higher than to merge with God...The huge lie is that you do not need anyone's god or books to do it, nor do you need the all seeing all knowing Imam or priest to tell you all about it...In fact oneness with God makes all books and philosophies irrelevant...God is not a book, and he does not live in one...That men were 'inspired' to write scripture is true, but it is no guarantee of accuracy or reality...

There have been some minor copying errors over the years ,but they are exceedingly minor ,and not one affects doctrine in any way. The NT authenticity is at 99.5% ,and the OT is very similar in it's amount of scribal error. Not even Shakespeare has this good of a record when it comes to copying errors ,and it is a much more recent work. There are not real contradictions in the Bible. A closer look at what most people call contradictions actually aren't. If you put the Bible to the real tests of historicity it comes out better than any other historical document (so long as you don't automatically rule out the supernatural) in history. Also Christians don't believe that the Bible is word for word God's direct speech ,but that the Bible was inspired by God ,and that He kept the authors from making any errors in the originals (called autographs). This is quite different from what Islam teaches about the Quran. I think you should do some of your own research instead of listening to some "scholar" that already has a bias. When the Bible is speaking on any matter what it says is absolutely true.

@ Duh
And every expert you would bring would begin with the assumption that the Bible isn't true. The whole thing about this is that BOTH sides start with presuppositions that affect their interpretation ,and this is why an evolutionist will say something in support of evolution with the same data that a creationist will use in support of creation. The question really is which presupposition is right? More and more people are realizing that evolution is a lie (not to mention supported by lies and hoaxes) ,and that it isn't science at all. Evolution is a religion without God ,without morals ,and without science. At least the presuppositions of the Christian worldview leads to science ,abolition of slavery ,religious freedom etc. Evolution leads to Nazism ,Communism ,eugenics ,abortion etc. One of them is ethically dead (scientifically dead as well) ,the other brings the ethically dead to life in Christ.

Quote from Wikipedia about the two different genealogies of Jesus by Matthew and Luke:

"The two Biblical genealogies disagree not only on on the name of Joseph’s father, but on the entire lineage back to David."

While I believe that both are only fiction, they are quite different. Thus, they contradict each other and at least one of them MUST BE WRONG.

Therefore, we can say THERE ARE ERRORS IN THE BIBLE WITHOUT ANY DOUBT.

This only one example. I could provide many more examples but a single one is enough to provide evidence that the bible contains errors.

Evolution is a religion without God ,without morals ,and without science.

A bull of crap, my friend. It doesn't have anything to do with evolution. Evolution is how nature evolved and in some degree how it works. Like rain, it's not God litterally who does it. It's how nature with all it's laws etc. works. If there is a God then His tool for life on earth is evolution.

And every expert you would bring would begin with the assumption that the Bible isn't true.

I don't need to bring experts, I already know the truth of the matter...It is you who needs experts to back up your weak positions...

None of your meanderings make any sense...

Those lineages that are hopefully contradictory are only hopefully contradictory if you aren't looking at the whole story. One of them is traced through Mary's family line ,and one is through Joseph's family line. This is only a problem if you are trying to make it into one.

@ Macmoed

Evolution is NOT how things work ,and things have never worked that way in the past ( I am specifically talking about the idea that all living organisms have a common ancestor ,and evolved over time into what they are today. I have no problem with natural selection and adaptation as these things do happen). This idea of a common ancestor shows up as an ancient Greek idea. It was later popularized (and plagiarized) by Darwin. No matter how much time you have this kind of evolution will NEVER HAPPEN. Things just don't work like this. In order for one organism to "evolve" you need to have brand new information added to the DNA. There is no mechanism that does this in nature. In fact in nature the opposite is constantly happening. If anything is actually happening things are de-evolving and losing useful information. Not only that evolution can't answer how life started in the first place. Abiogenesis (sometimes called chemical evolution) does not happen ,it goes against the law of nature known as biogenesis ,which states that life only comes from life. Micheal Ruse an evolutionist admitted this "Evolution is promoted by it's practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion-a full fledged alternative to Christianity , with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint - and Mr. Gish is but one of many to make it - the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.
"...evolution came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity."

@ Duh
I only even put that list up there because I keep on hearing people say that no real "scholar" (or scientist or intelligent person for that matter) actually believes the Bible to be true. I am sick of hearing these kinds of lies (especially when it refers to the idea that all "real" scientists ,which you yourself said earlier, believe in evolution) ,and misinformation. A real look at the Biblical texts shows that they are indeed the truth ,and when properly interpreted, match up with archaeology ,history ,and science. You dismiss all of the evidence for the truth of the Biblical texts without even looking at it while taking in anything anyone says about evolution as truth (so long as they affirm it as being true). You also seem willing to believe just about anything against the Bible to be the truth to without even looking at both sides of the story.

It couldn't possibly be since Joseph Smith of the LDS, was the LAST Prophet!

This idea of a common ancestor shows up as an ancient Greek idea. It was later popularized (and plagiarized) by Darwin.

You mean, it is not different then the process of religion. This might be true, cause everything relates to human proportions. The major difference though is that evolution doesn't tell us what to do or not and it is not exclusive like religions are. There is no good or bad in evolution.

Cerebrum is resistant to any logic and rationalism. It does not make any sense to discuss with him. He seems to belong to a fundamentalist think tank paid to spread all this nonsense in order to keep the fundamentalist world in order. We can tell him whatever we want he will always come with an answer because the organisation he belongs to produces them whenever scientists and scholars make new discoveries.

And in case that he really does not have any answer, then he just does not answer but he will never admit anything. This was the case when I explained that we know the speed of light and that we can conclude from the distance of fa away galaxies that the universe must be many billions of years old and that there can be no doubt about it.

You also seem willing to believe just about anything against the Bible to be the truth to without even looking at both sides of the story.

I read the Bible five times and used it as a reference hundreds of times and have looked at both sides of the story...I never said the Bible was useless or was full of lies...I said the Bible is not a book to believe, it is a book to understand, and you either understand it or you don't...
The Bible contains different layers, spiritual stuff, historical stuff, symbolic stuff, and imaginary stuff...If you are going to understand the Bible you must understand the natures of all those topics...If you cannot sort them out and understand them, you understand little or nothing...In some area's you are throwing the baby out with the bath water...You are not completely wrong, and I never said you were, but you are unrefined, you continue to swallow camels, while straining out the gnats...That's what Muslims do, in fact all religious supremacist bigots have that in common...To boil it down, according to Christians, The Bible is a road sign, pointing to Jesus, who is another road sign pointing to the Kingdom of Heaven...If you get stuck at the road sign, you will soon run out of gas...Your tank is almost empty now so you need to break out your road map, get your face out of the Bible, and find your way to Jesus before your engine quits...

Creationists are irrational. They depend on the Bible/Quran to foist their irrational ideas. Like the BS called Big Bang theory. which talks of this Universe having a starting point from an infinitely small point having infinite matter and space that sprang from a "big bang" . Bah! This is like Adam and Eve who begat Cain and Abel. And from where did Cain and Abel get their spouses? Perhaps the desert spook pluckwed their ribs and fashioned a wife each for Adam and Eve's progeny ? The Big bang theory has its origins in such irrational stupid tales that even a two year old would snigger derisively. Nobody has found the limits of space or the last star on its "edge". It is all a wild conjecture by scientists who want to play "god" with such irrational theories that has no real foundations but just "maybe so " theories that has an agenda to back the biblical fairy tales as the truth.After all the concept of Big Bang was propounded by a clergy from the Church. Isn't it stupid sitting on a small ,insignificant planet called Earth in a solar system that itself is on the fringes of our own galaxy and claim that since all stars and galaxies seem moving away from "us" (as though we are at the centre of the "creation") , hence there must be a Big Bang to trigger the beginning of this Universe? We are going back to "earth-centric Cosmos" again.
With this background the claim of a "last/final prophet" is another bullshit. Why final prophet? Because the desert cults have a belief in the "doomsday" or the socalled "judgement day" when all the believers are sent to "heaven"/ "jannat" and all unbelievers consigned to the eternal flames of "hell/jahanum". If Muhamad was the final prophet , the doomsday has not yet arrived even after 1,400 years after his death. Infact , the world has progressed and become a better oplace to live with humans experiencing the air of freedom and freethinking, progress economically, scientifically,knowledge-wise and above with modern democracy guaranteeing humanrights and freedom from discriminations and human sl;avery that no Bible or Quran can deliver. Infact all religious texts have failed in this respect. If we go back to the insanities of the socalled religions, we go back to the dark ages and the diktats of the clergy whose bloody hands have already taken millions of lives in the name of this socalled "god" and his rotten commandments. Bible and Quran encourage slavery, racism and exploitation of the blacks and other dark skinned peoples, which is a historical fact. Even today the arabs follow the abominable practice of slavery and racism.Why? Because ,like the jews, the arabs view themselves as the superior race and the chosen people of their monotheistical megalomaniacal "god" or Allah. I have friends who have worked in Saudi Arabia who have told me that they look down upon indians,pakistanis and bangladeshis as menial species. So much for this tall claim of Muhamad being the last "prophet".

Prophethood is the worst scam and it perpetuates a bunch of clergies who use it to expoit the common gullible population and live comfortably exploiting their fears and sense of insecurities and fear of death . Doomsday and judgement day is the byproduct of this massive scam.
The fact is we as human species are bound to become extinct in the evolutionary cycle like the thousands of species that have become extinct over millions of years. This is natural and a fact that cannot escape the process of evolution. Evolution is a fact that has been well documented by scientists.If we were to give in to these scamster who peddle "god and religion " for a comfortable living, we will be soon taken to the anarchy of religious intolerance : we will undo all the fruits of human progress in the field of knowledge, science and economics and become prisoners of the hideously backward idealogies of these religious fundamentalists and bigots.
Last prophet/Final prophet ,absolute BULLSHIT.

And from where did Cain and Abel get their spouses?

According to the Bible, there were other people already living out side the Garden...Where they came from is not explained...

Gen 4:13 Cain said to the LORD, “My punishment is more than I can bear. 14 Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”

15 But the LORD said to him, “Not so[e]; anyone who kills Cain will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. 16 So Cain went out from the LORD’s presence and lived in the land of Nod,[f] east of Eden.

I don't think Abel ever married ,but Cain got his wife from one of his own sisters. Adam had many sons and daughters. This is something that many people who attack the historicity of the Bible overlook.
You say that the Bible is a road sign pointing to Jesus ,but you are unwilling to follow the directions given by Jesus. Why is this? You deny all of His claims ,and basically call Him a liar when you say that Adam and Eve didn't exist ,along with Noah ,and others. Jesus believed that they were historical people ,and He also claimed to be God. He proved this with His resurrection(which was witnessed by hundreds of people) , but you still reject Him. Obviously the one who is lacking understanding here is you. You're not even willing to follow the directions of the one who you say is a road sign to the Kingdom of God. He isn't just a road sign He is the very gate ,and road itself. John 14:6 Jesus answered , "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Abolition of slavery ,science ,religious tolerance ,religious freedom ,freedom of speech etc. are fruits of Christianity. Without Christianity you wouldn't have any of the above. Also there were no "Dark Ages". The era commonly known as the "Dark Ages" was actually a period of great scientific advancement. You obviously do not know what you are talking about ,but are just venting your frustrations.
Evolution is NOT a fact ,and doesn't even truly qualify as a theory. It can't be tested observed or repeated. It can't be falsified either. This takes it out of the realm of science. In fact evolution is completely IMPOSSIBLE ,it goes against the laws of nature (specifically biogenesis and the second law of thermodynamics). Adaptation has been observed ,and so has natural selection ,but there has never been an instance of true Darwinian evolution ever. The processes needed for this kind of change simply do not happen. In fact nature runs in the opposite direction. We are degrading in our DNA from generation to generation. This is happening for all life.
Also the Big Bang theory is a load of crap. At least we agree on this ,but it is the commonly accepted model for evolutionists now ,and most creationists reject it. A universe that begins with a "Big Bang" is a dead universe.
Actually there is evidence that our galaxy is at the center of the universe. It has to do with red shifts (I think that is what it's called anyway I have poor short term memory sometimes. Hubble wanted to reject his original conclusions on red shifts simply because it suggested we are near the center of the universe).
Evolution has encouraged racism ,eugenics ,abortion ,Nazism etc. One Australian Aborigines was placed in a zoo with monkeys and was claimed to be one of evolution's "missing links". It also taught early that black people were descended from gorillas and were less intelligent due to this fact.
The Israelites are not chosen due to superiority of any kind ,and the Bible makes this perfectly clear. In fact they were chosen in spite of their rebellious ways. They were also specifically taught to treat foreigners and slaves kindly (OT slavery was more like indentured servitude and was nothing like slavery that most people think of today).
I think you need to know what you are talking about before you start posting things like the above.

Yes we know what the speed of light is in our part of the universe ,but the speed of light may not be the same in other parts of the universe. Rapid expansion and intense or decreased gravity can change the speed of light quite easily. Satellites in space have different time flow than we do here on earth. The difference is tiny ,but if we did not know about it we could never do our current GPS systems without adjusting to this difference in time flow. The difference in time while minor would cause major errors very fast without the adjustments we have made. Gravitational time dilation is one way that light could travel much faster further away from us than it does here. This all plays into the Theory of Relativity. Also I am not paid to come on here ,I do it because I feel compelled by God to do so. There is a command for Christians in the Bible it goes like this
Matthew 28:19 Therefor go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit,
I see a lot of misinformation on here ,and I do what I can to correct it. I won't go into specifics ,but many people on here post things that are blatantly false. I can't stand falsehood ,and unfortunately I see it a lot ,but this is one place where I can actually say something about it. I am attacked and constantly belittled simply because I am trying to tell the truth. John 3:19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world , but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.20 Everyone who does evil hates the light ,and will not come into it for fear that their deeds will be exposed.21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light , so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

Your comment is nonsense and only confirms what I said. Whenever somebody provides evidence against you than you will strike back with nonsense and never admit. i do not think that you are really believing in your words. You are just doing your job. Spreading nonsense without any limit.

But what about providing evidence? What about quoting renowned and accepted sources such as Wikipedia? You will never do that.

I am trying to tell the truth. John 3:19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world , but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.20 Everyone who does evil hates the light ,and will not come into it for fear that their deeds will be exposed.21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light , so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

Congratulations...Are you done patting yourself on the back now?

The hubble telescope confirmed a lot of tiny preassumptions they had regarding the big bang theory. The thought behind it is that stars/galaxys are moving away from eachother and when you trace the the movements, the speed of expandation etc. back, you get to the assumed startingpoint (big bang). The Hubble also discovered (deep sace) so many clusters of galaxys (approximately 8 billions years ago) close to eachother that it is most likely that the univers was once smaller. It is still a theory and as soon as there is a better explanation/theory, science will incorporate it and use it for the next step etc.

Regarding this kind of subjects humanity has just started to explore.

Big Bang theory is neither a hypothesis nor a message from some imagined 'God' of the scientists. It is a theory based on experimental observation and backed by mathematical analysis. You can not just wish it away by your blank assertions. You have to find fault with that experiment or with the mathematical model and send the same to the physics department of any renowned university. Otherwise you will be treated as a crank.

Scientists found existence of some strange electro-magnetic waves reverberating in the cosmos whose characteristics mathematically match with electromagnetic waves caused by an explosion some billion years back. This is the basis of the Big Bang theory. Modern Scientists detected existence of some more electromagnetic waves that correspond to a series of Big Bangs in the further remote past. So, the Hindu cosmological hypothesis of a series of creations and destructions agrees fully with modern science. Hindu holy sound ‘AUM’ which is called the primeval sound –NADBRAMHA- may well be the sound of the Big Bang. What modern scientists have achieved by experiment and mathematical analysis was achieved long ago by Vedic Rishis through meditation.

Darwin’s theory of ‘survival of the fittest through natural selection’ is not the only driving force of evolution. Theory of mutation, propounded by the Dutch Scientist Di Vris played significant role in the evolution. Theory of evolution may not be faultless, but yours is a pure bullshit.

In fact Hinduism and Buddhisn both seem to match much better with science than judaism, christianity and islam which all share the idea that the world was created only a few thousand years ago.

in contrast, buddhism always teached that the world is so old than we cannot find when the beginning was. Even today this seems to be true. If we discover anything looking like the end of the world or the beginning we will also have to ask what is behind.

It seems to me that we are not allowed to know such things, yet ,,,

You say that the Bible is a road sign pointing to Jesus ,but you are unwilling to follow the directions given by Jesus.

You really are loaded with assumptions...I said that because I know Christians believe it, and I already told your failing memory that Jesus is one way to God, but not the only way...Your insistence that he is the only way is false and misleading...It's not good enough for you to get the oranges, you want all the apples too, as well as the basket to carry them in...Well I'm sorry your Grace, Adam and Eve ate all the apples so you can't have any, you will have to be satisfied with oranges...And leave the basket here...

By the way, Cain marrying his sister is called incest and is usually regarded as one of those sins you like to talk about...Incest is illegal in all civilized countries, it often leads to mental retardation and blood conditions...Did God sanction this sinful marriage? And you did not answer up to just who outside the Garden Cain was afraid of...There should have been no one there...Apparently the Bible did not tell you everything, it left out the rest of the story...That's why you don't know it...

You say that Cain married one of his own sisters just as Adam married his own sister Eve. That mweans the whole Bible stands on immorality ,condoning 'incest'. No sane human being can accept that Bible can give any moral lessons. It certainly cannot. In the book of Genesis there is also another story of Judas (not the contemporary of Jesus) who impregnates his own daughter-in law , not to mention Lot sleeping with his own daughters to beget some tribes , Amobites and Maobotes or whatever..... This is insanely immoral : it outbeats any porn. Yet they claim that the Bible / Quran to be immaculate and morally superior. That is a joke!
Secondly , you claim that it is because of christianity that science has developed and grown. That is the most absurd and the most false claim. It is a very big lie ,considering the fact that the church interfered in the matters of science to make it subservient to theology of the Bible . Why was Galileo threatened ansd kept in house arrest? Why was Edward Bruno burnt ? Why was Copernicus treated as a 'heretic' ? Why were so many free thinkers captured, tortured and burnt at stake? The scientists came about because pagans like the prechristian greeks came back in the mainstream of knowledge ,like Aristotle, Plato,Socrates, Democritus,etc . And all those scientists were basically sceptics and only scepticism and dobts will impel inquiry and curiousity, not a smug ignorant belief in scriptures. So you can stop bluffing your way to promote your cult .

I would like to comment on your second point. On christianity and science I would say that you are right and you are not right. Of course, it is true that Galileo was accused and some others but it is also true that christianity contributed much to science. Greek philosophy was teached at christian monasteries which developed to universities later.

i would say that bookprinting and universities were the main forces behind the scientific revolution and the latter developed only in Europe and not in the islamic world nor in china were all other thinking different from islam and confucianism had not chance to soread.

There are also without doubt many christians who spread science such as Matteo Ricci and other jesuites who teached astronomy, mathematics and other things in China. One pioneer of genetics was Christian Mendel who also paved the way for the evoiution theory, which, by the way, is already accepted by the catholic church and all leading protestant churches at least in Europe.

Creationism is a phenomenom of very underdeveloped people and, surprisingly, the USA, where fundamentalists are still very strong. This has a couple of reasons: Many fundementalsts emigrated to USA were they still enjoy a large demographic share. Secondly, in contrast to most european countries, there is no Compulsory education in the US, and many fundamentalists can teach their children at home, brainwashing included.

Moreover, there is also religion teached as subject at school in some european countries such as Germany, but not o brainwash the children. They are teached to learn to assess what religion really is and how deal with it. Of course this is not compulsory and all children can decide by themselves when they are 14 years old.

There are also political reasons. The republicans rely on evangelical votes and oil money, while the evangelicals in turn receive some support. This unholy triangle alliance is dragging the USA so down - it is really a shame!

On christianity and science I would say that you are right and you are not right. Of course, it is true that Galileo was accused and some others but it is also true that christianity contributed much to science.

true, but it not because of christianity but rather in spite of christianity. The reason that science and religion cannot go hand in hand is because science tries to answer some question by applying methods that could be measured, calculated and verified by experiments etc. in ordr to be as objective as possible and then the conclusion. It's dynamical. On the other hand we have religions where the conclusion is fixed and where it tries to fix the gaps by using absurd and irrational stories/lies. Science has not a pre-fixed outcome. Religions have only that and are static as a statue. Everything in life is subjective but when it comes to stupid and irrational subjectivity, Religions have the golden Medal.

Science and knowledge progressed despite religions, not because of it . When I say religions , I mean all religions without exceptions. But no religion is as intolerant and bigoted as monotheistic cults such as judaism , christianity and islam. These are very dogmatic, rigid and uncompromisingly intolerant of anything outside their socalled "word of God" . With this kind of negative attitude and a closed mind , no fresh air/ ideas can seep in. These desert cults were arrogant , highly motivated to keep people in abject subjugation to their clergy and organisations ,and above all destructive of all cultures other than their own. The scientists of Europe had braved against all these odds to go in search of knowledge. That is why it is not because of christianity but despite it that Europe progressed. After all the ancient greeks and romans were not christians. If the muslims clerics and the church maintained the works of these ancient 'pagans' ,it was because that without it there would be a total intellectual vaccuum. Moreover these works of the ancient pagans were meant to subserve the churches and muslim clergies' objectives of propogating their cults,since they knew their scriptures were morally and intellectually bankrupt ,except for sowing the seeds of fear ,violence and instigating destruction of civilisations that grew organically over thousands of years. Again , it is only cherry-picking made by these monotheistic maniacs to further their barbaric agendas, and it was not love for free intellectual thinking or pursuit of knowledge.

Only in Christian Europe did science truly begin ,it was stillborn in all other cultures. Science NEEDS Christian presuppositions to even get a foothold to survive. Among these presuppositions are that the universe was made by a God of laws , and that we are made in God's image ,and are capable of understanding these laws. Francis Bacon (the founder of the scientific method) was inspired BY the Bible and Genesis in particular ,because he thought that before the Fall ,Adam had an encyclopedic knowledge of all science ,and that we should strive to regain that lost knowledge. Other great founders of modern science also found their inspiration not in Plato or Socrates ,but in the Bible. Johannes Kepler described science as "Thinking God's thoughts after Him". Most of the greatest scientists were inspired specifically by the Bible. Isaac Newton had more of a passion for the Bible ,and for God than he did for science ,and wrote more about God than he ever did about science. Isaac Newton once said "This most beautiful system of the sun ,planets ,and comets could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. ..atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system , I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."
Blaise Pascal once said ""Faith tells us what the senses cannot ,but it is not contrary to their findings. It simply transcends ,without contradicting them."

ALL other worldview make science a worthless effort. In atheism we are just a bunch of chemical reactions with no real understanding of anything ,and no possibility to understand anything either. In Islam the idea of natural laws is blasphemy because it "limits Allah's will to act". In Hinduism we could never use any animals or any life form for experiments. In Judaism you have to stay ritually clean to be a part of any of the ceremonies. In ancient Greek and Roman beliefs the gods were so unpredictable that the people thought it worthless to try and find out how things actually worked so they would philosophize about how things should work.

Galileo was in trouble because he opposed the accepted "scientific" model of the time. Not for going against the Bible. He was under house arrest for defying a decree by the Pope. He opposed the Ptolemaic system ,and it was mostly other scientists that opposed him ,and since the Church chose to stand by the accepted science they are now accused of being against science. Ironic isn't it?

If one goes to a public school in the USA one will be indoctrinated into the religion of humanism. Also you will not receive are very good education there either. Over here in public schools test scores are dropping dramatically ,but in home schools children are receiving far better educations that better prepare them for a good job. The public school system over here is actually teaching less and less every year. I witnessed this firsthand while I was in public schools. Not only is the curriculum dumbed down every year ,but the children's moral behavior is appalling. With evolution being taught as fact ,and moral relativism being increasingly taught things like Columbine are happening more and more frequently. These worldviews are devoid of morals (and science) ,and the effects are becoming more and more visible.
You obviously know very little about creationism. I really suggest you take a look at either answersingenesis.org or creation.com(Answers in Genesis is actually an Australian creationism evangelistic effort). Both sites have real answers to many of your questions ,and are backed up with real science.
Evolution is backed up with hoaxes ,lies , and "just so" stories(by just so stories I mean stories that aren't even very good). Archaeoraptor ,Haeckle's embryos , Piltdown man ,peppered moths (this one isn't even a problem for one who believes in creation ,but is just an example of how far people are willing to go to spread evolutionary propaganda) etc. Many of these things remain in textbooks even though they are known to be false (Haeckle's embryos being at the forefront).

Evolution also leads (when followed to it's logical conclusions) to Nazism,eugenics ,abortion , justified racism (the teachings early on were that each "race" evolved from a different type of ape. Blacks = gorillas =whites = chimpanzees etc. The claim was that since chimps were the smartest that whites were the "fittest race") justified rape (the teaching now is that rape is an evolutionary advantage) etc. Morals are thrown out the window ,because now everything is acceptable since all we are is highly evolved pond scum with no choice in our actions. This would also mean that everything we are typing here today is just a result of our individual brain chemistry ,and has no bearing on any kind of intelligence ,but only simple chemical reactions. This makes all of your arguments completely useless since it will all be forgotten along with you and everything you have ever cared about. It makes EVERYTHING completely pointless ,and has led people to throw their lives away to drugs ,and other immoral activities since they know that their lives are worthless ,and that nothing they do matters so they might as well do whatever makes them feel good at that moment in time no matter what the consequences might be. Evolution leads to a deadening of both the conscience and the mind. It leads to hopelessness ,and for many who truly believe it even to suicide. Even if it were the truth (which it is NOT) why on earth would we want these kinds of values being taught to our kids? Evolution is a religion built on death ,and ends only in death. Spiritual death (this includes morality ,and any kind of conscience) ,intellectual death (after all it's pointless to learn anything since nothing matters) , and eventually physical death (I know that the spiritual death is actually the worst since it eternally separates us from God). Do you really believe that there is no real hope ,and that we really have no free will? That's what evolution teaches ,and that's exactly what you get when it is truly believed.

The people Cain would have been afraid of would have been his other brothers and sisters. I suppose it's possible that he could have been afraid of his parent too ,but I doubt Eve would have wanted him to die even though he did kill his brother. Here is the verse many people miss Genesis 5:4 After Seth was born ,Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.
As for the biological implications ,Adam and Eve were created perfect ,and would not have had any mutations that they could have passed on to their offspring ,and it is likely that it took a few generations for such dangerous mutations to arise ,but even then there would be extremely few of them. They would not have had a genetic problem for intermarriage at this time as there had not been enough time for genetic problems to arise.
As for the moral implications ,since there was no danger of intermarriage at that time and it was necessary for the human race to survive ,and follow God's command to "multiply and fill the earth" ,it was not yet something immoral(many of God's laws in the OT are for our protection ,such as what to do about an infectious skin disease in the Pentateuch). God uses what is called "progressive revelation". This means that He tells us what we need to know when we need to know it (concerning His laws and commandments). The prohibition on closely related marriages wasn't given until the time of Moses. It would be around then that the biological problems would have started to appear.
Is there any logical solution other than this if the Bible is true (which it is)? This kind of marriage is wrong now ,and for good reasons ,but it wasn't wrong then ,and was even necessary. So what is the problem?

@ vbv
Again another vent of frustration with no real basis in reality. It was due to Christian influence that we have what we call modern science ,along with free speech ,abolition of slavery ,religious freedom ,religious tolerance (which doesn't mean that I have to believe that your belief are equally valid to mine ,but that I won't kill you because I disagree with you. Is geocentrism equally valid to heliocentrism? One is right and one is wrong ,unless both of our worldviews are wrong than they are not equally valid) etc.
Also is the idea that all men are created as equals morally bankrupt? How about that one should love their neighbors as they love themselves? How about loving one's enemies and praying for those who persecute you? These are the teachings of Christianity (among others ,but surely you would agree with these as being moral). You accuse Christians of being close minded ,bigoted ,and hateful ,but all you do is spew hatred towards them without even knowing what they really believe or teach.

Yawn! There is nothing scientific behind your words. You are just using rhetorics hoping that there will be enough people who do not know whom to believe. No scientist needs to read the bible for his work.

Your comments are laughable because even very early christians such as Origenes and Augustinus knew that parts of the bible are only allegorical but you and other fundamentalists are still behind that believing that anything in the bible is true word by word.

Did you even look at what Gravitational Time Dilation is? Or what about quantized red shifts? Go to your site wikipedia on GTD ,and you will see that Einstein predicted it ,and it has been confirmed. Even some evolutionists refer to quantized red shifts. One being Halton Arp. William G. Tifft was the first to report evidence of this phenomenon(you wanted me to use wikipedia). I think you should look up what someone says before you dismiss it.

@ vbv
Just because the Bible reports something doesn't mean it approves of the action. Many history books describe the Holocaust ,but does that mean that they all support Hitler and the writers are Nazis? What Lot's daughters did was wrong ,and the Bible has laws against it. Eve technically wouldn't have been Adam's sister. Judah was not supposed to be going to prostitutes (his daughter in law had disguised herself as a prostitute) ,and she shouldn't have done that either. Do you really expect any report of history to have 0 incidents of bad things happening? There are many bad things recorded in the Bible ,and they are all condemned.

Did you even look at what Gravitational Time Dilation is? Or what about quantized red shifts?

Are they God? If not they are irrelevant...Have you ever heard of theronistics, or water buffalo-ology? Or the phenomenology of time? They are not God either...


'There are many bad things recorded in the Bible ,and they are all condemned'.

And who condemned them? Certainly not God...Please list all the wrongs in the Bible and who condemned them...Thanks...

You still did not answer up as to who the people outside the Garden, that Cain was afraid of were...I also do not see your response to Bible incest...Cain marrying his sister in case you forgot...If God threatened anyone who would kill Cain, who was he threatening, and who would have told the people of Nod what Cain had done? I'm sure you can answer these simple questions...I look forward to your reply...

To talk t o people like you is like painting a dirty wall or like carving rotten wood (Confucius). In other words, it is like sticking broken glass together with glue (Wisdom of Salomon).

I am tired because I know that you will never admit because it is your job to spread untrue things around the world.

Or will explain to me how Noah caught 9000 different species of birds and 5000 mammals, thousands of reptiles and millions of insects and saved them and fed them all? You want to tell me that you believe in this nonsense?

If Noah loaded, all kinds of species on that boat [ it must have been enormous] How did he figure out how to load the unseen species like the Germs that we all know about these days … did they happen, to take a nice ride with the rest? … and if he did ...why would he take the Most deadly one … Does God has it for us or what ? … :-)

Did Noah OWNED a microscope or did god just dropped it on him to find and collect each one of them ?

I mean how do a person FIND GERMS with the naked eye ?

That kind absence of any kind of logic that make me Know that the story of Noah is just as a fairy tally as Adam and Eve's story …

Or will explain to me how Noah caught 9000 different species of birds and 5000 mammals, thousands of reptiles and millions of insects and saved them and fed them all?

Like Duh_Swami once said, the arc of Noah is symbolically and it is more likely that the arc is the planet earth. This is the only way to explain and bring the silly story to rational and human proportions. Nowadays we have sheepgoats wich is a crossing between a sheep and a goat. This species are created by science using scientific methods. I can assure all of you that Noah had no sheepgoat in his arc, since they didn't exist. Many animals that lived a couple of thousands of years ago do not exist anymore and the question arises, why did Noah take them in the arc when Gods plan was to exterminate them anyway?

If this is true than the loving entity God is not that loving. Why do you think Darwin fell of his believe.....he knew his believe wasn't the truth nor the way to get the truth to reality because it didn't resemble nature and the laws within.

Cerebrum does not believe at all in his words. It is nothing but rhetoric aimed at people with lower education level in order to protect some fundamentalist movements from becoming obsolete. But they are obsolete and they will dumped into the waste basket of history where they belong to just like cerebrums laughable words and ideas.

The people Cain would have been afraid of would have been his other brothers and sisters.

There is no confirmation of this...Cain and God did not identified them as such and used generic terms...'and 'whoever' finds me will kill me.”
'Whoever' is a generality implying a random assailant out of many possibilities...How many of Cain's brothers and sisters were there, how many of them lived in the land of Nod? There is no explanations because the story is allegory, and symbolic, not historic...The Cain and Able story is the Adam and Eve story from a different point of view...Cain and Able were not sons of Adam, they were Adam, and Eve...It's another story of causation, creation, and the establishment of life on the planet...Compare their stories for verification...Adam is alone and lonely, so is Cain...Adam sins, so does Cain...Adam takes a wife, so does Cain...Adams land is cursed, so is Cains...Adam is sent out to till the ground while Cain is a tiller of ground...Adam goes to sleep, Cain goes to the Land of Nod...Adams Garden is 'eastward in Eden, Cains city is on the 'East of Eden'...Adams wife was made subject to Adam, and Able was made subject to Cain...God told Eve that her desire would be for her husband and he would rule over her...And God told Cain about Able, That 'unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shall rule over him...There's a lot more scary stuff for literalists, but that's enough for now...

Let's take a closer look and see if your "symbolism" is there like you say it is.
First it EXPLICITLY states in the Bible that Cain and Abel WERE the sons of Adam and Eve. Genesis 4:1 Adam made love to his wife Eve ,and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said "With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man."2 Later she gave birth to his brother Abel.
Ok where does it say that Cain is alone and lonely?
Yes Cain tilled the ground ,but he had to eat somehow didn't he? Many people had to farm at such an early time in earth's history
Adam sins so does Cain ,and every other person has lived since Adam and Eve that lived long enough to do so. No real comparison that can't be made to anyone who ever lived.
Adam took a wife ,and so did Cain ,and every man who could (and wanted to) do so in order to fulfill God's commandment to "multiply and fill the earth"(not to mention the other reasons for getting married).
Adam is put in a deep sleep so that his rib can be removed in order for God to create Eve. Cain going to the land of Nod probably has no significance in the original Hebrew ,but only in our English(I also don't see a real significance in English ,sounds more like you trying to take something small and blow it out of proportion). It's not really a point of comparison either. Everyone sleeps.
East of Eden shows that it was a different place from where Adam was , how does this show them to be the same person?
Where does it say that Abel was made subject to Cain, Cain killed Abel he didn't rule over him.
That is certainly not said about Abel to Cain. I think this is what you are referring to though. Genesis 4:6 Then the Lord said to Cain , "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door, it desires to have you, but you must rule over it."
Nothing about either Abel having any desire for Cain.
Also brothers and sister ,and maybe nieces and nephews (I find it highly unlikely that Adam or Eve would have wanted to kill Cain and avenge Abel ,but I suppose it is possible) would have been the only people that the "whoever" could have been referring to. Whoever also doesn't rule out what I said either ,and it's the only logical conclusion.
Again your "symbolism" falls flat on it's face. The only comparisons you were able to make are true of ALL PEOPLE.
As for GTD and quantized red shifts ,they were in response to several questions of the distant starlight "problem". Red shifts were to show that we are in the center of the universe (our galaxy anyway) ,and GTD was to show that light could travel the necessary distance in the necessary time for our universe even at an age of approximately 6,000 years old.

Just as some animals went from herbivore to carnivore it's also likely that many bacteria that were already inside the animals (and people) went from helpful to harmful. Also Noah wasn't told to take bacteria on the ark ,but animals(specifically the animals with the "breath of life" or nephesh). The same goes for viruses. Also there are far fewer "kinds" than there are species today. "Kinds" would be any animals that can successfully breed(your sheep goats would have originally been one kind). This shrinks down the number of animals on the ark drastically. the estimates are at about 20,000 animals on the ark.

@ Duh
The word Nod means wondering ,and it has nothing to do with sleep.

"With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man."

No Human woman ever gave birth to a man...Of course you don't notice small matters like that...

You cannot refute the comparisons because they are true...At any rate I'm sick and tired of your Bible study classes on ISLAM -WATCH...You are hijacking I-W and turning it into your own church...Theft is sinful isn't it?...You really should save all that for Muslims or other lost souls who give a sht...The only thing you convince me of is that you are just another fanatic of a long line of fanatics...I'm not going to read your long drawn out Bible tracts because it is so redundant as to be boring...I have heard it all before, you offer nothing new..

You said " Noah was not told to take bacteria, only animal "
Please Ask your self … why would Christian God, NOT tell him about BACTERIA'' why would God be so secretive ? … not only God, wants his Creations to be on perpetual praying mode for, To please it, God likes to hides facts from us like the deadly bacterias and let us, be and die from pure ignorance for 2 thousand of years …
I hope you do not think that I am demeaning your God, Cerebrum … I wanted to show you that what you are saying does not make any sense ….you can give all the excuse you want ….but GOD SHOULD HAVE TOLD US ABOUT THESE UNSEEN LITTIL KILLERS …but he did not … that is wrong … if God claim to be a loving God.

Cerebrum …… I have been reading Jihad watch for a while now and I think that the creator are very nice Christians and most posters are very nice devout Christians, I think you would find a better environment over there talking about the Christian God.

peace

Cerebrum writes that the Arch kept around 20 000 animals. is this realistic?
The Berlin Zoological Garden is the larges Zoo in the world with around 17 500 animals on 34 hectares (84 acres). The number of species is only about 1700 or so and while institutions like this sometimes help to keep species alive, there is no way to believe that an arch could provide enough space and food for ten thousands of animals and even millions of insects.

1 hectare is 100 x 100 meters and an arch could not been much larger. And how can Noah and his partners provide food to them, feed the animals and keep it clean, provide medical treatment and so on?

There is also the problem with incest and this is another reason why other biblical fairytales such as about Adam and Eve, which also appear in the quran, are nothing but nonsense.

While keeping so many animals on small space is cruelty, there is also no explanation how it was possible to catch all these animals. Did Noah travel to Australia in order to catch all the Kangaroos and Koalas. Did he travel to China and caught Pandas? And how did he catch lions, tigers, bears and other dangerous animals? And where did he get the daily meat to feed them?

This is only ridiculous and stupid!

This is only ridiculous and stupid!

Not if you know the real historical truth...here it is.

Noah could roast a fish in the sun almost litterally some say. He was a giant and could reach Australie with his bare hands and to collect all the animals there and so he collected a pair of all animals from all the continents and put them in the arc. The reason the arc crushed somewhere in Ararat? or Hymalayas? is because it couldn't hold Noah....some animals drowned that day because of his weight and propotions.

It was only after many people ditched christianity in Europe that science grew. Otherwise we will have the church poking its long nose in everything . Why was Galileo kept under house arrest, Copernicus criticised for a heliocentric universe, Bruno burnt on a stake, heretics captured imprisoned and tortured and killed by the "kind-hearted" padres of the Christian church?? Do want to disown all these facts? Bible encourages slavery. Abraham had slaves , why Ishmael was the son of Hagar ,Abraham's egyptian slave.... So also other biblical patriarchs/prophets maintained slaves captured from non-jewish tribes . You say the Bible ,the socalled word of "God" was only doing 'reportage' , that means Yahweh was only a journalist reporting the misdeeds of his favourite cronies ? That is the biggest laugh I could ever had. Thank you cerebrum for such a regailing laughter!!!

You obviously didn't read a single word I typed. For one the ark was huge (450 feet x75 feet x 45 feet) ,and another the animals that would have been taken on there would have been about the size of a rat to the size of a sheep (the animals that can grow larger would have been taken when they were young so that after the flood they could spread out and breed). I also addressed the inbreeding issue. This is only a problem now ,and would not have been so back then. With the insects ,there would only have been a few "kinds" of insects ,and not the millions of species we have today. Again Noah was only told to take certain kinds of animals with him. As for getting all of the animals it would have been much easier since they would not have been afraid of humans. Not only that ,but they would still have all been in close proximity to where Noah was. The landscape of the earth has changed much since the flood ,and it's extremely likely that Australia was connected to the other continents by land ,and the animals migrated there AFTER the flood and not BEFORE. They could have kept it relatively clean by making the animals area have slats in the floor for the waste to go through. Having the right bedding for the waste to go one could have made things (like smell for example) much easier to handle. There is a book called "Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study" by John Woodmorappe. This would be an excellent place to have all of your questions answered.

I DID refute your little symbolism by simply taking a closer look at the text. I have yet to see one of your symbolisms hold any water. You accuse me of being too literal in reading the Bible ,but you somehow are willing to believe that Eve's statement of bringing forth a man is meant to be entirely literal? I have heard people referring to their own little boys as being a "man". It's just an expression. I don't deny that there is any symbolism in the Bible just YOUR version of symbolism.

@ fineliving56
If you take a look at what Deuteronomy has to say about things you will easily see that God knew about infectious diseases ,and told His people what to do to avoid spreading them. The people wouldn't have understood what bacteria and viruses were. He did give them good instructions for keeping clean ,avoiding disease, and keeping disease from spreading once it did appear. At the time of Noah there might not have been any danger from any bacteria or virus ,just as there was not danger from carnivorous animals.
Also why is it so bad for me to want to do something to please someone who has given me so much. Don't you like to do something nice for someone who does something nice for you? God gave up more than anyone else ever has in order that we might have a real relationship with Him ,and not be separated from Him for eternity. What's wrong with gratitude? I'm not doing good things in order to receive some kind of reward ,but simply because it's the right thing to do ,and I'm grateful to God for what He has done for me.

You are incorrect once again. Science flourished when people started to turn TO God and the Bible ,and not AWAY from God and the Bible. This was especially strong right after the Reformation. Galileo was put under house arrest for disobeying a direct order from the Pope. Copernicus was criticized on heliocentricity because it went against the science of the day (it was mostly scientists who opposed this model ,but the Church decided to side with science over the Bible just like they did with Galileo). I would like to ask which Bruno ,and if you are talking about the Inquisitions ,they were political ,and they only had jurisdiction over people who were professing Christians. There was a particular heresy that was trying to overthrow the entire government at the time.
As for slavery. In the OT "slavery" was far different than what most people think of ,and was more an indentured servitude or servant like status. If you take a look at the laws concerning "slavery" in the OT you will see that they were far more humanitarian than anything from any other civilization at the time(they were even supposed to let slaves go on the 7th year).
A lot of the Bible is history ,and even those who did follow God were not perfect. David said to be "a man after God's own heart" not only committed adultery ,but in order to hide it had the man who was the husband of Bathsheba ,sent to the front lines so that he would be killed in battle. God disapproved of this and David was punished for it. The only person who ever lived who was perfect was Jesus Christ. If the Bible had portrayed every person who did follow God as perfect ,then you would say that the Bible was guilty of hiding something ,and since no one but Jesus is perfect ,then you would have been correct. The Bible does not take things out that did happen or put things in that didn't. It shows the history of God's people as it truly was ,and not some sunshine and rainbows deal where everyone is perfect. Again I tell you to look at the TEACHINGS and NOT an individual's inability to follow them.

Thank you, Cerebrum for providing the name of John Woodmorappe! This person is close to the Creation Research Society (CRS). All members of this organisation are required to sign a declaration that they believe everything written in the bible and would never support any different view. They are publishing some printings from time to time and they are always trying to get creationism teached as alternative to scientific teachings into public schools.

CRS is widely regarded as pseudo-scientific, non-scientific or missionary. Even christian organisatios are critisising CRS because of their scharlatanism because it drives many ducated christians out of the churches.

There is nothing wrong for you to want to please your generous God … the problem is God's need, for you and others to please God … this exact need weakens God in the eyes of skeptics … at least it does to me.

About infectious diseases … some, could make so many holes in your assumption about that.
First all ancient Egyptian knew of separating people who had fevers and infections, they did surgery using opium for pain … all that happen long before the birth of Christianity
Could it be that God copied from Imhotep , with his knowledge of watching body parts to prevent infections ??? …:)
I am sorry .. I do not mean to make fun …. your post is not believable … you used …..might be … all speculation … there is no proves that what you said is what happened…. but we do have evidence of Ancient Egyptian advanced medical discoveries.

It would have been better for God to have added to the Medical knowledge ancient people already had and mentioned it in his bible to save people .. God did not have to say about washing … they already knew it.

I DID refute your little symbolism by simply taking a closer look at the text.


Blah blah blah, get lost preacher man...Bible class is over...

The stories of Noah and the story of Adam and Eve are the most dumbest stories in all religions books …
I think these stories are,nothing, but fairy tales, trickled down from one man made religion to anther and the stories kept getting dumber and dumber with the passage of time, and with the help of ignorance of the people who kept telling them to the next generation …. until it reached Islam …. and we all know what Islam/Muhamad/Allah did with these dumb stories … they became a thing to just laugh at .
in Islam Adam is a Muslim and Eve is a Muslimah who had to have a Burqa made out of leaves to be real Muslimah …… lol

Well,well,well,... you are the greatest obfuscator I have known. You certainly beat the muslims in their con-game of taqiyya. Galileo was kept under house arrest by the pope you say. What authority did the pope have to arrest anyone ? Was he a head of a government, a president/primeminister/legislator/congressman... ? Bible is worse than any stupid fairy tale and you ascribe science to it. Book 1 , Genesis, tell the story of "creation" in 6 days by a "god" who snoozes on the seventh day. By the way this "god" talks of day and night before he "created" the Sun and the Moon on the third day. Hahahahahahaha!!!!. And you say all is "scientific" ? None of the scientists subscribe to this stupid tale of "creation". You can bluff your way on a pulpit amongst gullible idiots but not everyone even among the gullible would be swayed by your crap. After you can fool most of the people only for sometime!

Adam and Eve were living dumbly ,unaware of being naked till they ate the fruit from the tree of 'knowledge'. From then on this"god" became angry that he banished them from the garden of Eden to the deserts of west Asia. Adam and Eve wanted to wear some decent clothes and this made this voyueristic "god" very angry ,heh? What about other animals in the Eden ? they were also banished to various parts of Earth , though they still are not wearing any clothes. Poor dumb animals have become the victims of the dumb rage of "Yahweh". And all this scientific,I presume ? Wow, hallelujah to this "science".
And you want us to believe that humanity sprang from such dumb couple "created" by a dumber "god". This tribal myth of a few jews has become a hard belief of so many people around the world is astounding indeed that people can be so dumb and so stupid and gullible.
Certainly your biblical world-view is dumb, totally against commonsense and absolutely unscientific , I cannot imagine your ascribing science to such a bunch of hilariously dumb tales of primitive men living in fear of darkness at night that he sees "god and devil" in every shadow. So much for your :scientific" perspectives!

Adam and Eve, Cain and Able, Noah, Moses and Jesus are all the same savior story told over, with different characters at different times, with saving life and humanity the common denominator of all of them...Adam and Eve/Cain &Able saved the human race from early extinction...Noah saved extinction from the flood...Moses saved by leading life to the promise land of milk and honey, Jesus is also called 'savior'...All these saviors have to do with causation, creation, and the establishment of life on the planet...In reality, these are cosmic and planetary forces, not people...What does Allah know about this? Nothing, absolutely nothing...

Actually at the time the Pope did have a great deal of authority ,and had more authority over those who were a part of the Church. In fact for a long time the only real establishment that had any authority was the Roman Catholic Church.
Where does it say that God snoozes on the 7th day? No what it says is that God rested on the 7th day ,and this means simply that He finished His creative work. Also He created light first before the sun and moon ,so as long as there is a rotating earth (implying a spherical earth) there can be night and day. I never said that the Bible was a science text book ,but that Christianity and it's presuppositions were the basis for modern science. Also I gave a huge list of scientists who do believe the account of creation ,but perhaps you missed it so I will give a few key players. Francis Bacon (founder of the scientific method believed in a historical Adam) ,Galileo , Johannes Kepler , Isaac Newton , Raymond V. Damadian (he's a living scientists who invented the MRI) etc. In fact nearly every branch of science was founded by a Bible believing Christian.
Also it was not the tree of "knowledge" that Adam and Eve ate from ,and they were not stupid before they ate from it. It was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This means that before they ate from it they didn't know the difference between good and evil. Being naked is a shameful thing when in public (they were in the presence of God ,and not alone). They were simply innocent before they sinned ,not stupid. The whole creation was to be under man's dominion ,and since man sinned the entire creation began to suffer the effects of the curse of sin. You need to look closer at what I say before going off on your rants. It doesn't make you look to good when you miss major portions of what is being said.

Who said that God needed us to please Him? He wants us to love Him as He loves us ,but again that's not something He needs. The God of the Bible is fully self sufficient ,and doesn't need anything from us. I think you have projected certain qualities of Allah onto God. I don't think you did this consciously. Perhaps it is like hearing a lie so many times you begin to believe it. Also the book of Deuteronomy was written by Moses long before Christianity. Until we know the exact date of the Egyptian advances ,and of when Deuteronomy was written then we won't know which came first.

@ vbv
Actually God is the one who first gave Adam and Eve some decent clothes. He was not angry at them for wearing them. You obviously have only skimmed a few pages ,and not taken a real look at anything.

@ Duh
Jesus was a real person ,and the Gospels are the real accounts of His life. Only a few fringe maniacs believe He didn't exist. The evidence for the existence of these people is stacked against your view.

@ Gnostic

Actually you are incorrect on a few of your points. One I do not work for any organisation or group that tells me to write here. Two CRS DOES NOT do any political lobbying ,and so does not advocate for teaching creation in schools. I don't either. Most teachers are so indoctrinated with the lies of evolution that they would teach creation incorrectly in order to indoctrinate their own student the way they have been. They do however have a basic statement of belief ,and it is one that anyone who truly believes the Bible would appreciate. An organisation like this needs a statement of faith so that people will know what they are donating to. I personally prefer to visit the sites of AiG (Answers in Genesis) ,and CMI (Creation Ministries International). Their sites have real scientists doing real science that has been interpreted correctly. Also ridicule isn't an argument. I received a similar complaint about AiG when I tried to give it as a source. Ridicule is often simply a weapon of those who have no argument(like vbv above who has almost none of his information correct). Try taking a look at the science that they use before dismissing them. Some of it is hard to understand ,but they do usually have explanations for laymen on most of their topics.

If you go back and read one of your posts, you will see that you are the one who said God likes for us to thank him … something like that …that lead me to say that … likes... translate to need for us to thank him ….and that is wrong.

Any way I disagree with you on most of what you are posting
let us agree to disagree … and move on

Let us get back to ….You know ….Islam !!!…. remember?? !!!

Jesus was a real person ,and the Gospels are the real accounts of His life. Only a few fringe maniacs believe He didn't exist.

You see Lad, that's where you fall down...You can't tolerate an opinion, educated opinion or not, that does not agree with your opinion, without disparaging remarks to re-enforce your weak points...Fringe maniacs are never right about anything are they?That is why you are a bigot...You just proved that I am right...again...Why should anyone give an insulting and disparaging bigot the time of day?

If you could point to at very least the article in which I posted it I would be grateful ,because I can't find it on this page. Also liking something isn't the same as needing something. God would like for all people to turn away from their sins ,and turn to Him ,but it's not something He needs either. I like to eat Reese's ,but I certainly don't need them (in fact I probably need to eat less of them). Besides what's wrong with being pleased when someone thanks you for something?

@ Duh

The thing is that the idea that Jesus never existed is an opinion that comes from ignorance and hate ,and not from an educated mind. This idea is very similar to your Palin being a Russian spy post. They both have the same worth ZERO. The idea comes from those who are bigoted against Christianity ,and they have no evidence to support the claim. In fact the evidence is OVERWHELMING for the historicity of both Jesus and the Gospels.

The thing is that the idea that Jesus never existed is an opinion that comes from ignorance and hate ,and not from an educated mind.

LOL you self righteous bigot...There you go again, needing help from insults to bolster your weakness...Ignorance and hate and uneducated huh...You are more helpless than I thought...Your ego is as big as a stadium full of Obama voters...Go to jail, go directly to jail, do not pass Go, and do not collect $200.00...

What do you mean by: Adam and Eve/Cain &Able saved the human race from early extinction?

The Bible story of Adam and Eve has them disobeying a basic command not to learn about evil (i.e. murder, warfare, stealing, jealousy, lying, etc.), but they do it anyway and plunge mankind into many thousands of years of hate, killing and destruction.

Adam and Eve unleash the forces of evil on earth (opening Pandora's box?) and then Cain (who represents evil) murders his brother Abel (who represents good) in a fit of jealousy, thus wiping out all of the offspring/descendants (the word "bloods" is used in the Torah) that Abel would have had to the end of time. Good is wiped from the face of the earth, Adam and Eve start over with Seth, but the outcome is unsure.

While I agree with your assessment that the Qur'an has nothing to offer, I fall to see the connection of the Adam and Eve/Cain and Abel stories to "saving life and humanity."

Please take the time to follow up on your post and explain what you mean.

What do you mean by: Adam and Eve/Cain &Able saved the human race from early extinction?

Had Adam and Eve not messed up in the Garden and were not thrown out, would we have a human race today? Would the Garden support a population of 5 billion or so? If they had not gone forth and multiplied would we have a human race now?
That they did go forth and multiply, according to the story, they saved the human race from early extinction...Had they not multiplied, the human race would have died out with them...But this is a symbolic story and should not be confused with real people living real events...

Isaac Newton, Galileo,Keplar, Einstien,etc were all rationalists and certainly not bible-toting pontiffs. What they discovered and theorised were all against the ethos and thinking ( if any thinking is really required to fabricate the inane tales of the Bible! )of the Bible .
You say "god" invented 'day and night' before the Earth went on a rotating spree. That is a joke. Earth always rotated. Bible never knew that this planet Eath is spherical, it assumed that Earth was a flat piece of land floating on ocean. The primitive man in the middle - east never knew cosmology as we know today : it is absurd to expect so much from a bronze age human who lived in fear of darkness and irrational superstitions . You know Dante Alieghiri depicts "Hell" as being below the gound we stand on and mount Purgatario at the opposite end from where one has to climb its summit to go to Paradiso. And Dante also depicts all pre-christian 'pagans' to be inhabiting this "inferno" or "Hell". This is pure christian theology and not science. Dante lived in the thirteenth and early fourteenth century AD ,predating Newton,Keplar, etc. Surely Newton, Keplar did not subscribe to this nonsense. Otherwise Newton, Keplar,etc would have gone into oblivion and science would not have progressed. Bible is extremely rigid and dogmatic and does not allow anything transgressing its irrational and stupid beliefs , as has been seen in history with freethinkers castigated, imprisoned, burnt at stake in the name of heresy and blasphemy and all such nonsense by "pious church fathers and their fanatical christian adherents". Science and knowledge progressed only because of tolerance and secular ,humanistic values and not bigotry of the various socalled religfions, especially the monstrous monotheism.

There is a vast amount of material available about Bible symbolism...So much that I don't need to invent any...Books have been written on the subject...As one example of many...The four gospels themselves in number represent the four cardinal points of the zodiac, and the four elements... Iraneous confirmed it..."That there are four corners of the world and four general winds, It is right that the Church should have four pillars"...The Roman Vulgate has it, beside Mathew is a angel, Aquarious or man, beside Luke a bull, Mark is a lion, or Leo, and John is beside an eagle or Scorpio...
St Augustine said that Christianity was not new, it has existed since the beginnings of the world,..
Eusubious said this " That the religion published by Jesus Christ to to all nations is neither new nor strange. For though without controversy, we are of late and the name of Christians is indeed new, yet our manner of life and the principals of our religion, have not lately been devised by us, but were instituted and observed , if I may say so, from the beginning of the world"...
This pretty much confirms that Christianity today, is a priestly re-write of ancient wisdom knowledge...Most of it symbolic in nature...The items I posted only scratch the surface...

The Quran then is a re-write of a re-write, and leans further away from truth and facts than the Christian re-write...

Again you show your lack of either reading comprehension ,or a lack of caring about what you post being correct. I said that God created LIGHT before He created the sun ,and moon. So as long as the earth IS rotating (implying a spherical earth) there can be night and day without them. The Bible DOES NOT depict the earth as flat. There are many verses that imply that the earth is indeed spherical Job 26:7 He spreads out the skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.
(so much for your flat earth floating on an ocean)
Isaiah 40:22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth ,And it's inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain ,And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
I also never said that the earth had a point in which it didn't rotate.
(there are more ,but I have limited space.)
I never used Einstein in my list.
Dante's work was FICTION ,and NOT theology. In fact it was a COMEDY. I don't subscribe to the nonsense in that book ,and I doubt anyone else does either.
Isaac Newton wrote more about God ,and the Bible than he ever did about science.
Kepler wanted to be a Lutheran minister ,but this wasn't what happened. He also had a firm belief in the Bible and God.
No one was ever burnt at the stake for scientific ideas.
Science only ever progressed when people applied Biblical presuppositions to the natural world. You only get these presuppositions when you actually believe what the Bible actually says. In fact a historical Adam was important in Francis Bacon's beliefs. He believed that Adam ,before the Fall, had an encyclopedic knowledge of all science ,and that we should strive to return to this kind of perfect knowledge.
Galileo firmly believed in the authority of the Bible ,but he had problems with the Roman Catholic Church ,because they were accepting the " science" of a geocentric solar system over his evidence for a heliocentric one(Aristotle's views had been incorporated into Catholic tradition which they held as highly as the Bible itself). The lesson that SHOULD be learned from this incident is that man's science is just as fallible as he is ,and that Scripture shouldn't be tied down to any "science".

Yes I will agree that there is symbolism in the Bible ,and that there are many books on the subject ,but every version you have written on this site falls flat on it's face with only a slight amount of reading the actual text.Also I see no reference to the elements or zodiac in that quote. How about some of these quotes from St. Augustine. "If you believe what you like in the Gospels ,and reject what you don't like ,it is not the Gospels you believe ,but yourself."
"Miracles are not contrary to nature ,but only contrary to what we know about nature."
"God had one son on earth without sin ,but never one without suffering."
Do you agree with these quotes by him?

Mohammed said that Adam was a Muslim do you believe that too?
There is no evidence that Christianity has been practiced since the beginning of creation. This is an opinion ,and has no evidence to back it up.
Even among the ancient beliefs there was often a fifth element. It depends on which country you were from. The Chinese had fire ,earth,water ,metal ,and wood. So which four elements are represented and which are left out (if you look at other societies they have other elements such as akasha). Taoism replaces air with qi which is an energy. Which belief is correct?
Why are these statements by these men correct ,but the statements of Jesus Himself are incorrect?
These quotes only confirm what these men believed ,and not necessarily that they are true ,unless you have some real evidence to show that the real teachings of Christianity have been in practice since the beginning of creation (which excludes evolution btw ,and makes your arguments in favor of evolution wrong).
You seem to accept anything from any source so long as it supports your twisted views. Maybe instead of just accepting what you want to hear you should look for the real truth of the matter.

So what you're saying is that the Adam and Eve/Cain &Able, Moses, Noah, etc. stories are all symbolic? A symbolic virtual extinction, perhaps? Since we're not supposed to confuse them with real people, what you're saying is that the symbolic Adam and Eve went forth symbolically from the symbolic garden and symbolically multiplied and thus symbolically somehow this saved the real human race?

People read the English version of Genesis and think that the original Hebrew said "day" meaning a "24 hour earth day." In Hebrew it does not actually say "the first day", but what is written is more like "step one." The Hebrew word usually translated as "in the beginning" actually means "at the head of all things" which could also mean "of primary importance." Instead of seeing chapter one as a series of six days (24 hour earth days), the more appropriate interpretion would be the "six stages" of creation. Also, why would The Creator not have really, really long days?

In the first line of Genesis we get the impression that God has created two separate entities: the sky/heaven and the land/earth. But by the time we get to line 8, we see this is not exactly so. In line 8, we are told that heaven was actually created on the 2nd day and that heaven consists of something called in Hebrew raqiya or rakia. This is not exactly land/earth, but is now described in English as the firmament. It is only in line 9 that we begin to get the idea of land/earth, but in this case it appears that it already had been created. It existed all along, but it was submerged in the "waters", so to speak, and only became a distinct entity when the "waters" or "surrounding substance" were removed and gathered into one place (i.e., the sun was created leaving behind the rock called earth, third rock from the sun).

During the 6th creation phase, humans were created, but in Hebrew it says these humans were created "in the shadow of God" not in the "image of God." Then, in Chapter 2, God creates Adam and Eve. However, creation phase/day six is not the "day" that Adam and Eve were created because that passage concludes with God saying it was a very good day. Since Adam and Eve were expelled on from the Garden of Eden on the same day they were created, this suggests they were created at a later date after the Sabbath (the 7th creation period on which God rested). In addition, the order of creation given in chapter one does not even remotely resemble the order of creation given in the story of Adam and Eve where God now creates a garden (place of learning) somewhere to the east of where He created Adam and then places newly created Adam in it.

Note: The humans that God created in chapter one were supposed to be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth so that the earth would support the growing population of people. (Gen.1:28). That seems pretty straight forward to me. So nobody had to get kicked out of anywhere to start the human race.

Blah blah, Bible class is over for the day...You think the symbolism falls flat because you are totally ignorant of it...Go to sleep now...As far as I am concerned Mr Preacher man, it is your ideas that are twisted...I'm tired of throwing pearls before swine...

I'm tired of Christianity being preached inexhaustibly on Islam watch...I don't care who believes in Bible symbolism or who does not... Beliefs don't change reality...Adam and Eve were not real people living real events...People who choose to believe they were, are welcome to believe so...Just don't preach to me about it...I was not born yesterday and have educated myself on these subjects...I'm not going to fall on my knee's and start worshipping fairy tales because 'someone else does...or because some book says I should...Worshipping religion is idolatry anyway...Not all Christians actually worship the Bible, but most of them sound like they do, since every word in it is 'Holy'...Whenever religious fairy tales come to the door, critical thinking and good common sense fly out the window...You can see that in any religion who presents fairy tales as reality...We don't believe Mohammad really went on a 'Night Journey' to the 'furthest mosque', or that the Archangel Gabriel had actual conversations with him do we? Well Muslims do because they suspend critical thinking in order to entertain such beliefs...Christians and others do exactly the same thing...It's all nonsense...There are only three possible reasons for Bible fairy tales...Entertainment, out right lies and word trickery, or symbolism...I don't think the Bible was written for entertainment, nor is it a book of lies, but it is chuck full of symbolism...I didn't make that up, I just know about it...

No where does it say that Adam and Eve were kicked out the same day they were created. Genesis 1 is a chronological account of creation while Genesis 2 is things directly relevant to Adam and Eve. These accounts aren't contradictory ,but complimentary. Also the Hebrew word for day is "yom" ,and in the context is meant as 6 literal 24 hour days. Tektonics Ministries has a good article that shows that there are no conflicts between Genesis 1 ,and Genesis 2. Genesis is written as history ,and is meant to be understood as history. Also just because Adam and Eve hadn't had children before their being kicked out of the Garden of Eden doesn't mean that they weren't capable of doing so. The word you translated as shadow is tselem ,and is translated as image. It apparently does come from the word for shadow or statue(these particular words do give an image of what they are ,in the case of a shadow from ,and in the case of the statue modeled after). The "waters" were to form the oceans ,and the sun would not be a part of this. It also says God made dry land appear ,and that He gathered the waters ,and not necessarily that the land was already there.

@ Duh
I said that "your" symbolism falls flat ,because it isn't even there. Either you're being completely sarcastic with your symbolism (Cain going to live in the land of Nod ,and Adam going to sleep being the same thing from a different perspective. Also Eve being "mother of all the living" meaning she's mother nature.) ,or your listening to some lunatics on your symbolism. This is taking expressions taking them hyper literally ,and then turning them into some sort of symbolic meaning that isn't in the text. Also on some of your points you were completely incorrect(Abel having a desire to be ruled by Cain). It's far easier to believe Genesis (which is written as history ,and intended to be read as such) is actual history than to believe the insane symbolism you have brought up. Your only claim that Genesis is a fairy tale is that it has miraculous events in it. Again you let your anti-supernatural bias rule out Genesis as what it really is. You also reject all evidence against evolution due to your a priori assumptions that evolution is true. You just listen to whatever "scientist" or "expert" no matter what they say and don't investigate whether or not their claims are true. I'm not asking anyone to believe "fairy tales" ,but you do already believe in one called evolution. The only difference between evolution and a fairy tale is the magic wand. The magic wand in evolution is time ,and the prince is made of pond scum. This particular fairy tale is taught in schools as truth with no one being able to produce even the difficulties in this fairy tale without being fired or sued. Things are currently one sided when it comes to this fairy tale ,but more and more people are waking up and realizing evolution for the lie it is.

Whine, whine, deny, deny...Denial is a river in Egypt...That post was over two inches in length so I only read the last inch which was incoherent..

I'll summarize it for you then. Your symbolism isn't even in the Bible at all ,and has completely incorrect statements in it. You run to taking an expression in the Bible hyper literally ,and use it to back your nonsense. You do believe a fairy tale called evolution. You don't care if your supporters ("scientists" and "experts") are correct so long as they agree with you. I hope this is short enough for you.

Your symbolism isn't even in the Bible at all ,and has completely incorrect statements in it.

Why, because you say so? Tell me another funny story...All you are doing is showing your blatant ignorance and denial...Of course the Bible contains no symbolism for you because you are too much into your ego, and denial, to see what is right in front of your face...Your ignorance is not my responsibility...I tried to tell you, but you have plugs in your ears...Just believe whatever you want, but don't try and convince me that you are some kind of an expert, and your opinions carry some kind of weight, because you are WRONG, but to stupid to see it...I have refrained from calling you stupid in the past, but now I have changed my mind...You are as Jesus of Book describes, you strain out the gnat and swallow the camel...If you choke, it is on you...

You say Newton wrote about the Bible more than about science. That is a big lie. Newton was not only a physicist but also a mathematician, his contribution to the development of calculus is well known. He was certainly not a bible-totting bigot , but a thoroughly rational human being. This how evangelical preachers and the clergy obfuscate and tell lies to over-awe the gullible folks and claim more converts in their kittybag to siphon off their money under the guise of "holiness". Those days the church and the clergy weilded a lot of political power and influence, Newton may have blabbered a bit to be politically correct rather than face the incarceration that Galileo went through. Newton is certainly not known to have supported any of the irrational things thaT WAS PROPOGATED IN THE BIBLE. Or else he would not been the great man he is.

How can the symbolism you mentions be there is half of what you claim is there isn't? You had maybe 2 points of Adam being similar to Cain ,but those same 2 points could be compared to a HUGE amount of people ,and are therefore irrelevant. The other points you attempted to make were either not even in the text at all ,or would not be there if not for you being someone who speaks English. THAT is why I said that it was incorrect ,and not even there.

@ vbv
Yes Isaac Newton made great contributions to science ,but he was also a very dedicated Christian and in fact wrote more about God ,and the Bible than he did science. In fact his original intention was to become a Minister in the Church of England. Isaac Newton calculated a figure for the creation being at 4,000 B.C. He also wrote 2 books about what he studied in the Bible "Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms" ,and "Observations Upon the Prophecies of Daniel". Newton believed the Bible ,and a simple look at his own words show what he believed. "I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God ,written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily." "Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors." There are many more quotes like this ,and your "politically correct" crap won't fly here.
Galileo only had problems because the Church was blindly accepting what was considered "science". This problem can be avoided in the future by accepting the Bible from the start ,and waiting to see if the "science" in question matches the infallible Word of God. Scientists were actually Galileo's prime opponents and not the Church. In fact they liked him ,but he got a little too arrogant. Plus it wasn't anything that Galileo said against that Bible that got him in trouble. It was because he defied a direct order from the Pope(the Roman Catholic Church was the only real center for law and order at this time).

How can the symbolism you mentions be there is half of what you claim is there isn't?

If you can't read the symbolism it is invisible to you...But not everything that is invisible to you does not exist...Have you ever seen a radio wave with your naked eye? You do not even know what you are denying, if you did you couldn't deny it...
You may or may not agree with it, but you could not deny it's existence...Your position is of wilful ignorance...I can't help you out of that...

Your crap about religiousity of Newton is fabricated. Neither you nor I were there to witness it. He may have written what you claim to please the clergy of the church and escape any of the terrible consequences that had visited many of his predecessors. I do not think any scientist worth his salt would accept the six day "creation" of this world by a zombie of a "god" called Yahweh ,created by the jews. That tyoo only some 6,000 years back. That is the most ludicrous thing I have heard , and you living in the 21st. century amidst so much knowledge,wisdom, sciwence subscribe to such stupidity speaks volumes about you.

I wasn't there ,but there were people that did live during that time that did know him. He was a devout Christian ,and believed the Bible in it's entirety. This is history ,and all you have to do is look it up. I didn't fabricate any of it ,and the burden of proof that he did not believe these things (when he adamantly claimed he did) is on you. Your "politically correct" idea is pure speculation ,and is against the evidence available ,and he actually did stand up against things in the Church of England that he was against. He did however believe in a 6,000 year old earth ,and did so using his own calculations. Also the creator of the MRI (a scientist still living today by the way) Dr. Raymond V. Damadian also believes the Bible ,and a 6,000 year old earth(are you going to claim that he isn't a good scientist when he invented a machine that is one of the best diagnostic tools we have today?). In fact Isaac Newton thought that atheism was ridiculous ,and downright stupid. You have bought into the lie of Christianity being against science. This is blatantly untrue ,and nearly ALL of the branches of science today were FOUNDED by Christian scientists who firmly believed the Bible. There were no terrible consequences for science. Galileo was not even put under house arrest for science ,but because he defied a direct decree from the Pope (which was like directly defying a king in that time). In fact the only problems that were going on were happening because of people who couldn't let go of the accepted "science" of the day (this is much like the Pope recently declaring that evolution is not contrary to the Bible ,which it is ,and is also a fairy tale). In fact Galileo's prime opponents weren't Ministers or Preachers ,but other scientists who had accepted Aristotle and Ptolemy's work over the experimental evidence that Galileo offered. So it wasn't the Church that held back science like you claim ,but quite the opposite. It was the works of ancient Greeks ,and Romans that slowed things down.
Not only do you not care that nearly everything that you have posted is incorrect ,but you have failed to look at the evidence behind the Bible. You subscribe to the ancient Greek idea that we all came from one ancestor (Darwin only plagiarized it from various sources) ,which there is no evidence for.

@ Duh
OK I think maybe I need to clarify myself even further. In the VERSES that you claim are a part of YOUR SYMBOLISM aren't even IN THE BIBLE AT ALL ,Then how can your symbolism exist there either.

You mean Cain and Able are not in the Bible? Adam and Eve either? You see Cerebrum I try and explain complicated concepts simply so your small mind has room for them...But your small mind has no room for them even in simplified form, so I'm confident you would not understand any in depth explanation...If you can't get out of the third grade, don't blame me for your failures...Hamlet said it...'Your ideas, Cerebrum, compared to the ideas of the universe are as the ideas of gnats'...

One obvious system of symbolism in the Bible is numerical...All those numbers mean something...Every Hebrew letter has a numerical value...The sum of the values in a name or word is symbolically different than the word itself.. Y H V H
10+5 6+ 5 =26...
God's number is 26...That's only one example of hundreds where these word/numbers mean something...There are two Hebrew systems based on this Sephir Yetzerah, and Gematria...If there is number symbolism there is also knowledge symbolism...Something you know nothing about...

If you had taken a careful look at one of my precious posts you would know exactly which part was not in the Bible. You specifically said that Abel is said to have the same feelings that Eve was to have for Adam (As in your desire will be for your husband ,and he will rule over you). This is NOT in the Bible as you claimed. Your other points failed for these reasons. 2 of them were things that could be compared to nearly anyone who lived throughout history ,and are therefore irrelevant(your comparisons of sin and being married can be applied to a VAST amount of people). Your other point failed ,because it has NO significance in the Hebrew language ,but only in the English language (this was your point of Adam going to sleep and Cain going to the land of Nod ,which means wandering or wanderer, and it wasn't even a real significant point in English either).
I also took a look at Hebrew number formation. 10+5 ,and 10+6 are never used BECAUSE of those letters being used to form the name YHWH. This is specifically avoided. In order to get the number 26 you would have to go a different route of adding the numerical values of certain letters together. They specifically AVOID using God's name for numerical purposes (and this is likely true for numerical symbolism as well).
Again I never denied that there is symbolism in the Bible ,just not YOUR symbolism ,as they all fall apart when examined a little closer. How about an example of symbolism that is actually there. Jesus is compared to the bronze serpent that was put on a pole when the Israelite's were wandering in the desert. Or how about Jesus being the "seed of the woman" spoken about in Genesis. Or about when Jesus said that the Temple would be destroyed ,and raised in 3 days (He was symbolically referring to Himself). What about the symbolism of the "Sign of Jonah".

I only read the last two inches of any of your posts, I already told you that...Your Posts qualify for a Pop-Eye quote...'Enough is enough, and enough is too much'...How can you say my symbolism is wrong when you also say it does not exist? You are simply ignorant to the point of stupidity...Basically you are too immature for any higher or more complicated material...it would be like throwing pearls before swine...

The only symbolism I have spoken of are those dealing with causation, creation and the establishing of life on Earth...You are willfully ignorant of these even though the Bible deals with them...But as a literalist you can't see it because you are literally spiritually blind...
I almost feel sorry for you because you are so...limited...

is a letter kaf with a letter vav. (Actually it is vav kaf since Hebrew is written/read right to left.) Therefore, the name of the Hebrew/Christian God YHVH (yod heh vav heh) does not equal 26.

However, the letters can be read as "Behold, I Have/Am Ten," as well as "I Am That I Am." Ten is a quorum representing existence and was the minimum number necessary for prayers for the intercession of the Divine Presence on behalf of the congregation.

The number ten has a symbolic reference in the argument/discussion that Abraham had with YHVH concerning the imminent destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Because YHVH could not find a quorum of just, moral men, the people of those towns could not be saved. There simply weren't enough good men there to pray for Divine forgiveness.

Yes, the Hebrew word "yom" means "day." But it also means "time."

Note that Chapter 2, verse 4 of Genesis reads:
These are the GENERATIONS of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day (YOD here clearly means TIME, but is translated as DAY) which the Lord YHVH made the earth and the heavens.

Note also that it does not say: This is the SIX DAYS when the heavens and earth were created. It says GENERATIONS. In other words, TIME. Perhaps, just perhaps, this was a very very long time and the previous references to "days" meant time periods of creation.

Some food for thought:
For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night. Psalms 90:4

He is the Lord YHVH: his judgements are in all the earth. He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. Psalm 105:7-8. (A thousand generations would amount to a minimum of about 30,000 years given 3 generations per every one hundred years! Why say this if the earth was only 3000 years old when this was written?)

I realize that the conventional creationist wisdom says that the universe was created in 6, 24 hour earth days, but this is taking the English translation quite literally, while the Hebrew original text can be interpreted in more than one way.

I have read the Bible casually , and I have a copy of the same , alongwith Quran (translated by M.M.Pickthall) and I cannot find in any single line that is in conformity with modern science. It is all irrational fear-mongering, sectarian, hate-filled, encouraging slavery of infidels/non-believers/infidels/pagans,etc. It talks of 'eye-for-an-eye' and 'tooth-for-a-tooth' kind of justice, stoning to death, random killing of infidels/pagans is recommended by this god of Bible/Quran, etc. And scores of immoral tales, bigotry and extreme intolerance is abounding in the Old Testamenmt and the Quran. And yet you say that science is found in this crazy,immoral book of lies and scientists are inspired by it - which is an absolute lie. No science can emanate from this book. However , we can say one thing - it will inspire intelligent humans not to think like those irrational tales which are not fit for human consumption. These irrational extremities in the Bible/Quran can only inspire rational human beings to stay away from irrationality and stupidity , and I can agree with you to that extent.

from a Charles Manson study... it's called Group Think, a phenomena where you make decisions based on what the group want's you to make, so you belong. Seems this is what mohamamd did, a shrewd process to make people submit to his rules and desires... this is exactly what he did to enslave a billion people in his web, that along side of the fact he targeted people with nothing...nothing but the desert and some goats and a fear of the retributions if not followed would gladly accept a *heaven* where they could walk around with an eternal boner and s*rew any of a number of virgins at their beck and call, with some bright eyed boys added for the followers of different perversions. Sad really to be a follower, especially of a pervert such as mohamad, where he has contact with gabriel AFTER he has done some atrocious act, and told by *allah* that's it's ok. Sad but rather funny, but they reign terror on us all, even his followers (shia vs. sunni)

'with some bright eyed boys added for the followers of different perversions' for aki amd kope...best to let sleeping dogs lie

Therefore, the name of the Hebrew/Christian God YHVH (yod heh vav heh) does not equal 26.

It does if you add up the numerical values of each letter...The compilers of Gematria knew what they were doing...The ancient Romans had a saying, 'Daemon est Deus inversus'...
Which means Satan is God, upside down, inside out backwards, or in reverse...The Hebrew letters for the Highest Ehyeh, is 543, Moses number is 345...The reverse of God...add them up and you get 888 which is the gnostic number for Jesus Christ...It's another way to describe the alpha and Omega...Experience Jewish rabi's know all about this symbolism, especially the Chabad, who are adept at Jewish Kaballah...The point is, it does not matter if someone agrees with this or not...numerical symbolism and comic symbolism in the Bible exist...and denial does not make them go away...

I didn't claim an specific science in the Bible ,I said that Biblical PRESUPPOSITIONS were necessary for the rise of science. Actually there were many scientists who were inspired to do science because of the Bible ,and not in spite of it. These include Francis Bacon ,Isaac Newton ,George Washington Carver etc.
Eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth are NOT what Christians teach or believe. This was OT law ,but things have changed since then. We believe in the "Golden Rule". Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Is that rule immoral?
Yes there are plenty of horrible things reported in the Bible ,but do you see any commands to do these things?(the slavery in the OT was different than what we think of today,and there was no command to go out and conquer "infidels" to take as slaves. Also although this slavery was allowed it wasn't a command to go out and get slaves. In fact the only way they could acquire slaves was to buy them from a foreign nation. This was often done as a survival measure by the slave.) Where is there an example of random killing of pagans? Stoning is brutal ,but what about the execution methods of pagan nations? Crucifixion was a favorite of the Romans ,and it's where we get the word excruciating. In you take a look at the law codes in the OT you will find they are FAR more humanitarian than any of their contemporaries.

Yes you can interpret the word yom in the way you said ,but I think we need to take a certain factor into consideration ,and that is simple context. In Genesis yom is accompanied by the words for morning and evening ,and in nearly ALL cases when this is done it means a literal 24 hour day. I am only aware of one exception to this rule(I can't remember where ,but I can find it if you would like me to). As for your mentions of Psalms ,I have this to say. Psalms are songs of praise to God ,and aren't the same as the history in Genesis. That mention of a thousand years as being a day ,and a day being as a thousand years is that God is outside of time ,and not subject to it in the way we are. As for the "thousand generations". The Psalm seems to be indicating God as remembering His covenant forever ,and for a thousand generations. It doesn't say God has been remembering His covenant for that time ,but the He will do so. Also it's more or less known that there have not been a thousand generations since Abraham's time. The genealogies in the Bible do not support a thousand generations as having existed either. I think it would be good for you to study what type of literature Genesis is (historical narrative) ,rather than see what interpretations can be made while only looking at that small part of the text.

Your view can be incorrect ,and the symbolism you cite still be nonexistent. I could say there are lava monsters in the center of the earth ,and be incorrect even though they don't exist. One of the things you cite in your symbolism doesn't exist so the rest falls apart(Abel having the feelings for Cain that Eve was to have for Adam). The other points are either irrelevant or meaningless in the original Hebrew.
I hope this post is small enough.

It's small enough like your mind...You are in a constant state of denial, and I don't care if you agree or not...I should not have to explain every little detail anyway, you just plain don't understand them...You may think some example I give is faulty, while your own have no merit at all...The reason you see flaws is because I try to explain things to you on the level you can understand them...But I have over estimated your ability to comprehend simplicity, so I have to lower my standards for you, and talk to you like a child...Now, go to your room...

Ancient patches of a giant seagrass in the Mediterranean Sea are now considered the oldest living organism on Earth after scientists dated them as up to 200,000 years old.

The analysis, published in the journal PLos ONE, found the seagrass was between 12,000 and 200,000 years old and was most likely to be at least 100,000 years old. This is far older than the current known oldest species, a Tasmanian plant that is believed to be 43,000 years old.

You need to contact these scientists and explain to them how wrong they are...full story on Drudge...

A few simple questions. 1 How can your symbolism be correct if a major portion of the symbolism does not exist in the text.2 How can it be correct if 2 other points are irrelevant.3 How can it be there if one major point has NO MEANING in the original Hebrew.
These points make up your symbolism ,and if half have no meaning ,and half are completely irrelevant ,than how can that symbolism even be read by anyone? Reading what you want to be in the text is called eisegesis ,and you seem to excel at this.

Again the dating methods used involve assumptions ,and evolutionary ones at that. Also if their margin for error is nearly 190,000 years ,then since they admit that they are using assumptions (they do so in their introduction at the PLoS ONE site) ,then how do you know that the margin for error isn't even greater. Now maybe if their margin of error was +or - 10,000 years (putting it around 190,000 to 210,000 years) it might not look so ridiculous ,but even then I wouldn't trust it. Not only are many people promoting evolution NOT caring about honesty in their work (archaeoraptor ,Haeckle's embryo's etc. They have no reason to be truthful if evolution is true. I'm not saying that ALL evolutionists are liars ,but that they have no basis in their worldview that makes telling the truth important.) ,but they are also basing much of their work on assumptions.

More rationalizations, more denial.,..You need to convince these scientists who don't have the slightest idea what they are doing, that your way of measuring is superior to their way of measuring...of course they went to school to get stupid not learn how to measure, and you did not...All you have is an outdated yard stick called the Bible...I can't imagine anyone more foolish than you are...Johnny Cash sang ,'I fought the law and the law won'...If you ever confront a real scientist with your BS, you will sing, 'I fought real science and real science won'...It's you with the pseudo science, not them...Now you can go to your room...

If OT has nothing to do with christianity,why don't christians disown the barbaric books of the OT ? Science did not find its origins in the Bible ,but in the older pagan cultures of Rome,Greece, Egypt, India,China, which were culturally,civilisationally far more advanced than the wandering barbarians who authored the OT. If anything the Bible was anti-science and pro-superstitions as history has borne out since the ascendancy of judaism and christianity , especially what is known as the dark ages in Europe with burning of 'heretics', and discouraging anything that goes against the orthodox beliefs of the Bible. These are recorded facts and however much you may deny ,they cannot be obliterated.

I never said that science found it's origins in the Bible ,I said that MODERN SCIENCE only truly began when people applied BIBLICAL PRESUPPOSITIONS to the natural world.
"Dark Ages" is a misnomer ,and during this time there was actually a great deal of scientific advancement in Europe.
I assume you are talking about the Inquisitions right? They were POLITICAL ,and NOT BASED on CHRISTIAN TEACHINGS. Also the Inquisitions have been greatly exaggerated (not that they weren't bad ,but there were nowhere nearly as many people killed as is often claimed). These "heretics" were known as Cathars ,and they were the equivalent to modern day terrorists at the time. In fact the death penalty was very rare ,and most people who were guilty were simply exiled ,and ONLY if they didn't recant. Only the people who refused to confess ,when there was also evidence supporting the prosecution was there a death penalty.
Where did I say that the OT has nothing to do with Christianity? There is a new Covenant ,and some things have changed ,but the OT is still an important part of Scripture.

@ Duh
So you think that evolution is "real science"? Well that one of 2 major "bait and switch" deals with this propaganda. The first one being that natural selection and adaptation are the same as all organisms coming from a single ancestor. Evolution is HISTORICAL science ,and cannot be observed ,tested ,or repeated. REAL science or "empirical" science ,I would likely have nothing to argue on. However we are not talking about "empirical" science ,but the "historical" or "origins" science. Also how do you know that my sources aren't using "real" science? You haven't even looked at my sources. You haven't looked at their evidence either (which they show how ALL evidence is in support of the Biblical worldview). Again you simply go to the fallacy of "appeal to majority". Also they admit that they were using assumptions in the article ,and THAT was my main point something YOU are obviously in denial about.
You also didn't answer my above questions on your "symbolism".