Are you 18 years old or above?
Try our free social site WTMX
Ancient European DNA Results
great arnold schwartzenegger impersonation
I studied since a very early age to become a paleontologist and i have quite a bit of knowledge in archeology as well due to some overlaps and it truly pisses me just how much of our history keeps getting buried or destroyed by mongrel kikes and other shit stains like the filthy mixed blooded mongrel spics here in South America, The amount of effigies representing blue eyed gods, Caucasian remains and architecture that is far too advanced to be made by a bunch of subhuman scum that pretty much only exist to get high on drugs, It's so easy to start building connections and starting to realize that Aryans were present here and in many other places....if only our people started asking questions and looking back through their history instead of wasting their lives away with garbage like social media, TV or some other pathetic shit that's never going to lead anywhere....but i guess i can't expect much from the untermensch that constitute most of society.
It is already written in the Bible that we would be so numerous here like the grains of sand on a beach. Even though there is archeological evidence to back up the Bible, there is a group who keep saying it is just a fairly tail while they use the exact same text to claim a land of their own. It's quite clear that somewhere in our past, an invasion happened and our most sacred texts were taken and have been used against us. It seems many of our people became enslaved. This story isn't over, but we must teach the children who they are, but moreover, who is against them. You can't defend yourself if you don't know what is harmful to you.
I don't care much for religion to put it bluntly and i think that forcing it upon others is going to make you more enemies than friends, If someone wants to seek guidance of any sort, Let them do it on their own terms.
The union between the Devil and the woman was the sin of mongrelization, race mixing, and the fruit of that sin was a mongrel devil named Cain. It should be further noted that Cain had children (Genesis 4:17-22), and they were later known as the Canaanites, the children of the devil(Jews according to Jesus John 8:44). As these Canaanite-devils multiplied they filled the land of Palestine with all kinds of evil. A brief outline of their sexual practices is given in Leviticus 18. This is why God ordered the Israelites to kill all the Canaanites and drive them out of Palestine. (Numbers 33:51-53, Deuteronomy 7:1-6) God said, “But of the cities of these people (Canaanites) which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.” Does anyone wonder why the Jews consider the Holy Church / Christianity as their ultimate target to bring down?
The fact that these words survive speaks to the power of Yahweh. Do not give up my brothers and sisters.
The modern "out of Africa" theory claiming Africans rapidly evolved into new subspecies within 50k years - practically overnight, is bullshit commie propaganda. The Homo Erectus subhumans left Africa starting well over a million years ago and migrated into all the warm areas of the world they could reach. H. Erectus was too dumb to survive for long in cold climates and the ones that stayed in Africa and other tropical regions changed very little while those that left the jungles and adapted to new environments became new subspecies like Heidelberg man - some of whom went back into Africa to mix with the Erectus and develop modern Negroids. The Heidelbergs that adapted to the northern climate of Eurasia evolved into Neanderthals then Cro-Magnon Caucasoids in the west while becoming Mongoloids in the east. It took over a million years for the modern races/subspecies to develop.
out of africa theory disproven in 2014 by 2 Russian Geneticists "we have NO common ancestors with the negroid" NONE! links bellow........................................ <br>https://www.scirp.org/journal/....PaperInformation.asp <br>https://www.scirp.org/journal/....paperinformation.asp ...don't know about the "chimp" crap here but the info about no common ancestors is relevant. <br>https://www.scirp.org/journal/....paperinformation.asp <br>https://atlanteangardens.blogs....pot.com/2014/05/russ this is pretty interesting as well............................... https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=21698
@Trey Xanthean: If we had no common ancestor with them we wouldn't be able to breed with them. Africa is the original home of the jungle chimp. When their jungles dried up, some became upright-walking chimps of the African and possibly mid-east grasslands named Australopithecines. When some of these upright chimps became full-time predatory hunters, they lost their long chimp hair, developed sweat glands to regulate heat and became Homo Habilis - the "handy man" tool maker whose meat diet would grow it's brain enough to become the world traveler named Homo Erectus who could harness fire. There were no other ape men or man-apes in the rest of the world until Erectus left Africa - just other apes like orangutan or gibbon forms.
@Spectralwulf: well the DNA does NOT agree with your assessment. and i hold that (as is well known) an admixture of an "unknown extinct" hominid was introduced into the african genome around 100,000 years ago that makes it possible for Us to breed with them so says their DNA. that is NOT a common ancestor but an admixture after the fact you understand... also i do NOT in any way agree with the we are descended from Apes business we have similar genes but all mammals carry certain genes and those genes make them mammals. so we can agree to disagree Brother ;-)
@Trey Xanthean: Heidelbergensis is the common relative that returned to Africa and mingled with the African Erectus. Heidelberg man was first found in Germany but has been found as far south as Southern Africa. That "unknown extinct" hominid from 100k years ago found in the groid genome was the last form of Erectus known as Homo Ergaster. I think they know what it was but it would be an admission that blacks are indeed a primitive race. The Erectus still lived and evolved in Africa, just much slower than their ancient relatives that left the continent and adapted to new climates. We are still related to them enough to very successfully breed - as distasteful as that may be.
@Spectralwulf: "If we had no common ancestor with them we wouldn't be able to breed with them." This is called begging the question. It supposes that an evolutionary process has got us to where we are today, over the course of so many millions of years that basically any fantasy of origins can be superimposed upon that period of time. But if we are the product of a very recent creation, then all of your ideas about chimps interbreeding with each other to eventually produce modern man must be thrown out. The basis of the idea that 4.2 billion years have elapsed since earth's formation rests upon the dating of zircon crystals, whose uranium - lead ratios seem to indicate such an age. HOWEVER, when the amount of helium in these crystals is examined, and seen to be far higher than would be expected for a gas which has an extreme abilityy to diffuse out from these crystals, then it is seen that they are at most only 6000 years old. It has long been pondered by atmospheric scientists why the amount of helium in the atmosphere is far lower than would be expected, given an assumed age for the earth of 4.2 billion years, and this is the answer, ie that this gas is still locked up in the zircons as they are only very young, and recently formed.
@HereAmI: You must believe ancient Judean tribal records and the creation myths of campfire story tellers are Holy Writ. That would be like making a religion out of your courthouse records a couple thousand years in the future. You must deny sciences like geology and carbon dating. You must think dinosaurs and man lived together like a Flintstones cartoon. If one digs into the ground to the buried surface level 6000 years ago, there is little change from today. If you dig down to 60 thousand years ago, you will find mammoths, mastodons, saber-toothed cats and many other extinct animals. 65 million years ago, you would find the middle of the USA was under a saltwater sea and the land on either side had dinosaurs. Are you going to claim that fossilized sea life or aquatic dinosaurs found on mountains got there by a flood of magic water? You must think that coal and oil was never plant material and just magically appeared. The walls of the city of Jericho were built over 7000 years ago. Your 4000 BC creation dogma does not fit with reality. The pyramids are older than that.
@Spectralwulf: These Judaean records ARE holy writ - they are so riddled with impossible and invisible messages that they could not be anything other. Many are the instances of this - but just as a single example, the first word Moses was commanded to write can be read according to the intrinsic meaning of the letters in that word, when we find the transcendental message "The Son of God will die by His own hand upon a cross." The word can also be read in different reading frames, when we find the words God / Son / Thorns / Head / Tree / Covenant. "Courthouse records" contain nothing even remotely like this; in fact God tells us that He is discovered in holy writ because He can "Tell the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done." Science is whatever man decides it is - it is in fact a belief system, which must not be challenged, especially if the challenges suggest that "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" which is the ultimate heresy for "science". So geology is based upon circular reasoning which dates an object by its position in a so called geological column, and the level is dated by the objects found in it. I have already explained in outline why radio dating is wildly wrong beyond 5000 years into the past. And yes, dinosaurs and man DID live together. The evidence for that is everywhere. Now as to digging into the ground to a certain level reveals a surface which was there 6000 years ago, clearly, the depth you have to dig to is determined by what has occurred there since that time - and if there was a huge Flood which overlaid everything with hundreds or thousands of feet of silt, then this pre-Flood layer will be found at different depths. Obviously, had these layers of silt been deposited sequentially over hundreds of thousands of years, then there would be no clear line between one layer and the next - but this is in fact what we observe. The layers were all deposited at one discrete moment in time. And I do not make the claim that animal residues on mountain tops got there via a Flood event; rather, I claim that these animals were drowned at sea level or thereabouts, and the mountains were then uplifted. Nor do I claim that oil and gas and coal were anything other than decayed animal and plant residues, because clearly, that is how they came into being, ie via deposition beneath an inundation of silt. Jericho is a very old city, but it was not built "over 7000 years ago" - this is a date which fits with your preconception of history, but it is clear that whenever it was built, its walls collapsed exactly as recorded in the book of Exodus. And although you attempt to disprove this history and so disprove the Bible, it is interesting that you cannot provide proof for earlier cities, as this date in the past reveals the beginning of human society, exactly as scripture records it. I am afraid that your last comment reveals how little you know, as the pyramids are clearly dated to 2500 BC at the earliest - not 4000 BC, as you claim.
@HereAmI: The records and stories of the Bible were put together by councils of men who decided on what books to include - not God or even prophets. Who was born of who in ancient times is only relevant to the politics of that era. There is nothing holy or sacred about mundane records. The teachings of the prophets could be sacred and divinely inspired but the rest is used to create a common group history for maintaining a common mindset among worshippers. I consider the New Testament a powerful book that changed the world and thus divinely inspired while the old Testament is just inspirational tales passed on by men. I think most modern people can't even grasp the symbolism of most Biblical stories including the stories of Jesus. We don't even live in the same reality as people before the industrial revolution. Yes I'm tired and confused 4000 bc and 4000 years ago. what I was trying to point out was that 6000 years ago is not a very long time in the history of man. Göbekli Tepe in Turkey is 11 thousand years old while Jericho is the longest inhabited city on Earth and it goes far beyond 4000 bc. back to the Ice age - which you must deny as well even as the evidence for ice ages is scattered across the world to see. You are trying to bend reality to fit the biblical narrative instead of using reason. You are a science denier whose faith in God seems contingent on a what an ancient book says rather than what can be proven.
@Spectralwulf: The "councils of men" you refer to do not take account of the fact that some men are divinely inspired - both in what they write, and in what they do. So there are two sorts of men; men like you, and men like me. You are of the first man, Adam, and I am of the second Man, the Lord Jesus Christ, and He stated that the first type would not understand the things that are second nature to the second type. As scripture states, "But we have the Mind of Christ", but you lack this Mind, and so cannot understand the scriptures - you state that the OT is "just inspirational tales", but it is not - it is the foreshadowing of Christ, Who stated, "But these are they that speak of Me," and "If ye believed Moses ye would have believed Me, for he wrote of Me." For example, the Ark of Noah is a type of Christ, within which we are safe, and without which, we are drowned. Joseph was a type of Christ, Pharaoh renamed him "Zaphnath Paeneah" which means "Saviour of the world" because of how he saved Egypt from famine. Isaac is a type of Christ, who was offered up to God in sacrifice - but then the blow was stayed, whereas with the Lord Jesus, the knife came down. The mountain where Abraham took him to offer him up was Mount Moriah, which we know as Calvary. So yes, "most modern people..." etc - because "most modern people" - including you, lack the spirit of God, because you are not of His sheep, and so do not hear His voice, and so were not written before the foundation of the world in the Lamb's Book of Life. As Paul says, "But the natural man ( that's you ) receiveth not the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" - and you do not have the spirit. You are a blind man following the blind, and together you will fall into the ditch. But we do live in exactly the same reality as those early people; a reality marked and defaced by sin, rebellion, and hatred for God. "Ice Ages" are only proven by scrapings on rocks - these scrapings were not caused by ice, but by the receding Flood waters, evidence for which has been found from the Dead Sea ( which was filled up with water at that time ) to Ireland, where walls have been discovered dozens of feet below a peat bog, to various lakes in the US which show a sudden inundation of massive extent - all dated to 3520 BC. So I am not "bending reality" - it is you who are doing that. And I already explained to you that "science" is not science - it is a belief system whose sacred texts and priests may not be denied without major repercussions.
@Spectralwulf: "Lost it's hair and grew sweat glands"? There is no scientific evidence to back this up. Moreover, there is zero DNA linkage between Caucasians and Asians for that matter. As far as interbreeding, that has only been possible in the modern age,. Our genetics will cause not only the baby to die, but the mother as well in many cases. It is only with certain drugs to prevent this rejection and a C-section is this mixed child able to come into the world, so there is no natural crossing.
@pastprovespresent: There is a several million year old progression of skeletons found that go from man-ape to ape-man. The upright chimp breeds (Australopithecus) became that way when their jungles dried up around them and being able to walk upright became a survival advantage. In the middle of the progression is Homo Habilis - who became a predator of the East African plains and no longer needed to forage near the shrinking jungles like an upright chimp. H. Habilis made tools of a greater skill than any chimp and his brain grew larger along with the greater consumption of meat - which can be proven by testing bones. Chimps have sweat glands but they are less developed than humans. The skin - which is an organ that produces long chimp hair provides protection in the jungle but would not have a cooling benefit like sweat glands in a sunny, dry environment such as the Serengeti plain. The proof is that at some point mannish apes clearly became apish men and H. Habilis is assumed to be the one that made that critical transition when it became a full-time meat eater. As for your "no DNA linkage", it should be common sense that you cannot breed with a far divergent, separate species - only closely related subspecies.
@Spectralwulf: Pure speculation, all of it.
@HereAmI: Right - all those bones and the archeological evidence was put in the ground just to test your faith. One can dig in the dry ground of east Africa and see the fossils of the jungle that was once there. They can find the bones of upright walking chimps. They can see how over time those upright apes became more like men. Instead of acknowledging that evidence, you would rather LIE - just to believe in a magical, hocus pocus creation myth instead of a natural progression that is no less of a miracle. All the stages of evolution can be seen when they are repeated in the mother's womb in a matter of nine months. You must deny once being a tadpole-like sperm - swimming into your mother and powered by your father's energy.
@Spectralwulf: "All those bones." How few they have ever found - and we know how readily your colleagues commit fraud, don't we? But a bone can be placed alongside another one and an assumption be made that one is an evolutionary development of the other - this is what is known in the world of sensible people as wishful thinking. "They can find the bones of upright walking chimps." If you mean "Lucy", then unbrainwashed palaeontologists like Sir Solly Zuckerman was shown these bones, and his response was "It's a bloody ape!" As it is. Nobody can "see how over time they became more like men." This is silly and tendentious thinking, engaged in by silly and tendentious persons like you. You should try to engage with the difference between evidence, and the interpretation of that evidence. This is what science does - it attempts to look at the evidence, and fit it into a theory; but the temptation is to hammer the evidence into the theory so as to try to make it work. But it doesn't. Apes have 48 chromosomes, and we have 46, and although once again, geneticists have tried to create a scenario which involves a fusion event taking place such that this reduction of chromosome number occurred, when we actually look at the evidence, it is simply not there; and without a chromosome number which is the same, there can be no genetic link between apes and men, regardless of how you might want it to exist. So I am not LYING, I am simply interpreting the EVIDENCE in a way which does not fit with your delusions of evolution, and so you do not like that, and call me a liar instead of somebody who has a far superior theory of origins. And please do not repeat the phylogeny / ontogeny argument; it was debunked even during Haeckel's lifetime, even though the textbooks continue to repeat it. But the simple fact is that nobody who has the remotest familiarity with the complexities we see in the genome can imagine that there was not a Creation event to explain it; lifetimes have been spent trying to get reaction vessels to produce proteins, and this has failed every time, even though intelligent beings have made the glassware, applied the electricity, and engineered the gas mixes to order. What we get is a reaction which when completed, is simple tar. And I should not have to point out that a sperm is useless without an egg to swim to, which must be supported by a uterus, and a whole host of additional hormonal release mechanisms to support the pregnancy. None of these things are even remotely conceivable unless there was a divine command originally - not just to create life, but to surround it with an extensive infrastructure of other systems to maintain it.
@HereAmI: I learned about archeology and human anthropology a generation before leftist academics took over all the universities and started manipulating findings to fit modern racial agendas - like the black "chedderman" in the UK or the recent "out of Africa/we're all white negroes" propaganda. You are indeed forced to lie to defend ancient mid-east literature instead of acknowledging proven scientific facts. You want to believe the world and mankind was somehow "beamed" into existence by some cosmic teleporter ray rather than developing by natural processes. There is no way to reason with someone who chooses to reject reason to defend ancient stories they regard as holy writ and the infallible word of God. You're going to believe fairy tales - like every animal that ever existed could fit on Noah's ark and never fathom that such oral history passed on for many lifetimes was likely an exaggerated tale of people fleeing the Black Sea flood and taking vital pairs of livestock with them. You choose the lie over reason and facts.
@Spectralwulf: You aren't listening. It is not the facts I deny - but your interpretation of those facts, to fit an atheist agenda. I have also pointed out that there is not a shred of evidence for complex systems coming into being via chance processes which become more complex as time progresses - this is a direct refutation of the scirntific law of entropy. So you promote the kind of science which you have mangled and twisted to "fit" a bankrupt philosophy, and reject that science when it shows that you are wrong-headed in your thinking. But please - REASON with me, rather than simply making addle-pated claims which you cannot back up or rationalise. I'm all ears. And I have previously explained to you that the stories written in scripture are far more than stories - they are in many cases, prophecies which came true, and are still coming true as we speak - surely no sane person could deny the obvious understanding that a Mark is approaching without which no man can buy or sell. But do not venture off into an ignorant characterization of the Noah's Ark story - do a little reading, and then you will be better able to understand the things you claim. Traces of a monstrous Flood have been detected worldwide, which occurred in 3520 BC; these traces extend throughout the northern hemisphere, and far beyond the Black Sea, in fact from Mesopotamia vis the dead Sea, across to Ireland, and into North America. One of your problems is that you are very ignorant about most things, and so you dwell in a fool's paradise alongside all your other atheist friends. If you actually knew the science, you would be forced to abandon your foolish bigotry.
@HereAmI: There is no evidence of the entire world suddenly being covered in water. That is another lie you choose to perpetuate. There was coastal flooding whenever pools of glacial meltwater poured into the oceans and raised sea levels. There is evidence the Black sea was once a freshwater lake in a Mediterranean climate with four major rivers flowing into it - thus making it an Eden of abundance where the human population could thrive into a civilization. Those that chose what tales to put into the Bible were not scientists - just poorly educated theologians of their time. They used the oldest campfire stories to fill the void of ancient history of which they knew little about. You worship such stories instead of seeing them for what they are. God is only real to you in books and not as a living presence which you feel yourself to be a living part of.
@Spectralwulf: "There is no evidence...." The evidence is there; but you have to be prepared to set aside your biases, prejudices, and natural fallen sinful state, which does not want to know that "the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof, the world, and they that dwell therein." Here is the evidence as it relates to the northern hemisphere; so you will see - assuming you are prepared to acknowledge your previous ignorance - that the Flood has left massive worldwide traces behind it, and that it can be precisely dated, and seen to have affected areas well beyond the limits you have decided for it. http://www.biblicalchronologis....t.org/products/Noah&
Here is just one of those "campfire stories" you are telling us about. In ancient times, the children of Israel had a God called YHVH, who led them out of Egypt and across the Gulf of Aqaba into the land of Midian, and after a period of time, into the promised land. This God spoke to Moses at the place called Mount Sinai; and from that meeting, devolved the Ten Commandments, and many other instructions. One of them was that they should organize a system whereby this same YHVH could be appropriately worshipped, and amongst other instructions, they were told to fashion a metal breastplate for the High Priest to wear when he entered into the Holy of Holies once per year, to make atonement for the sins of the people. Upon this breastplate were to be placed 12 gemstones, one for each of the tribes, and each one engraved with the tribal name, and in a specific order. Now palaeohebrew letters have a numerical value, so each tribe has a numerical value too. Surprisingly for such ignorant sheepherding people, whether these numbers were added up horizontally, vertically, or diagonally, the number was always the same - 888. Now this number is the same number as we find when we count up the number, whether in Greek or Hebrew, for the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is the One called YHVH, Who came down to earth some 1500 years after this breastplate was made, to dwell amongst men. So the conclusion we draw is that when the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies to make atonement for the people once per year, the Father of this same Lord Jesus Christ saw His own Son represented in numerical form beneath Him. Now clearly, this particular campfire story could not have been so perfectly devised by a primitive people some 1500 years in advance of the events which it foreshadowed. Nor, of course, could the arrangement in which they were commanded to camp; which is seen to be a perfect cross shape, with one limb longer than the other three. Nor can we explain, except in terms of the existence of the God of the Bible, why the very first word in that Book, each letter of which has not only a numerical value but also an intrinsic meaning, could spell out, when we read these letters individually, the statement "The Son of God will die by His own hand upon a cross."
@HereAmI: You would use glaciation as evidence of a fictional worldwide flood. The lake Euxine/Black sea flood is an actual observable event, as it is evident from sea floor samples when the freshwater lake suddenly became a saltwater sea. Even the story of Noah claims they landed at Mt Ararat - which is the highest mountain that would have been seen by lakemen on boats and barges that were pushed by the floodwaters toward the eastern end of the lake. Once the castaways headed over the mountains to the foot of that great white mountain in the distance, they would have found themselves in an entirely new world - the middle east region. Thus their Eden was destroyed by flood and they became wandering refugees in a new land. The Fertile crescent region would then have to be conquered and the stone age Semites along the rivers had to be driven out or ruled. The ancient settlement of Jericho would have been seized and walls erected to control the Jordan valley.
@Spectralwulf: You haven't bothered to read the link I sent you. As such then, you are simply wallowing in your ignorance. You prefer lies to the truth - that is your prerogative; but either way, you will be brought before the Judge of all the earth, and commanded to give account.
@HereAmI: There is not enough water to flood the entire world. Even when the poles were melted and most of the world was a jungle from which our oil and coal comes from, and the continents were split by inland seas - there was never enough water to flood the entire world. You don't seem to grasp the magnitude of the Black sea flood. Lake Euxine would have had the largest population of people ever amassed in the entire world. There is no other place like it in the world today. They were Aryan/Caucasians that multiplied from the limitless bounty of the Lake, rivers and the basin around it. When it flooded, tens of thousands were dispersed in different directions - not just Noah's family but countless others that related a similar story. It was the catalyst for the great Aryan dispersion and the founding of several civilizations.
@Spectralwulf: And you don't seem to grasp that signs of a massive inundation are present from Mesopotamia to North America, and that in each place, this inundation is dated by the science you claim to respect to 3520 BC. You don't seem to grasp that peoples throughout the world independently record this Flood in their ancient histories. You don't seem to grasp that the world as it then was was relatively flat, and that being the case, it is well known that the entire world could be easily covered to a depth of fifteen feet, or five metres, and thus no person could have survived, even if they were clinging to wreckage. You don't seem to grasp that the oil and coal you refer to is buried en masse - the animals and vegetation which forms this resource would need to have been buried rapidly, by the hundreds of feet of sediment which we see deposited worldwide. You don't seem to grasp that wherever these sediments are seen, they are not eroded with respect to each other, and so one layer was laid down immediately upon the previous layer, before natural erosion by water could occur. You do not seem to grasp these things because you do not want to grasp these things; you are quite happy to live in cognitive dissonance and the brainwashing you have been subjected to since birth; and for this wilfull ignorance, you will pay a heavy price.
Firstly, time does not go back more than 6000 years, so a "37,000 y/o specimen" does not exist. The RATE project provided a highly convincing explanation as to why radioactive dating methodologies are hugely inaccurate if they are used for events dating from more than 5000 years ago, when the Flood occurred, ie in 3520 BC. The reason why modern Europeans are all of the same racial type is because they are the children of Israel, who migrated not out of Africa but out of Israel. The African is a separate and completely distinct creation - the "Beast of the Field", but you can see why modern "scientists" do not want to even remotely envisage such a scenario, because it would speak of a recent creation event, rather than an evolution event, which is the fantasy they have constructed their entire world view around.
"A day with Yahweh is like 1000 years, and 1000 years like a day." The 7 days it took Yahweh to recreate this world could be said to take more like 7000 years. Also, Yahweh "came upon" this earth - He didn't really create it, He brought it back to life. Meaning there was life/an existence that went extincted (war, famine, ice age, for example) before He "came upon it."
@Dennick : Scripture is very clear that "The evening and the morning were the first day", etc - He said this because He knew there would be people disputing what He did. If a day were a thousand years, then things would have been very cold and dark for the first four thousand years, and vegetation could not have been supported after it was created on the third day. When you say "He didn't really create it" - again, you are disputing the direct statements of God. "All things were created by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made." There is no evidence whatsoever that YHVH "brought the earth back to life." This so called "Gap Theory" has been thoroughly discredited. And nowhere does scripture say that "YHVH came upon it," which is to suggest that He found it floating in some sort of void and decided to fix it up with life and vegetation, etc.
@HereAmI: "2 Peter 3:8 King James Version 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with God as a thousand years (with Man), and a thousand years (with Man) is as one day (with God). Psalm 90 "4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night."
@Trey Xanthean: Why this obsession to have each day of creation as a thousand years? How do you understand the scriptures "And the evening and the morning were the ..... day?" Clearly, each day is separated by an evening and a morning. How does this square with a day of a thousand years? Are you suggesting that there is anything which God cannot do? "For with God, all things are possible."
It's just another way of bending reality to fit the faith like what you do. You act as though geologists or archeologists have never aligned recorded history with their dating techniques. I would trust a geologists to tell where to dig to find artifacts from a certain time period. The mountains of the US lifted the ground from deep levels and exposed the age of dinosaurs. People in the plains of midwest can never find a T Rex because all they will find is fossilized sea creatures. The Earth would be a total madhouse If every extinct fossil animal ever found all lived within the last 6 thousand years. There would be crazy cave paintings revealing vast varieties of ancient animals - including giant insects and amphibians from the time when the entire Earth was an oxygen-rich jungle or reptilian proto mammals when huge swaths of the Earth was desert. You will never find humans naturally buried and fossilized in rock beside dinosaurs or countless other extinct animals.
@Spectralwulf: Even the Romans depicted these dinosaurs fighting with men in swamps. The Epic of Beowulf speaks of a giant beast - Grendel - whose description, ( tiny front legs, huge rear limbs ) matches T Rex. Marco Polo records that the Emperor of China had a carriage drawn by two dinosaurs with giant plate-like eyes. The "mokele mbembe" of the Congolese jungles have been identifid by natives from pictures shown to them as some sort of dinosaur which they recognize. Bishop Bell is buried in Carlisle Cathedral, and the brass plate surrounding his crypt shows clear evidence of a dinosaur inscribed upon it. Where I live there is a brass dragon statue in the centre of town which records the legend that one of these creatures lived in the area, and was eventually killed by the locals; to this day the roads are called "Baldragon." All the evidence is there - you just don't want to see it. Scripture speaks of two dinosaurs - Behemoth and Leviathan. the latter being a fire-emitting beast of the oceans.
@Trey Xanthean: there is no Obsession Brother. i simply typed out the scripture from my Companion Bible (KJV) and posted it. it says what it says. i have no control over that nor do i deny anything is possible with God. again it says what it says and it is a double witness. one was Peter, one was Moses, so. one way or another whether or not you or i have the exact understanding of the occurrence makes little difference. take care Brother...
@Trey Xanthean: However, what you typed seemed to confirm what "Dennick" had posted earlier; ie that creation occurred over a period of 6000 years. So that is why I challenged what you seemed to be implying, based on the previous flow of ideas in the thread. Besides, Peter does NOT say that creation was a six-thousand year process, so he does NOT give a "double witness." He simply refers to God's understanding of the meaning of time.
@HereAmI: well i never said Peter agreed with Dennick or with you. i simply copied what my Bible said. yes, it is a double witness of the understanding WE have of how The Most High accounts "time". Creation is what it is. it took the "time" it took. i was not there so i could not say one way or another. but as you said already ALL THINGS (meaning either or) are possible with God. He did it His way. we have an explanation given to us that Our comparatively tiny minds can comprehend though The Spirit reveals deeper meanings for us to contemplate. however God said as well, "My ways are Not your ways" so either way... here we are and here we will be until we are gone. God Bless and Keep you Brother. see ya...
@Trey Xanthean: "I never said...." I know you didn't say. But you implied, as you wrote something which clearly referenced what Dennick had said. What you wrote was not a double witness, because God is not the Author of confusion. He does not say that Creation was a seven-day event punctuated by evenings and mornings, and then say that it was an event which occurred over six thousand years. "You were not there so you could not say." Nor were you at the cross, nor at the resurrection, nor present when the rain started. From what you imply - again, - none of the events recorded in scripture can be relied upon, because "you were not there." This is where faith comes in to the picture. You either have it, and believe what God has said, or you do not have it, and so are unpleasing to Him. And "all things" are not possible with God. For example, He cannot lie, and He cannot undo what He has done, and He cannot look upon sin. And saying that "His ways are not our ways" may be true - and of course is true - but if He says something clearly to us, then that is what He means. Other things He does not say, we may speculate upon, but cannot definitively understand one way or the other, nor are we required to. And He states, "In six days, God created the heavens and the earth." Believe Him.
Browse To Upload