3 edits
Just looked it up and 5,700 to 10,000 years came up.
Now I guess the argument is that god created it, exactly as said in the bible, could be true. But i do have a problem with that shorter time. The cynic might say it is not enough to make a pebble, or 5mm of the grand canyon. I do think these creationist struggle with concepts of time.
But if it is true, to my maths that is just 200 - 300 generations (30 years a generation). What I wonder - even if you take the bible as complete truth, is it possible to get from adam to moses to Jesus in that time - 300 generations?
any ideas?
Originally posted by e4chrisThe bible give you the generations of both sides.
Just looked it up and 5,700 to 10,000 years came up.
Now I guess the argument is that god created it, exactly as said in the bible, could be true. But i do have a problem with that shorter time. The cynic might say it is not enough to make a pebble, or 5mm of the grand canyon. I do think these creationist struggle with concepts of time.
But if it is t ...[text shortened]... is it possible to get from adam to moses to Jesus in that time - 300 generations?
any ideas?
1 edit
Originally posted by e4chrisI thought that was the main reason for Creationism, ie. to justify the names and lineages from the bible.
Just looked it up and 5,700 to 10,000 years came up.
Now I guess the argument is that god created it, exactly as said in the bible, could be true. But i do have a problem with that shorter time. The cynic might say it is not enough to make a pebble, or 5mm of the grand canyon. I do think these creationist struggle with concepts of time.
But if it is t ...[text shortened]... is it possible to get from adam to moses to Jesus in that time - 300 generations?
any ideas?
After all, the bible really does go on about every Tom,Dick and Harry from certain bloodlines?
I would have thought it would be more interesting to trace Jesus' bloodline.
To think that no one has really put their hand up to say "Hey , I got JC's blood in me, I'm special" , is quite weird. I guess the lineages got lost in the dark ages.
Or did JC not have kids?
Anyone?
Originally posted by e4chrisYou reckon there are Christians out there who have named their kids Adam and Eve? Surely there are. You reckon sometimes the parents blame everything on Eve? 🙂
can it link adam to moses?
Sorry to but in on your thread. I just had to unload these ideas without starting a thread..
Originally posted by karoly aczelThat would make them be the real Pope 🙄
I thought that was the main reason for Creationism, ie. to justify the names and lineages from the bible.
After all, the bible really does go on about every Tom,Dick and Harry from certain bloodlines?
I would have thought it would be more interesting to trace Jesus' bloodline.
To think that no one has really put their hand up to say "Hey , I got ...[text shortened]... weird. I guess the lineages got lost in the dark ages.
Or did JC not have kids?
Anyone?
if the bible of offering up a bloodline from adam to moses etc that would be quite impressive. I don't think it is? There are a few family trees in the OT where you have Paul son of Micheal, son of david son of.... etc i doubt in 200 generations they make it back to adam.
my knowledge of the OT is not great, in progress, forgive me if this is dumb!
Originally posted by e4chrisit isn't all in one place. you have in genesis the lineage from adam to noah. i think you have one from noah to abe then isaac and jacob. then you have lots of lines for each of jacob's 12 sons (i think josef is split into manase and efraim i think). judas' line leads to david. prior to jesus's birth you have the line of david that leads to mary.
if the bible of offering up a bloodline from adam to moses etc that would be quite impressive. I don't think it is? There are a few family trees in the OT where you have Paul son of Micheal, son of david son of.... etc i doubt in 200 generations they make it back to adam.
my knowledge of the OT is not great, in progress, forgive me if this is dumb!
so basically, they try to identify who lived at roughly the same time as an event in history we have a date for, then go back through that person's genealogy and aproximate when adam was born. that they believe to be the beginning of the earth. the funny thing is they use historical evidence from egypt, babylon, the persian empire, the phoenicions, etc, to mark their young earthy timeline, but ignore facts like the egyptian civilization surviving unchanged through the global flood that destroyed humanity.
oh well. no point getting worked up by kent hovind and other frauds.
Originally posted by RJHindsI think I figured out why creationists are afraid to use their own brain but rely instead on other people:
Astounding Evidence for a Young Earth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n042X-Fuihg
Evidence for a Young Earth
http://www.earthage.org/youngearthev/evidence_for_a_young_earth.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=fvwp&v=tX9eDTNfQHY
They have an extreme deep seated inferiority complex, as a group, because of the extreme brainwashing inherent in religions, especially Christianity, as to make them feel human intelligence cannot be trusted, failing miserably in comparison to their alleged god.
So not trusting their OWN brains they defer to those other humans who have made up these fairy tales about the genealogy time line of the alleged Adam to modern day times.
They can't trust their own brains and therefore they can't trust scientists who refute the fairy tales of Christianity. Funny how they can trust others to make pronunciations of such timelines.
They will say such stupid statements as 'if you don't know how the universe began you can't tell ANYTHING about the past', because they can't trust THEMSELVES to say anything about the past for fear of being compared to their alleged god.
