Scientists say we may have been wrong about the origin of life

A lot more than that. The Bible is a collection of stories, many of which were handed down from generation to generation orally. This is particularly true of the Old Testament. Many of the OT books are allegories, some are oral histories. None are meant to be scientific theories...
Except those many prominent religious authorities and apologists that endlessly push Biblical inerrancy, that every word of the OT and NT was inspired (and apparently ok'd) by the Holy Spirit. Even those NT books that took till the Third Century AD to accept after much disagreements. It has to be that way, how else will our congregation believe us?
 
Except those many prominent religious authorities and apologists that endlessly push Biblical inerrancy, that every word of the OT and NT was inspired (and apparently ok'd) by the Holy Spirit. Even those NT books that took till the Third Century AD to accept after much disagreements. It has to be that way, how else will our congregation believe us?
Sadly, that is also the case in Australia but less so than in US.
 
are we still struggling for the meaning of life - YES! - we may enjoy parts of it and hate others but what does it all mean - the recent astronaughts just couldn't wait to get back to this wonderful ;shining ; vibrant planet from dead Moon!!
 
Last edited:
If I look on christian forums, I get the idea that there are not many christians who believe young earth creationism. I don't think it matters much. Derek Prince was a great Bible teacher. He believed GAP theory, that it's old and dinosaurs are billions of years old and 6000 year ago after a flood God recreated it. I used to believe that too. I spoke about it with my brother.

He said: They think I'm nuts, but I believe it's 6000 years old. Come on. No way. No it's old. It was a recreation. And then they found soft tissue in a dinosaur. Yes it's millions or billions of years old, but it's because of the permafrost. Yeah right. Go fool your mother. Not me. That's when I stopped believing it. Job describes dinosaurs in the Bible.

I studied Physical Geography for a year and Landscape architecture for a year. I just believed what they said. Mesozoicum etc, time periods. It was just: The oldest earth layer was deposited first and has fossils in it that are just 1 cell or something and that took billions of years and then the next layer was deposited with more complicated fossils and so on.

Okay. I was 19. Why should I doubt these intelligent people who wrote the books and educated me? It's not what the Bible says, but I thought: Well then God just said days but meant 6 times billions of years or something. Who cares.

But now I think these creation science videos are fascinating. They explain stuff that can't be explained with the evolution model, but can be with the flood model. A guy said: We were taught it took millions of years, but with mount St Helen I saw that it was formed very quick.

And the one who came up with plate tectonics, Africa and America drifting apart, first Pangea, he believed the flood of Noah and said it happened fast, but regular scientist didn't believe him and later they did, but said it went slow. They just look at how it is now and then assume it always went that slow. They just leave out the flood. With a world wide flood the lightest 1 cell organisms just go to the bottom first.
 
Last edited:
Anthropologists recently made a startling discovery when they found 7,000-year-old mummies that don’t share human DNA during a complex excavation project. This revelation comes from a remote archaeological site where the environmental conditions preserved biological tissue with remarkable clarity for thousands of years. Initial genetic sequencing results indicate a significant departure from the standard genetic markers typically found in homo sapiens from that era. These findings prompt a reevaluation of migration patterns and potential unknown lineages that inhabited the region long ago. Researchers continue to analyze the samples to determine how these individuals fit into the broader history of life.


MSN

That kind of screws up the story of "made in our image" Could revise to "made in our images"
 
The earth is a big place. The early stages of life could have happened many times in many places. The one that did the best job replaced the others. That's evolution. It could take a while.
I don't know why so many professionals stick to the theory that all life started in Africa. If it did, it suggests outside manipulation, not nature.
 
I know you weren't talking to me, and I thought that I would never utter these words, but could you please explain???
so many different cultures including their scientists and archeologists - hope they are all singing from the same hymn book? or we may be getting mixed messages?
 
Back
Top