The evidence for a recent dating for adam Xxx chat free oinlin iran


21-Sep-2017 02:36

Hugh Ross and his fellow progressive creationists, along with the other pre-Adamite proponents, are trying to rescue the Bible from a perceived conflict with ‘science’ by reinterpreting the Bible rather than by questioning the ‘science’.

This is because they erroneously think that ‘science’ speaks with more authority than God’s Word about origins and the age of the Earth.

However, his adjusted range of dates does not solve the problem.

If it is possible that Adam and Eve lived 10,000 years ago, then this implies it is possible that such indigenous people are not descendants of Adam and Eve (which would mean that they could not be saved through Christ, our kinsman/redeemer—Isaiah ).

Such a mindset overlooks the fact that where modern science deals with origins, it is based on strict naturalism (the humanistic view that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural, not supernatural, causes and laws).

Unfortunately compromise of this sort means having to continually change one’s position to keep up with evolutionary pronouncements.

He makes the extraordinary statement: “The step-by-step approach to bipedal primate creation that we can see in the recent fossil record may reasonably reflect God’s understanding of the difficulty other life-forms would encounter in adapting to sinful humans.” This is a classic example of the confusion that Christians get themselves into when they depart from the text of the Bible and allow outside influences, especially long-age naturalism, to dictate the meaning of Scripture.

the evidence for a recent dating for adam-71

moriah dating baldwin hills

This requires Ross to postulate the existence of creatures with human-like characteristics, but ‘spiritless’ (see Skull Wars). According to Ross, because the world was a place of death, violence and decay for hundreds of thousands/millions of years before the Curse recorded in Genesis –19.He also believes in the same general sequence of events and the same order of appearance as evolutionists.Although he believes that God made Adam from the dust, he also accepts the evolutionists’ long-age interpretation of the fossil record.Pre-Adamism of this type is also starkly contrary to what Genesis tells us about Eve, namely that God made her from one of Adam’s ribs (Genesis ), not from some pre-existing creature; and that Adam named her Eve “because she was the mother of all living” (Genesis ).

the evidence for a recent dating for adam-10

indiandating promotion code

Evangelicals who cannot accept the plain text of the Bible regarding the creation of the first man from the dust of the ground often do not accept what the Bible says about the Flood being global, because they accept the fossil layers as evidence for millions of years, not the result of the sequence of burial by a global flood.For example, Ross stated on his website in 1997: “Starting about 2 to 4 million years ago God began creating man-like mammals or ‘hominids.’? They did not worship God or establish religious practices.These creatures stood on two feet, had large brains, and used tools. In time, all these man-like creatures went extinct.Hence pre-Adamism took the form of , or multiple creations of different races.



The Evidences for a Recent Dating for Adam, about 14, to 15, years Before Present. A recent genetic study of human genes related to the brain concluded that.… continue reading »


Read more