Adam Was Not the First Human, for the Bible Tells Us So

Updated on January 8, 2019
HeadlyvonNoggin profile image

For as long as he can remember, Jeremy has been formulating theories that reconcile his fascination with science and his faith in God.

"God Created Evolution" is a project consisting of multiple articles that evaluate the first 11 books of Genesis in the context of known history and modern science.
"God Created Evolution" is a project consisting of multiple articles that evaluate the first 11 books of Genesis in the context of known history and modern science.

Was Adam the First Human?

The creation of man in Genesis has always been read to mean that Adam was the first human God created. Why is that exactly? This isn't stated anywhere. In fact, what it actually says is that God created humans on day 6 of the creation account in chapter 1, then God rested on day 7 at the beginning of chapter 2, then comes the story of Adam's creation. It's nothing more than an assumption that these are two tellings of the same event.

For most of recorded human history, it really didn't matter. The events listed in the creation account were of little consequence. Whether God created all the earth in six days or in 4.54 billion years was irrelevant as there was no way of knowing one way or the other. There wasn't any reason to even suspect it was any different than how it read, and the overall message of the Bible didn't hinge on it.

Today, it does matter. In these modern times, we now understand more about the history of the earth and humanity than ever before. Modern understanding has proven to be in direct conflict with traditional interpretations of Genesis. This has resulted in many rejecting the Bible as nothing more than mythology, and many others rejecting modern wisdom and scientific progress as false.

The creation versus evolution debate has come to be one of the most divisive topics we face. Many people of faith fight tooth and nail to keep topics like evolution out of the school curriculum, and many others don't see why their children must remain in the dark because some people can't let go of their old religious beliefs.

The interpretation that says Adam was the first man in existence is the primary misconception that makes the Bible and modern science seemingly incompatible. Correcting this one small error takes pre-flood Genesis out of the realm of mythology and plants it firmly into known history.

Sumerian writing tablet recording the allocation of beer.
Sumerian writing tablet recording the allocation of beer. | Source

The Mythology of the First Civilization

Civilization first began in Mesopotamia over five thousand years ago, and the Sumerians are credited as the inventors. They built the first cities that ever existed, with populations in the tens of thousands made possible through their development of large-scale year-round agriculture.

Throughout the rise of civilization the Sumerians became talented builders. They also created the first government, the first laws, arithmetic, astronomy/astrology, the wheel, sailboats, frying pans, razors, harps, kilns for firing bricks and pottery, bronze hand tools, and plows, to name just a few.

Not long after large-scale agriculture first began, a crude form of writing was developed out of the need to keep records of labor and materials. Another first accredited to the Sumerians. Over the centuries that followed, writing became more advanced and they began to record stories passed down through generations that explained how their people came up with all of these ideas that would forever change the human race. The funny thing is, these stories didn't give credit to their ancestors. They claim they were taught by immortal human-like gods.

The Sumerian and Akkadian tablets where these Sumerian stories are found predate the oldest books of the bible by over a thousand years by our best scholarly estimations. Some of these tablets contain stories that share many very similar components to stories found in early Genesis, including the story of Adam and Eve, the biblical flood, and the confusing of a once universal language. Numerous tablets from throughout the latter part of the 3rd millennium BC containing these stories have been found all around Mesopotamia, suggesting they were very well known in the region during that time. Because of this, it has become a more and more common assumption that some of the stories found in early Genesis were actually inspired by these ancient tales.

There’s no doubt Sumerian mythology had an impact on subsequent civilizations. The Akkadians were definitely inspired by this first civilization, considering they basically adopted much of the Sumerian lifestyle, including their mythology. Greek and Roman mythology also contains echoed themes that suggest the roots of their beliefs may have come from the well-known Sumerian beliefs as well. They all speak of multiple immortal gods, human in form, both male and female, who were fallible, moody, and often at odds with each other, and they all speak of the intermingling between these immortal beings and mortal humans, producing demigods and titans.

Were There People Before Adam and Eve?

If the creation of Adam in Genesis happened in an already populated world, given the time frame and location specified, then the humans who eventually became the Sumerians would have been the people that populated the landscape.

The Books of Moses

Other than the obvious correlation between a handful of stories in early Genesis with Sumerian mythology, the Books of Moses are very much unique.

The most obvious quality that differentiates them from the others is that in this story there is only one God. The Greeks were fascinated by these books, which is why some of the oldest manuscripts of the Torah that still exist today are written in Greek. They also had a strong impact on the Romans, who after over a century of Christian persecution legalized Christianity, then a few decades later made it the only legal religion. What's more, the books have continuously been an ever-present influence on the western world in every age since. Today, the Books of Moses serve as the foundation for the world’s two largest religions, making up half the world’s population, three thousand years later. No other writings from these ancient civilizations can make that claim.

At the same time, in today’s scientifically enlightened age many dismiss Genesis as nothing more than mythology. There are nearly as many in the non-religious, secular, agnostic, or atheist category as there are Muslims, making them the third largest group behind Christians and Muslims.

One reason for this is because it has been confirmed that those events in early Genesis did not happen. For instance, we’ve confirmed geologically that there has never been a global flood. The last time the entire planet was covered with water was over three billion years ago when land did not yet exist, let alone humans. And we have confirmed genetically that, while every human alive today does actually share a common ancestor, this ancestor existed in Africa tens of thousands of years before the events of Genesis.

Those interpretations of Genesis that say the flood was global and that Adam was the first human to exist were formed centuries ago by people who couldn’t have known any better. Now, we do. Rereading the first five and one-quarter chapters of Genesis for what it actually says, and not for what we’ve always been told it says, tells a very different story that's much more in sync with our modern scientifically-based understanding.

A map of DNA migration.
A map of DNA migration.

What Was the State of the Earth During Genesis?

The first order of business is to establish the proper context. What was the state of the Earth during the time frame in which early Genesis is set?

Pre-Flood Genesis in an Already Populated World Context

We now know that by 10,000 BC homo sapiens had already populated the planet and had over the course of many generations established themselves as the dominant species in the animal kingdom, which is exactly what the humans created in Genesis 1 were commanded to do:

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." (Genesis 1:28)

We also know that humans in this same region were the first to use the seeds in seed baring vegetation to grow food starting around 9,000 BC, which matches up with the illustration in Genesis 1 of God teaching humans. Where these same verses also state that the animals will use these plants for food as well, only with the humans does it specifically talk about the seeds that then bare other seed-bearing plants:

Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.

And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food. ” And it was so. (Genesis 1:29-30)

And we also know through climatological evidence that this same region matched the description given at the beginning of Genesis 2 from around 6,200 BC due to the dramatic shift in climate that transformed much of the region from lush green lands to desert. An aridification event often referred to as the 8.2 kiloyear event:

No no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground. (Genesis 2:5)

Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.

Adam, Eve, and the Garden of Eden

But where the humans (and everything else) in Genesis 1 were specifically told what to do, in Genesis 2 Adam was only told what not to do: He was to eat from any tree but the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat;

but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it. For in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17)

In fact, the whole theme of the Adam and Eve story has to do with them exhibiting their own individual free will. For instance, one of the very first things it says God did after placing Adam in the garden was to bring the animals to Adam to see what he would call them.

And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them; and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. (Genesis 2:19)

The humans created in Genesis 1 were given very specific commands that would take generations to realize. They were told to:

  • Populate and subdue the Earth
  • Establish dominance in the animal kingdom

So how could Adam, Eve, and their descendants be expected to accomplish these things considering how capable and willing they were to disobey?

Reconsidering things with the idea that Adam was not the first human, but rather was the first human capable of behaving contrary to God's will in an already populated world of humans yields many interesting possibilities both throughout the remainder of the bible itself, as well as far outside of it.

Cain leads able to death.
Cain leads able to death. | Source

Who Were the "Others" That Cain Feared?

Within the Bible, some of the more cryptic and confusing verses in the chapters to follow begin to make much more sense if the region was already populated when Adam was created. Like the unnamed "others" that Cain expressed concern about in chapter 4. The concern God is validated by somehow "marking" him to protect him from harm.

Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is more than I can bear.

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.”

But the Lord said to him, “Not so; 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. (Genesis 4:13-15)

It also puts a whole new spin on the first few verses of chapter 6, those which talk about the "sons of God" finding the "daughters of humans" beautiful and having children by them. This comes right in the middle of its explanation for why the flood was necessary. It even goes on to explain that humans are mortal and live less than a hundred and twenty years, contrary to the hundreds of years it says Adam and his descendants lived in chapter 5.

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them,

that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair; and they took for themselves wives of all whom they chose.

And the Lord said, "My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for he also is flesh; yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years." (Genesis 6:1-3)

Noah's ark.
Noah's ark. | Source

Was the Flood Really Global?

This should be obvious, but many still hold onto the belief that the flood completely covered the entire Earth. Even in the traditional context this would not make sense as the flood occurred just 10 generations after Adam. So Adam's descendants could not have populated more than a small portion of the Earth. There would be no need in that sense to flood the entire planet. Not to mention the fact that the authors of the bible would have no sense of what global really means as the entirety of the Earth from their perspective was the land they lived in.

But even beyond that reasoning, there are a couple of subtle clues that tell us the flood wasn't a global phenomenon that wiped out everything that lived. The first comes at the end of chapter four when the author explains that three of Cain's descendants were the "fathers of all those who: lived in tents and herded cattle, played stringed instruments, made metal tools."

And Adah bore Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents, and of those who have cattle.

And his brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of all those who handle the harp and organ.

And Zillah, she also bore Tubalcain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron; and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah. (Genesis 4:20-22)

These descendants come seven generations after Cain, which is the same number of generations Methuselah was from Seth. Methuselah died the same year as the flood, probably in it. Specifically stating that these descendants "fathered' or "instructed" anyone would be totally pointless if Cain's descendants and everyone else were wiped out in the flood. Plus, it's clear these verses are referring to individuals the intended reader is familiar with, so they couldn't be people who hadn't existed since the flood.

The other clue can be seen in the only two biblical mentions of the 'Nephilim'. One before the flood:

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown. (Genesis 6:4)

And one after:

So they brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, “The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height.

And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.” (Numbers 13:32-33)

Of course, simply proving the flood wasn't actually global doesn't do much considering the whole purpose of the flood was to wipe out the "wicked" element that had risen in humanity. A localized flood would hardly accomplish that in this already populated world scenario. But, if Adam was the introduction of free will, and wickedness was only possible through free will, then a local flood of the Mesopotamian valley would be all it would take. In fact, that valley, which is a geological equivalent of a storm drain, would be the perfect location to place an element as potentially dangerous as free will.

Adam Was Not the First Man

In this modern age, many will surely find this a bit much to swallow. But in the context of the evolution of life as we understand it, the appearance of a new species of humans with free will and extended lifespans would be no more of a leap than the change from single-celled to multi-celled organisms or the adaptations that made crawling up onto land from the sea possible.

Even in the progression of the Homo genus, there were large leaps forward from one species to the next. However, if an even more advanced species did actually appear just a few thousand years ago, they're certainly not here anymore. Of course, according to the story, they were all washed away by a large flood. Mass extinctions play a crucial role throughout the evolutionary history of life. In that context, the flood was merely the last of many edits that shaped life as we know it today.

Is this possible?

Even if any physical remains that could potentially confirm this theory had been washed out to sea by a large flood, certainly the existence of beings like this would have left some sort of lasting impression, especially if they existed for over sixteen hundred years in a region populated by humans. You might expect to see rapid advancements in intellectual and technological capabilities, like what appears to have happened with the Sumerians and the Egyptians. Or you might expect to see their influence reflected in the mythology written by these ancient civilizations, like what can be seen in the Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Greek, and Roman stories: Immortal beings who lived the equivalent of ten mortal lifespans who were exceptionally wise and knowledgeable in agricultural practices, who were prone to human emotion, who bred with mortal humans and created beings of both bloodlines, then disappeared.

Chapter 1 of the Book of Genesis (Video)

© 2012 Jeremy Christian

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment
    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      12 hours ago

      "don't advertise your own plays for self interest with God's name" Very True.

      They speak in God's name, they prophecy in God's name, then when God don't act "WE NEVER said it was in his name" very convenient, who's name was it then ?

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      14 hours ago

      I must have one crazy *intuition* "about things" Jeremy, but that's pretty much how i understand things as well.

      That last post of yours should be read as a Sermon because of how institutionalized the thinking of many institutions has become.

      Just recently i was talking to a group of believers in the City centre, something i do a lot of wherever i go. This one group said to me, "do you really think God would allow any religion to represent his name if God wasn't using that religion" ? My first thoughts were, "God REALLY don't care"

      I disputed that question of theirs, and as a result they moved their books and themselves a few yards away from me ( Just because i questioned their claim ) Am I/WE not allowed to Question a claim like that ???

      The reason i questioned that claim was because the early christians ( wasn't ) known for being called after God's name. And hallowed & sanctify ( don't ) mean to broadcast a name to Justify that God is using "US/THEM" either.

      To me that reasoning, if we want to call it that, is TOSH, false reasoning, Especially knowing the claims they made in that name. And yes it is ( ARROGANT ) for them or any institution to claim that. It would be nice to think they walked away because they seen the nonsense of their reasonings, but i know that's not the case.

      I guess it's OK if people want to be caught up in institutions, but how will that benefit anyone other than themselves ? If they're not liberal enough to understand peoples objections or why they think the way they do, who they trying to win, and why ?

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      23 hours ago from Texas

      I find it exceedingly arrogant for any man-made institution to fly the banner of God and to claim themselves an authority in His name.

      This, I believe, is the central intent of the commandment to not take God's name in vain. I don't think that means don't say GD. I think that means don't advertise your own plays for self interest with God's name.

      Failings of a human institution do not and should not reflect on God and should in no way sway the faith of anyone.

      Faith, belief, is an acknowledgement that God is God. The only true authority.

      Faith makes it a choice. God could show Himself, looming and casting a shadow across all the world, but then our acknowledgement and allegiance wouldn't be a choice.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      23 hours ago from Texas

      Antonio50S,

      This, I think, is the central point to it all. You're right. The size of the universe is irrelevant. What's significant about us humans is our ability to behave and act free of any restraint.

      In that way we're unlike anything that exists anywhere else in the universe. That characteristic is unique to us alone, in all of natural existence.

      This is why we are of prime interest to the God of this immense universe.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      31 hours ago

      Should have added, Faith and making the right choices are Connected as well.

      Just like the counsel Jesus gave to the Church of "Ephesus" in ( Rev 2 ) Jesus asked previously in ( Luke 18:8 ) in the context of the persistent Widow & Judge. "When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?"

      Faith can be a difficult one by itself, and with all the pressures of modern living, including many conflicting views as well, it takes effort staying on the right track. If we can put to one side some of the issues of institutions, some may help to do that, or they can take away our faith altogether, but for any of them to claim absolute truth ? Must be a distraction to some. Even those claiming to have that truth have to get past Jesus being the Way, Truth, and Life. Bottom line in the end, it's between us, God, and the death of Jesus. NOBODY else can give us life despite their claims.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      37 hours ago

      Jeremy. You definitely hit some good points there.

      Putting to one side the behaviour of them institutions, I was reading ( Psalms 8 )

      Apparently there's more stars in our universe than grains of sand on every seashore on our planet. Our universe is that HUGE, we can make the mistake in thinking we don't have any significant here in this cosmos at all.

      ( Psalms 8 ) is a very good chapter in showing our significant here. Vs3 "When i consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, 4 what is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him? 5 You made him a little lower than the "heavenly beings" ( ANGELS ) and crowned him with glory and honour. 6 You made him ruler over the works of your hands; you put everything under his feet."

      That's a very good question, "What is man that you are mindful of him" ?

      Our signiificance in this universe really has nothing to do with Size. Cosmologist probably dispute whether we have any significance at all for that very reason, but one thing that definitely sets us apart as being Unique is the FREE WILL within us and also the ability to comprehend our very Cosmos itself.

      In a way, having a Mind & Free Will is both a Blessing & Curse at the same time. As you said, "there would be no consequences to our actions and choices" which as you said "is the whole point to living life"

      The problem with us ( MANKIND ) we keep struggling to make the right choices, plus we have trouble getting along with each other as a species. People don't know how to forgive, let go, and move on. It's literally a case of, the "Sins of the Father" reaching to the Third & Fourth generations, and nearly all the problems facing HUMANITY right now are all as a result of making the wrong choices with that Free Will.

      Not sure if animals have the ability to experience happiness like human beings do ? Even though they do some crazy funny things ? How many times in the bible has God pleaded with us, his very creation to do things his way ? The best Joy, Happiness & Satifaction could only come by making the right choices to begin with, but if we take God, the supreme being out the equation, we struggle even knowing what the right choices are.

      In the "Old Testament" the Israelites struggled making the right choices, in the "New Testament" Christians still have the same problem, Only Jesus went beyond the Old Testament Laws to the very root of our problems, "the heart itself" In just a short few 70 years or there about, Jesus had to counsel the 7 Congregations of ( Revelation 2 )

      To the Church of "Ephesus" Jesus said, you have "forsaken your first love" and tried to get them to remember the height which they had fallen from, to repent ( turn around ) and do the former deeds.

      I quess the reasons we struggle with institutions is because we keep allowing ourselves to become institutionalized again and again, to the point of being "neither" Hot nor Cold. That's the worst place to be in at any church or institution, because it opens up the doors to all kinds of abuse, Especially Psychological.

      Right now, I don't believe God is using any institution or church as many claim, because none of them have the complete truth, but saying that, God can bypass any institution or church to reach anybody wherever they are.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      47 hours ago

      Jeremy. Everything you said is spot on, you can write a book on that.

      Free Will ? or Generations of Institutions ? :)

      Just thinking about some things at the moment.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 days ago from Texas

      Antonio50S,

      I think you're exactly right. If God were to intercede and override there would be no consequences to our actions and choices, which I believe is the whole point to living life.

      It seems to me, according to the story being told, that God went out of His way to give us agency to have our own minds and make our own decisions. So He doesn't do all of that to then just override those actions or the resulting consequences.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 days ago

      Sorry Jeremy. Did go on a bit, but some of them organized religions right down to the "gave my life to Jesus lot" I really feel "uneasy" with now.

      I will NEVER dispute the claims of Jesus, He's already proved himself again by his words in ( Matthew 23:13,15,16 ) They travel over land and sea to win a single convert, then make him a subject or son of Hell, ( Greek "GEHENNA" valley of hinnom, not literal Hell ) They shut the kingdom of heaven in mens faces, they won't enter themselves, nor will they allow others to either. That's ( Psychological Trapping )

      Verse 16 "If anyone swears by the temple, it means NOTHING; but if anyone swears by the GOLD of the temple, he is bound by his oath" Funny That :)

      If anyone of these institutions has to swear over the bible in courts over abuse cases, which Jesus said not to, you can be sure they're aware of their guilt, and i don't really trust any institution who keep quoting these verses now either. Without even realising, they're just "misdirecting" as if they are not capable of committing the same crimes.

      It was OK poking fun of other institutions for years for abusing their members, but when they had to appear in the same courts themselves with the same charges, they talk the Rhetoric ( We're no different than other institutions with these things going on ) Yeah, that's "Truth" OK.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 days ago

      Apology. Was a bit tired when i sent that last post, few spelling mistakes etc.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      6 days ago

      Yes Jeremy. That's always been my problem and concern with a number of these institutions.

      They think Freedom of Speech means freedom to abuse their members, be it Psycologically or other.

      And as you said, they do nothing to dissuade it, but am aware governments in some countries are begining to take abuse accusations very seriously in these institutions, and many have been charged as a result, including the institutions themselves being find large amounts of money.

      You know what i used to think in the past about some of these religious institutions ? A lot of them claimed to be used by God, but i used to wonder why God couldn't prevent a child from being abused again and again ( All the way to adult life ) All because the abuser kept saying ( I repent, I repent ) time after time, year after year.

      Once is bad enough, but indefinitely ????? Them elders or ministers, obviously never & still don't know what the word "Repentance" means.

      ( 1 Cor 5:1-2 ) Paul counselled the corinthian church-congregation for not dealing with a "man sleeping with his father's wife" even unbelievers never did things like that, yet for the past few decades some of these members in these institutions have been abusing children for years.

      They may have been worried about not exposing the problem to the world pretending that their organization is impeccable, but these things don't stay hidden for long.

      What were these institutions thinking ? Did it not cross their minds that these children one day will be adults who will report these incidences ?

      Then when they get pulled up in courts, what do the "governing body" do ??? They swear on the bible to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

      Well, thats a crock which goes against Jesus words in ( Matthew 5:37 ) "Simply let your Yes, be Yes, and your No, be No," because "anything beyond this comes from the evil one"

      People known for telling and speaking the truth NEVER need to swear by anything under the heavens. Their word alone should be better than any written statement or contract. JESUS KNEW THAT.

      The question why God never stopped them abuse cases going on in the first place is because they're just MAN MADE institutions without his backing, despite their claims.

      If God intervened in one institution to prevent these things happening, then that would take away the Free Will of all the rest as well. God backing any one unstitution or even individual self-proclaimed prophets, while they cintradict themselves as well, just don't do. Not good enough. Jesus knew what he was talking about, that's why he warned about all of them in ( Matthew 24 ) incidentally the "inner-rooms" in ( verse 26 ) Is a warning to all. It refers to anyone making claims of "hidden knowledge" which only they know about.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      6 days ago from Texas

      Anotonio50S,

      I totally agree. Just buying what the religious institutions of the world have been selling us unchecked and unchallenged has led us to the backward thinking masses we have today. As well as the secular backlash that we're experiencing.

      People thinking they have the authority and justification to enforce things God said or did in a totally different context is a dangerous way of thinking that those institutions don't do much of anything to dissuade it.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      7 days ago

      Colleen & Jeremy.

      RESPECT to both of you.

      Colleen.

      It took me a few years to accept we don't have all the answers to everything & another few years to get away from those who thought they did.

      Any religion or governing body that keeps claiming "new light, new revelations & truths" from above just to discard them later on again as Old Light "also don't have the truth" who in reality just keeps their members psychologically trapped in a system.

      It's better to be an atheist and find the truth through our own searchings than to accept other peoples revelations and interpretations of truth. When i say truth, i don't mean having all the answers to everything, that's impossible, but there are timeless truths that's unquestionable and applicable down through the ages such as the "Golden Rule" "The Law of Love" and how we treat others, including the reasons behind the sacrifice of Jesus.

      Real Love is not controlling or insisting that our way of understanding some things is the only way, and also agree with Paul in ( 1 Corinthians 8 ) Though the context is about foods, idols & gods, Paul knew there was no other God/gods to make a distinction from. The principles behind them are timeless which apply in All situations in All generations.

      Basically Paul was saying "If anyone thinks he KNOWS something, he don't know it as he OUGHT TO KNOW" it's not about knowledge or having all the answers, and in fact, it's good not to have all the answers because it teaches us deeper truths which cannot be measured in conventional ways.

      Real Love also don't go round calling others fools just because they understand things a little different, and they don't use their religion or beliefs as a form of revenge against others either just because they appear ( DIFFERENT from us )

      "Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food" ( Rom 14 ) that food also includes "some interpretations" and understandings.

    • profile image

      Colleen 

      8 days ago

      Thanks for the post, Jeremy. I especially appreciate your emphasis on looking at this with a mind untainted by institutions' interpretations. So many of those and they differ so should we just pick one to go with? I don't think so. Discussions like these are a great opportunity to get a better understanding of the Bible.

      Every day of creation had morning (lightening) and evening (darkening). But for how long we aren't told. The sun and moon and stars were put in the sky on day 4 so maybe that's the day time was created in expectation of man and his need for time as a finite being.

      God is infinite and presumably didn't need "time". We use our limited resources and scientific methods to try to measure it but it's really just a best guess. How can we measure something that's beyond our mental capacity to understand?

      So yes science and biblical creation mesh as long as we accept our limits and fallibility. And yes we can believe as children when we embrace the mystery of God's limitlessness and humble ourselves enough to say "I don't know".

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      9 days ago

      To Derrick.

      Quoting Jeremy.

      "fortunately for us the bible goes beyond a title only. It describes them"

      I sometimes wonder who's defending the bible better ? You staunch church believers or Jeremy ? :)

      Don't get me wrong, i don't agree with all of Jeremys views but at least he explains why he sees things the way he does. I also noticed some of Jeremys views don't actually go agains't the bible as such, depending what we're talking about ? Just different ways of understanding things. Even I'v noticed what looks like inconsistencies in the fossil record which CAN'T be explained right now, ( If a person wanted to, they could easily use them inconsistencies to support evolution ) but for me, thats where faith comes in. Who's to Judge Jeremy because his faith isn't so strong. Even all the disciples lost faith when Jesus was crucified, untill they received the Holly Spirit.

      Please don't tell me some of you critics of Jeremy have the Holy Spirit while believing in an unholy teaching like Hell which isn't a true transliterate from the Original Hebrew & Greek text ?

      Glad i ( Reserve my Judgements )

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      10 days ago from Texas

      With all my respect,

      The bible and science are already mixed. Science is a depiction of the natural world throughout history. The stories of the bible happened in this same natural world.

      The bible and science coexist. There's no separating the two.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      10 days ago from Texas

      Derrick,

      You're right. The bible doesn't say "humans". The word humans did not exist then. But fortunately for us the bible goes beyond a title only. It describes them. They live up to a 120 years old. They're male and female. They're created in "God's image" and God himself deemed them "good". This accurately describes humans and the beginning on this planet.

      Science and it's ability to observe and repeat results can be used to determine history. Through these practices science has pieced together a history of the specific region the bible is based throughout the ages that the biblical stories happen in. Together the bible and nature tell a more complete story.

      Like St. Augustine said, the book of scripture and the book of nature are both authored by God. So they cannot conflict. If they do at any point appear to conflict, then it is fallible human interpretation that is wrong.

    • profile image

      With all my respect 

      11 days ago

      Mr. You need to stop mixing since, with the Bible, the Bible it’s a un breakable power,. The reason a 1500 strong atomic bomb did not do nothing to GODS firmament and just USA has wasted billions of dollars on over 20,000 rockets that have done nothing because it’s all ready righting in the Bible, and Russia and other country’s have fun learning about the Gods wall around us we can’t get out that even NASA president has it in his head stone asking God, for forgiveness and none of the people that said that had gone to the moon do not wat to put there hand and sure on this false because the moon and son are inside the firmament, so we can’t say we have been to space NoNo orbit yes that even fighting planes have destroy Russia satellite

    • profile image

      Derrick 

      11 days ago

      I found at least one lie in your post. I only scanned through it and did not read it all. You say the bible says God created "humans". Thats a lie. Bible does not say or use that word. Whatvit does say is not even in plural. It says that God created he him. He created man and woman. No word 'humans' anywhere. If you know your bible, you will know that it prophesies about people like you changing the word. Always go to the bible 'KJV' to see if someone is telling the truth of the scriptures. Also you say that we concluded that all this stuff about the begining. Thats a lie too. Science can only be aplied to something observable and repeatable and can not be applied to historical documents. If you know your facts, then im sure you knew that..

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Jeremy. I totally agree with your "approach" to things, that's partly what i had in mind as being part of that "Truth" Not so much in all the details being correct, but rather as you say ( If there's something I think that can be shown to be wrong, I adopt what can be demonstrated as truth ) it's an attitude & approach to things.

      That applies to me as well, I don't have all the answers, and you know, you maybe right about the Flood being more closer to 4000 BC ? either way it's no real issue to me, and i do know a number of bible chronological dates given by biblical scholars, theologians, and various others don't actually match up with what the bible is saying either.

      Regarding them church-going types, and "others" they don't frown upon me anymore, if they see me, they just cross the street. So much for the Prodigal Son, either way i "don't" give any of them the opportunity to treat me like that again.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      Anotonio50S,

      Yeah, I don't mesh well with the church-going type either. The type of conversations I want to have are generally frowned-on in your typical church. Which should always be recognized for what it is, a red flag.

      I don't assume I'm right. I have these discussions. I just put what I think out there. If there's something I think that can be shown to be wrong, I adopt what can be demonstrated as truth and drop whatever I thought before.

      I'm only interested in what's actually true. Just because the guy in the building with the crucifix on it told me doesn't mean that's the truth.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Jeremy. I must say, i admire your attention to details.

      One very big reason i don't like judging others is because i was ( JUST LIKE YOU ) if something "never" made perfect sense, or fit the puzzle perfectly, i would discard all of it as ( Bull B*** ) nonsense. Excuse my beautiful expression, but then found the "Truth" in the most unusual and unlikeliest of places, a little hard to explain right now, but that Truth wasn't anything to do with any religion or faith group claiming ( WE Got the Truth ) it's way beyond all that, yet so simple at the same time.

      Jesus was right, you have to become like a child again, see things like children do, and nothing anyone said made complete sense. I would ( Alway's notice and pick up any contradictions ), then when i questioned them, get ostracized for doing so, in other words, i wasn't a SHEEP in their eyes because i Questioned the faith, Quetioned their claim to having the Truth, Questioned everything, and why not ? because that's what children do. The problem is, we're ALL fallible by nature, NOBODY, NO human being, can fill our every need, answer our every question. One way or another, EVERYONE "WILL" let us down eventually. That "Includes" ( peoples interpretations of bible Chronology ) as well, but the Truth is nothing to do with any of that.

      And when people are so fixated on their own "personal" faith, personal experiences, or religion as being the one and only Truth, or that their way of seeing things is the only way, then that can be open to all kinds of Abuse, Emotional, Psychological, even "CONTROL" abuse. Talking from experience on that. They definitely gave me the "Truth" but not the way they think.

      Now I agree with what Jesus said "I am the WAY and the TRUTH and the LIFE, NO-ONE comes to the Father except through me" and only he knows each persons psychology, past experiences, and why they see things the way they do.

      Capital ( G ) or not don't really come into it, since there's no other God to make a distinction from, and any future salvation is now centred on Jesus himself. ( John 14:6 )

      You mentioned something about ( Life constantly striving to thrive ) That's an interesting concept that needs picking up on, but don't see it as having anything to do with evolution. Will explain what i mean by that.

      Will get back to you.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      I'm primarily interested in things like Rohl's association between Nimrod and Enmerkar, one of the Sumerian kings on the list. Both are said to be hunters, and both are claimed to be the builders of Uruk.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Ok Jeremy. Will explain my view on things. Give me a little time, but just for now, either you're in the right ? or "David Rohl" Egyptologist is in the right who RESET the biblical Time Line of events ?

      And just for the record, David don't hold to any religious views, therefore no need to be biased.

      Either way, you don't need to be a mathematician to know things don't add. Will get back to you.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio50S,

      You - ""No real point" because a lot of your views are wrong anyway."

      Explain this. Explain how it is that you're so certain that you've got it right. What is your view based on? Because my view is based on a whole lot of physical evidence. Why do you say I'm wrong? How is it that you know for certain we didn't evolve from monkeys?

      You - "The point i was trying to make, 700 years is a very long time for 2 civilizations to form, and the time frame from 2345 - 2375 to 1300 Centuary BCE is more than adequate to meet that."

      Your timeline is wrong. Both according to the Genesis timeline and archaeological history.The flood would have been closer to 4000BC. Both Genesis and the Sumerian King's List say the Sumerian city of Uruk was established just after the flood, and Uruk was established roughly 3800BC.

      And the culture that came before the "Uruk culture", called the "Ubaid culture", lasted the same length of time as the period between Adam and the flood. Roughly 1600 years.

      This was the first human civilization. The first phase of Sumer.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Jeremy. I won't explain that 1656 year. "No real point" because a lot of your views are wrong anyway. If you believe we evolved from monkeys etc, ( Then i don't think you will appreciate the explanation either ) I do believe there are solid pivotal dates in history to work from, but it will never be appreciated while believing in evolution at the same time.

      Look after yourself kid :)

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      To Jeremy.

      I was aware of the 1656 year, but left that out for a reason. That's another story.

      The point i was trying to make, 700 years is a very long time for 2 civilizations to form, and the time frame from 2345 - 2375 to 1300 Centuary BCE is more than adequate to meet that.

      The13th Dynasty supports this even better if we know what happened then.

      All over the city of Avaris, Egypt, ( during this period ) Archaeologist discovered shallow burial graves were victims of a plague were suddenly cast into, which was also out custom with the usual burial rutuals during that time.

      Whichever way we want to look at it, something major happened during that Dynasty, and it fits in very well with the biblical narrative of God taking the lives of every first born in Egypt, including pharaohs very own. Semitic writings were also discovered in Egypt which supports Israels captivity there, plus after that event a lot of Egyptians migrated from Egypt as well.

      ( All in the 13th Dynasty )

      It gets a little difficult trying to reinterpret every event that happened in the bible without hitting contradictions, plus if humans aren't prone to making up gods, why do we have trouble accepting the Sumerian account of a Global flood ?

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio50S,

      "If the Exodus was around the 1300th Centuary BCE ? that would give Egypt and the Sumerians almost 700 years to develope civilizations after the flood in 2345 - 2375 BCE"

      Except that timeline doesn't fit Genesis. From Adam to the flood, 1656 years. Adam to Abraham, 1950 years. That only leaves 294 years.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio50S,

      Re: Sumerians and their gods

      This is a good place to focus. Think about just how short the periods of time are that we're speaking about. A few centuries. Roughly the length of time America's been a country.

      Yet in that time we've got the emergence of two full blown civilizations, complete with ruling classes and working classes and cities and laws, and add to that the complete (presumably) fabrication of gods.

      It's such a common view to assume that humans are prone to making up gods to explain things they don't understand. That's what's assumed by non-believers. That the Christian God, along with all other gods, is nothing more than the product of the typical over imaginative ignorant minds of humans. Mythology.

      Those 300 or so years didn't consist of fading short lived generations of people. Their memories reached right back to the beginning of everything. Noah's sons were still alive. No fantasy required.

      I agree you have to "search" for it. That's what these articles are for me. They're a product of my search. And what I've pieced together for my own view makes perfect sense to me. Way more sense than what the traditional view is.

      We've been told all of our lives what is "true" and "right". Yet what's been determined true/right before was based on a very limited knowledge base of information. We now have an abundance of information. It's time to wise up and re-evaluate some things.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      Squinkey,

      "Misinterpreting scripture is not advised."

      How is anyone to know what interpretation is right? How can you know with any certainty whether or not how someone reads it is "misinterpreted"?

      I don't understand the anti-evolution view. How else would God create? Make each thing by hand? Life constantly striving to thrive and become over time sounds exactly like the work of God to me. It's how everything else works. Trees grow over a significant amount of time from a seed. We grow over a significant amount of time from a single cell. Evolving and becoming over time is consistent with nature, which is consistent with God. Evolution is simply the "how".

      It's a pointless argument. And what's wrong with evolving from monkeys? What's wrong with monkeys? Monkeys are incredible.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      To Jeremy.

      Time of the biblical flood.

      Approx years.

      2345 - 2375 BCE

      Time of the biblical Exodus.

      Approx years.

      1500 BCE

      Some think it came later around 1400 or 1300th Centuary BCE, which I'm sure that's the date "David Rohl" arrived at while reseting Egypt's "Time Line" ? don't quote me, check it out.

      So really it's not about when "Abraham" or Adam was born, it's about when these events actually took place.

      If the Exodus was around the 1300th Centuary BCE ? that would give Egypt and the Sumerians almost 700 years to develope civilizations after the flood in 2345 - 2375 BCE, taking into account the 400 years of Israels captivity in Egypt.

      Though Egypt and the Sumerians had a large population to build these civilizations, they "CANNOT" be compaired to the large populations of many countries of today. 2 Million Egyptians say back then would have been a large population, easily achieved over a 700 year period, the population "Growth" back then was much higher as well due to various reasons.

      Plus all these civilizations back then were direct descendants of Noah, they all had connections to the bible, plus if the floods were just local floods, that's what these civilizations would have recorded, but they NEVER, instead they ALL recorded a GLOBAL flood.

    • profile image

      Squinkey 

      2 weeks ago

      Jeremy, he created Adam from the dust of the earth... So how is it that Adam wasn't the first human? Misinterpreting scripture is not advised. Evolution is a Greek teaching and Darwin influenced the section of the Greek teaching where they theorized that man "evolved" from a monkey as i learnt from Answers in Genesis, Mr. Ham himself. It does not say in the bible anywhere about God creating a monkey that slowly evolved over millions of years. The first days of creation have been proven to be 24 hour days judging from the "evening" and "morning" used in each verse. BTW the KJV is the most reliable version being the closest English translation of the original manuscripts found. The main issue that catholics face when looking to the first few chapters of Genesis is evolution DOES NOT link to the bible, the time scales are off and to simply try to compromise is risky territory. I would like to direct you to a man named Frank Turek, who can better explain the full christian view and any relationships Christianity has with Evolution. You can find through YouTube by searching 'Cross Examined." I hope this is of use to anyone who reads this message and i'll try to answer asap to any comments regarding this one.

      Good day.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Ok Jeremy. I understand what your saying now, it took a while.

      As i said, nobody can dispute Egypt or the Sumerians ever existed. Despite Abraham being in Egypt, either way Egypt and the Sumerians existed independently of Abraham, and still came out of that flood irrespective of the time period.

      The King list supports that, Even Egypt had records of the biblical flood. The rest are just Time Frame details which don't change the main events that happened.

      If we check out the population of the ancient Egyptians "Independently" of the bible, it becomes clear why pharaoh became afraid of the Israelite numbers. ( Exodus 1:7-9 ) No need for that if pharoah knew about the previous pharaohs dealings in regards to Joseph and the famine. That's also one reason why Israel grew so large and rapidly.

      What is certain, Egypt had a large population and the Israelites were begining to match that.

      No matter what anyone says or thinks, these are historical Facts.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Here's a thought Jeremy. Something i forgot to add.

      Over a period of 400 years while Israel was in captivity under the pharaohs, They grew to over 600,000 men, besides women and children which would take the figure up to about 2 Million in total.

      "David Rohl" also shows the Israelites ( In that number ) "suddenly" left there dwelling homes in Egypt, in agreement with the Exodus.

      ( Exodus 12:37 )

      If Egypt and the Sumerians could live in them numbers, so could the Israeltes.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      To be fair Jeremy, you probably understand these times frames better than me because really, I'm usless on that. But i also know that's how things happened, "give or take"

      If you wan't a better understanding of these Time Frames, "David Rohl" Egyptologist is the man. He wrote the book "A Test of Time" "The Bible from Myth to History"

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      It never took 300 years for the Sumerians to turn away from God again, you only have to look at the gods they served, but they also knew their history and where they came from as well, that's also the reason for the exaggerations & myths, mixed in with truths on the Sumerian king list.

      That's the nature of the human heart, we want it all, what better way than to create our OWN gods ? Even Israel made them mistakes with Baal worship. Unfortunately that freedom was and "still is" "just an illusion" which ultimately leads to death, as always.

      Plus a lot of these full-blown civilizations that came after, came from the people who came out of the flood who we now call Egyptians & Sumerians, etc.

      However, God was using Abraham, Isaac etc, ( exclusively ) to form the nation of Israel separate from other nations.

      Whichever way you look at it, nobody can dispute Egypt ever existed. In fact Israel was formed under their captivity over a period of 400 years, while at the same time other groups existed in parallel, such as the Sumerians.

      Whatever contact Abraham had with Egypt, Israel was formed under their captivity, and Moses was used lead them out, while God destroyed all the Egyptian army under the Red Sea. Pharoah may have been defiant about NOT letting Israel go, but God made sure he stayed defiant so he could destroy all his armies for abusing the Israelites, and to show Egypt someone higher was, and "still is in charge" A number of these ancient kings found that out the hard way.

      It all makes perfect sense to me and to many others as well, but you also have to "search" for it. It's a fact, we appreciate things more when we work for them, but "never" take for granted what's given us either, because one day the waters may dry up to the point of no return.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      Abraham was born just under 2000 years after Adam was created, or just over 300 years after the flood.

      At the flood the world's population was reduced to Noah, his three sons, and their wives. 8 people, or 4 mating pairs total.

      Abraham's father was from the Sumerian city of Ur and Abraham had dealings with an Egyptian pharaoh.

      So in 300 years 4 mating pairs populated the earth enough for there to be at least two full-blown civilizations? Complete with kingdoms and pharaohs?

      It just doesn't work. The more you look at it the more it falls apart.

      This has nothing to do with questioning God. Only how people interpret the stories of the bible.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Jeremy. Though the question you asked sounds logical, there's a difference between Faith & Trust.

      10 generations is a Huge amount if we take into account people lived up to 930 years.

      And in "each" generation, "They CONTINUED to have other sons and daughters" AS WELL.

      But just focusing on Adam alone, how many children do you think he could have had during his own long life span ? Let alone his childen and grandchildren etc who also continued to have "other sons and daughters" and so on, multiplying each time. 1600 years is a very long time considerding their life spans.

      Despite how far they may have spread, or why the flood ? that's really besides the point, It's the reasons behind why it happened in the first place, and they wasn't right there in that valley either, they did spread out, and it was easier to do so as well in Pre-Flood genesis.

      The question you asked " Why flood the whole Earth" ? The question is "Why Not" ? Why question God when he could use any means to carry out his will ? Plus the flood never destroyed the earth itself, but only the people in it and what they were doing prior to that flood.

      Another question to consider ? Since the time of the "Sumerian King" list was recorded on tablet, till the birth of Jesus, how many world Empires existed ? Quite a few. The ancient Aztecs alone used to sacrifice 200,000 people every year to their Deities. Where did all these people come from ? Another question, where did this idea of sacrificing come from in the first place ?

      Whatever "inconsistencies" people "May Think" existed during the genesis period, there are far more that can NEVER be explained without the genesis account.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      2 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio50S,

      Every layer of strata was top soil at one point. The building of layers of Earth is consistent enough that the layers can be used to determine how old something found in that layer is. Carbon dating is one method of determing ages. This is another.

      Think about it like this. Why flood the whole Earth? God had just created Adam 10 generations prior. Just how far out could his descendants have really spread in that time? Why flood the entire planet if all the people were right there in that valley?

      It doesn't make sense for the flood to be global. No matter how you look at it.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      2 weeks ago

      Ok Jeremy. I understand what your saying, but when i said "It's good to be able to interepret evidence or lack of for ourselves" don't mean that some things are open to interpretation in the first place.

      Regarding the fallible human interpretation of the bible, that applies to ALL human beings alike, including objectors to a worldwide flood.

      ANYONE who claims to have come up with the same conlusions as yourself ? Well, i would like to know how they managed that when local floods hardly disprove a worldwide deluge.

      When Noah warned the people of a flood destruction, everybody laughed at him because they never seen rain before, Untill it started to rain. By then it was to late. ( Mathew 24:37-39 ) is another warning, but not of a flood.

      The Ark came to rest on "Mount Ararat"

      The significance of that is, we know for certain that mount Ararat is at least 4000 years old, and many other geological formations and mountains haven't changed that much during this time period.

      Let's just say Mount Everest is rising by "two & half" inches a year, that's probably around 800 feet in a 4000 year period, that's not a lot of change, therefore any silt deposits would only have been temporary Top Soil.

      The way you described finding silt deposits in layers of Strata is nor even an interepretation, maybe a theory at best. But you can apply this to the cambrian period because millions of years past in-between stages.

      In just a 4000 year period, you won't get an even silt deposit around the Globe, because it mostly would have been Top Soil.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      3 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio50S,

      This isn't about whether or not we believe the bible, but whether or not we believe a fallible human interpretation of the bible. The flood being global is just an interpretation. The bible (original Hebrew) can be read either way without conflict. It's only the English translation that makes it sound global because the people doing the translating were assuming a global flood too.

      The rest of the biblical story is actually inconsistent with the global flood scenario. Example, the Nephilim. They are mentioned as being in the world before the flood in Genesis 6. Then, in Numbers 13, the Israelites report seeing descendants of the Nephilim in Hebron.

      This would be impossible if the flood were global.

      A global flood is just an inaccurate interpretation. Recognizing that does not mean you doubt the bible or God's word.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      3 weeks ago

      Sorry Jeremy. Maybe its just me, but still ( Cannot picture the scene ) Any silt deposit would have been "Top Soil" and for that would have disappeared over time as well.

      Peoples interpretations and claims of what they consider factual are actually just opinions & unsubstantiated claims that cannot be proved.

      With all the Biblical discoveries in museums throughout the world, NONE have disproved the bible yet. To question this one based on the apparent lack of silt is really just approaching the subject based on disbelief to begin with.

      The claim you made ( there'd be a layer of silt deposit ) is not something that can be proved, but rather just an ASSUMPTION of what we might expect to find ? and the supposed lack of silt evidence in this case CANNOT be taken as proof that the biblical account of the flood is wrong either.

      Unfortunately Jeremy, no matter what anyone says, this one boils down to Faith & Trust in the biblical account, and not peoples unsubstantiated claims and OPINIONS which are based on "unbelief" to begin with. ( Which discredits the rest of the bible as well )

      Plus if the biblical interpretation of a worldwide flood is wrong, then so is all the rest of the bible, including the New Testament with its references to that ( Worldwide ) flood.

      It's good to be able to interepret evidence or lack of for ourselves, and not be swayed by other peoples opinions, because at the end of the day, that's just what they are.

      I also know your understanding of the "Wife-sister narative" including the spies who "THOUGHT" they seen the Nephilim, and other interepretations of yours are wrong as well. No disrespect intended Jeremy, but all this discredits your own reasonings & the way you look at things.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      3 weeks ago

      You know Jeremy. You may even be right on some details ? and the way you Incorporate them into your own beliefs without being an atheist may be a sign of deeper faith than first appears.

      Plus a little surprised on your understanding of the "Word" ( Logos, Greek ). Even a lot of professed christians either don't know what the "Word" is, or they dispute it's interpretation.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      3 weeks ago

      The way you explained it sounds feasible and simple ( "Untill" you try and picture the scene ) "some things just don't work like that in real life"

      "Plus" The age of artifacts are determined by C14 carbon dating, not layers of strata. Archaeologist should be aware of this as well.

      And maybe there is a layer of silt deposit across the Globe, but science and archaeologist are not there to support a biblical flood, therefore would be dismissed and "overlooked" ?

      Motives, intentions and personal beliefs come into it as well which determine how evidence is interpreted. Faulty reasonings of the heart can lead to false conclusions.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      3 weeks ago from Texas

      Archaeologists determine the age of artifacts by the layer of strata they're in. If there were at a single point a flood that covered every continent, there'd be a layer of silt deposit that could be used to pinpoint a specific time consistent across the globe.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      3 weeks ago from Texas

      Even if all the continents were covered for a few days, there'd still be a consistent silt deposit layer.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      3 weeks ago

      I understand what you're saying, but you need to have that silt there in the first place. Something you don't get evenly on every continent due to various geological formations. The thicknesses of these silts vary according to continents. In rock formations for example you would have less silt deposits.

      I don't think geology is as simple as that.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      3 weeks ago

      A question we may ask a lot of, where did all the water go ? The answer is "in the Ocean basins" which covers over 70% of earths surface. And with all that water pressure you get a shift in tectonic plates as well. It took a few months for that water to recede, not the kind of details associated with folklore.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      3 weeks ago from Texas

      If there were ever a point in Earth's history when the entire surface of the Earth was submerged there'd be irrefutable evidence in the form of a silt deposit on every continent in the same layer of strata.

      There is not.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      3 weeks ago

      Not sure how anyone could come to the conclusion that a Global flood was really more of a local event ? Especially with ( so many ) objections to it. ?

      Just a few here.

      ( 1 ) Even if the floods were local, why would that rule out a worldwide flood ??????????

      ( 2 ) This localized flood theory has been around for decades, long before any apparent evidence to the contrary. Therefore difficult to see how anyone could arrive at this conlusion. Knowing this, any personal conclusion would have to be biased.

      ( 3 ) How do we know the silt deposits from these localized floods never came as a result of a worldwide flood ?

      ( 4 ) These regions in the middle east are above see level anyway, which would support a Global flood. Even in Pre-flood genesis in the book of genesis itself there were rivers around these rigions. "One of the great Rivers" being the "Tigris" river was likely one of them.

      ( 5 ) Some parts of the Oceans in the world are deeper than the highest mountains, plus one half of our planet is completely covered in water. And if we were to look at the sphere of our planet and the water covering it, "29,000 ft" Say for the highest mountain is not a lot really.

      ( 6 ) All the flood legends worldwide suppord a Global flood, not a localized one. WHY ?

      ( 7 ) This one's interesting. ( Psalms 104:6-9 ) 7 "But at your rebuke the waters fled" 9 "You set a boundary they cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth"

      Anyone who truly knows the reality of God's existence won't have any trouble believing God could actually set these boudaries in the first place.

      And if we go back to that Pre-flood genesis, i don't see where these "others" even fit in with all this ? Or even after the flood for that ?

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      3 weeks ago from Texas

      Jesus Freak 57,

      In my view all civilizations share the same local history. The descendants of Noah's sons were all dispersed at Babel, so all share the same memories of the same local flood.

    • profile image

      Jesus Freak 57 

      3 weeks ago

      Great article, Keith. Much of my own studying has produced alot of the same conclusions you have drawn. I share your accessment of the global flood being a more local event, however, I'm curious as to how other civilizations also describe their own version of global flooding. Aztecs, Incas, west coast Tlingits, to name a few. How would you explain other civilizations who also have global flooding as a part of their stories?

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      3 weeks ago from Texas

      Hi Donna,

      Can you be more specific. If there's something you see that I have wrong I want to know about it.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      3 weeks ago from Texas

      Keith,

      "It is just this simple: from the word of God the earth was formed and the word itself was made flesh"

      If you'll read, this pretty much goes right along with what I'm saying. "From the word of God the earth was formed" is very much in line with my hub about creation, as is "the word itself was made flesh".

      Here I'm wondering if you're reading this to mean "the word" as the bible. It is not.

    • profile image

      Thedecadentone 

      4 weeks ago

      To future readers, please ignore Keiths hateful attacks. If I didnt know any better, he seems like one of those antichrist trolls who acts crazy online to give people a bad impression of Christians. Some people just need to self validate themselves by attacking others beliefs, which Jesus never did. He attacked only hypocrites who were morally corrupt and subverting the scriptures they claimed to follow for their selfish agendas.

    • profile image

      Donna 

      4 weeks ago

      I believe you believe what you think but it is incorrect. It is not in order and does not align with what the Word of God says.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      4 weeks ago

      To Keith.

      Just reading through your comments. Quotes, yours.

      "To believe a lie is not the same as having an open mind" Whatever that meant ?????

      And to Jeremy you said,

      "One truth you do have though...adam was not the first man but the first in the geneology of Jesus Christ"

      That's what this article was about in the first place, ( something i DON'T agree with Jeremy on ) yet you accused me of believing a lie while telling Jeremy he's right that adam wasn't the first human.

      I don't think you even knew what the word geneology meant till i explained what the "Wife-sister narrative" was about.

      Maybe next time, it's yourself you need to examine Keith. If only we could work out the secrets of the heart via mathematics ? I wonder what it would reveal about us ? ( Jeremiah 17:9 )

      Personally, i don't have any issue communicating with people like Jeremy, since i already know what i believe in, but you Keith need to ask yourself why you even visited this site in the first place ?

      Regarding "Truth" itself ? i don't believe that's something that can be hidden for long, but the reasons why people disagree are separate issues altogether. ( Jeremiah 17:9 ) again.

      Only trying to get you to see your own contradictions Keith. It's easier to notice other peoples fault's, calling them all kinds of names than to look at our own faults & behaviours.

      Regarding my comment to brian ? That applies to you as well, "Don't Judge" look at your own behavior & the reasons behind them.

      Peace to you.

    • profile image

      Devanshi Bhanushali 

      4 weeks ago

      Very nice information

      I liked this information

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      4 weeks ago

      To Keith.

      You carry to much around with you.

      Lighten up the load.

    • profile image

      Keith 

      4 weeks ago

      Becouse you no nothing of me yet judge my "open mind " to be lesser than anouther you 2 show yourself a hippocrit and your "insight" into the scriptures is a complete betrail of your intensions...what i believe comes from science the book of nature and the book of God are the same and by mathmatics does this TRUTH reviel itsself ...and by mathmatics did God show me his creation... i will not come to this sight again i will erase all conections to it as i will not let it benifit from my traffic you antonio should examine yourself...to believe a lie is not the same as having an open mind...i think theirfor i have proven this man wrong by logic and truth not as you have accused of being closed minded- i have found truths theirfor i judge between truth and lie not as an idle scoffer but as a true teacher of the word. ..what was it you said to brian? About judgement?

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      4 weeks ago

      To keith.

      Jeremy holds a number of views which i don't agree with and he knows it.

      I actually think he's more receptive and open to new truth than you. People confident in their own faith and what they believe in don't need to call others fools, or to feel threatened that someone may take away what they have. It's OK to have faults, but ( "NOT OK" ) to live in ignorant of them and point fingers at others as if we're without fault ourselves.

      As Jesus said, "Healthy people don't need a doctor"

      In any case, right now we're living under a period of what is called the ( Grace period ) when that's over, the full penalty is due. Namely "Life or Death" But untill that time, God is holding back his judgement.

      Your Job is to work out your own salvation, that includes living by example.

      You can make as many mistakes as possible, That's OK, but you always have to be honest with yourself about what you see in yourself every day, and make the change.

      And talk of Wisdom. Wise people are always ready to listen and be corrected in humility.

      May peace be with you.

    • profile image

      Keith 

      4 weeks ago

      You are a fool as you say antonio agree with whom you will however to fear the lord is the beginning of wisdom.. and by wisdom does the word prove itself all one need do is look..and to agree with one that obviously holds such a great bias is itself foolishness good luck i hope you find truth but its not here in this mans wisdom

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      4 weeks ago

      To Keith.

      ( 1 kings 18 & 19 )

      The people of Samaria could have trusted that God had the power to deliver them out of a Famine situation, but couldn't decide which God to serve ? Baal or Jehovah.

      ( 18:41-46 ) Elijah prays for rain. And it rained.

      ( Chapter 19 ) is interesting. Even Elijah lost his faith because of Jezebel's threat to kill him.

      While Elijah was hiding in a cave, God reassured him of his power by sending a Powerful wind - Shattering the rocks, then causing an Earthquake, then a Fire.

      After Elijah witnessed these things, God asked him "What are you doing here, Elijah?"

      If Elijah can lose his faith out of Fear, why do we think we're any better than him ?

      After all the centuries of God pleading and interceding on behalf of the faithless Israelites, ( Out of choice again ) the "Old Testament" came to it's Grand Finale when Matthew opens up with a record of the geneology of Jesus, son of david, son of Abraham. ( Matthew 1:1 )

      Jesus "never" came to condemn people, but to offer the oppurtunity of Life. ( John 3:17 ) "Again"

      We're all fools keith.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      4 weeks ago

      To Keith.

      ( 2 Kings 6:29 )

      It was OK eating someone else's kids, then hide our own.

      That pretty much sums up human behaviour in desperate times :)

      I wonder what prompted God to have this recorded, other than to show the depravity of man ?

      If every Word and Action in the bible is literally from God, that would make him responsible for a lot of things people choose to do out of "Free-Will"

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      4 weeks ago

      To keith.

      I agree with Jeremy.

      AND "NO" I DEFINITELY don't believe every text or Hebrew word literally came from God directly.

      So many people have misread and misunderstood so many gruesom "passages" and "words" from the bible as being ( The very words and desires of God himself )

      Example ( 2 Kings 6:24-29 )

      A situation God predicted would happen when the people rejected God.

      When there was a "famine" in Samaria, the people resorted to eating their own children as God predicted they would.

      V:28 "This woman said to me, Give up your son so that we may eat him today" Which they did as it happened, but they wasn't words that came from God himself.

      You think God was happy with that situation or that the people resorted to eating their own children ? Yet God made sure this situation was recorded in the bible. People do crazy things in desperate times.

      It's in that sense all Scriptures are inspired of God.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      4 weeks ago from Texas

      To make my view clear,

      I believe the bible is exactly what it needs to be. It has successfully made the story known to all people the world over.

    • profile image

      Keith 

      4 weeks ago

      It is just this simple: from the word of God the earth was formed and the word itself was made flesh.... not as this man jeremy contends that from the earth came man and from man came the word.. concider

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      Now your on the right track antonio these scriptures are according to the genealogy of Jesus theirfor he attacks them as if by "logic" however i must inform you that the hebrew text is the word of God evey letter, word,and phrase. .and by logic can be proved..but not by fools that wont even look -dont let this mans biased opinion take you from the truth..keep up the good work

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      You never know Jeremy.

      Maybe they were getting one over on the powerful rulers ? Especially when the rulers found out who Abraham and Isaac were. They became afraid as a result and gave gifts to Abrahan/Isaac.

      Abraham may have thought, ( Let's play these Rulers ) :)

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      I also understand what you mean when you say "they are not word directed by God"

      That is true, otherwise it would take away peoples "Free Will" to act as they will, but despite the wilful actions of men and women in the bible, God was working out his plan amongst all of it.

      And it's in that sense, "All Scriptures are inspired of God" ( 2 Timothy 3:16 )

      I think there's hope for you yet Jeremy :) I hope there's hope for me as well :)

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      At the end of the day Jeremy, nobody is a master of "anyones" faith or how they understands things, but the botton line for me is where that geneology lead to. ( Mathew 1 ) Jesus.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      The point is nobody was allowed to touch the wives of Abraham and Isaac.

      God prevented that from happening because the Messiah Jesus would come through the lineage of Abraham.

      The geneology of Abraham to Jesus ( Mathew 1 )

      There's no way, no how God was going to allow anyone to touch their wives. To much was at stake. The rest are just details.

      If you reject or dispute these situations ever occurred in the first place ? Then you may as well reject the promises God made to Abraham as well, which would render all of the new testament a lie as well, including the whole gospel message of Jesus, which includes Jesus birth, death, Resurrection ( "Anastasis" Greek ) the whole geneology of Jesus & everything Else associated with him.

      We don't need to use hermeneutics or reinterpret the scriptures. It a simple case of accepting & trusting the "words" we're reading. If we cannot do that ? Then we're better of walking away from it all.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio,

      I imagine this would be a very popular story. The common man (Abraham/Isaac) getting one over on a powerful ruler. Tell that one again.

      And they did, over and over. Changes to the story as it adapts from teller to teller.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Keith,

      I do think there was a forbidden fruit. And I do think there was a character playing the role of temptation (the serpent).

      It wasn't the fruit that was significant, or magical in some kind of way. What was significant about it was that God forbade it. To eat that fruit was to act contrary to God's will, unlike anything else in the natural world.

      I do think the stories of the bible are significant because they are accounts of when this God interacted with humanity. But I do not think they are words directly from God. There's no reason to think they are.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio,

      The first thing that comes to mind is Abimilech. This means the same thing happened to him twice. After the first, he went right back and did it again.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      To Jeremy.

      I did read ( Genesis 12, 20, 26 ) again, and never noticed anything to imply it's the same story told 3 times.

      In fact the opposite.

      G20:11 Abraham, "There is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife"

      G13 Abraham, "This is how you can show your love for me: "EVERYWHERE we go, say of me, He is my brother"

      Back in them days, as Abraham himself noticed, the people had no fear of God at all. If they wanted something, they would just take it.

      V13 is interesting. "EVERYWHERE we go, say of me, He is my brother"

      Apart from the 2 times in Abrahams situation that we already know about, I wonder how many other times that situation came up ? apart from the 3 we already know about ???

      Isaacs situation would not have been any different. ( Dealing with the same issues ) Sometimes the beauty that's noticed in strangers is just the fact that they are different ? Isaac was basically dealing with the same situation.

      The story behind this ? God already promised, through the descendants of Abraham & Isaac etc, "All nations will be blessed"

      It soon became apparent that anyone who tried to interfere with Abraham & Isaacs Wives, "knowing the plans of God" had to deal with the very Almighy, Yahweh/Jehovah himself. And they soon found that out.

      The only reasons we know this situation happened 3 times is because of the FEAR of Abraham & Isaac.

      You could say, we are priviledged to even know these details.

      I wish these Critics of the bible would actually take the time to read & understand what's going on behind the scenes instead of following other people's objections.

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      Safe? What are you talking about? Is it safe for you to exclude examination of the scriptures as if God wrote it? And what harm is it to the soul to search for truth? You say your not comfortable reading the bible as if God wrote it and this is a great example of your bias and your supposed science and "logic"(a man of science is allways ready to discard his beliefs for the truth) i mean if we truely wish to know if it was God that wrote the bible or not shouldn't we look for ourselfs? And the fact that you wont arnt you the one then that is just believing what your told about the bible? Arnt you then the hippocrit? I mean you still think it was a snake and an apple in the garden dont you? Becouse that is what you were told.... however we men of God who call upon the lord Christ- Jesus is his name live the gospel and are taught by him not what weve heard as you insist. So when we then hear the lies of the serpent we speak becouse we know. And it is he who calls us.. one truth do you have though...adam was not the first man but the first in the genealogy of Jesus Christ theirfor he is called the first man and Jesus the last and eve the mother of all living

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      Jeremy. It may seem a little odd in this day and age that such things did happen, but those are the kind of things that happened back then.

      There are similarities in the stories of Abraham/Isaac, but differences as well.

      Why would the differences disprove that this situation actually happened 3 times ?

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      Thanks Jeremy, but this thought went through my mind which don't happen to often these days.

      She must have been a nice looking bird for that to happen 3 times ;-)

      It does happen.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio,

      Recognize that I'm laying out the bigger picture across these articles. I'm not dismissing the bible. I just recognize that the way it's interpreted, the way we were all taught to read it and told what it means, is fallible.

      Modern science has shown us that the traditional interpretations can't be right, but science has not proven the bible wrong. Only that interpretation.

      I'm showing here that with the right interpretation, science and the bible do not conflict.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Keith,

      Sorry to repeat that same example, but it's a good one. It takes very little explanation. There are others, but they often take more to see. This one doesn't take anymore than just recognizing the duplicated story.

      You say a "wise man" might examine the differences to understand God's message.

      Is that really a safe assumption. To think anything you imagine based on comparing these stories is understanding God intended you to get out of this?

      So, which is it? Did these same events really happen three times to teach lessons? Or is it repeated three times, whether it ever really happened at all, to teach us lessons?

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      Ok Jeremy.

      I did read about the "Wife-sister narratives" and "Yes" i was familiar with that, something i never gave a second thought to.

      To me it's about the story behind it, and the way people behave confronted in a situation. FEAR plays a big part in this "Wife-sister narrative"

      I must say Jeremy, you have to approach this subject or narrative in an atheistic manner to notice inconsistencies like that. And talk of inconsistencies, "inconsistencies need not be contradictions" either, especailly when there's things going on behind the scenes, including different cultures and way's of understanding things.

      Quoting what you said, "This, to me at least, is a pretty obvious edditing error"

      The question is ? Is it ? Or are they just standard objection based on atheisic views to begin with ?

      You gave an example of what you consider an inconsistency, but the main story of the bible, adam & eve, why things went wrong in eden, and God's plan of Salvation based on the Gospel of Jesus is missed altogether.

      Just one bit of advice, ( when you look to closely at a painting and scrutinise it close up ) you will miss the bigger picture.

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      Again with the gen. 12 20 and 26 just a one trick pony arnt you the scriptures you refer to are complete and from God just becouse they use the same "this is my sister" you then say they were"edited " even though they all clearly give time stamps as to whare they are in time by the location they are in... a wise man then might just then examine the differences betweem them to understand what the message is God is tryinsg to teach us... thank you for putting them together s,o we can examine thempui

      .

      ..

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      Ok Jeremy.

      Not to familiar with that, or something i noticed. Give me some time, maybe a couple of days or so, could do with looking that up myself.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio,

      The best example I can give is Genesis 12, 20 and 26.

      These are commonly known as the "wife-sister narratives". It's the same story told 3 times. First time it's Abraham and a Pharaoh. The second time it's Abraham and Abimilech. The third time it's Isaac and Abimilech.

      What likely happened is this story was very popular. Over the ages the protagonist and antagonist was changed to more contemporary names so it's more relatable to the audience.

      All 3 versions were found, and rather than just choosing 1, all 3 were edited in within the Abraham/Isaac stories.

      This, to me at least, is a pretty obvious editing error.

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      Trying to answer them questions is difficult if we don't understand the concept of Sin or the Transgressions of God.

      The worst kind of sickness we can have is a "Spiritual Sickness" a sickness we're not even aware of.

      God wasn't trying to control people's actions since they were free moral agents with a "Free Will" but there were consequences for their actions nontheless.

      A lot of what first went wrong with Adam & Eve, Cain & Abel using that "Free Will" in the wrong way, the results are clearly seen as we continue reading in Genesis. The problem is our thinking & the world we have become accustomed to living in. ( "Basically, the whole history of Man is filled with violence and bloodshed" ) Discoveries in museums throughout the world support that as well.

      Not sure how you can say the story isn't consistent with Gods word ? One reason why people reject the bible is because of the things that happened in the O/T using that "Free Will" then we turn round and blame God in the end as well, or outright reject his existence.

      God also had a nation or capital which represented his ruleship on earth during that time, "being Israel" but the invitation to be involved in it was also open to other nations to join as well till the arrival of the messiah.

      While all this was going on, God's ultimate plan was in fulfilling the first prophecy made in ( Genesis 3:15 ) being that the mesiah, Jesus himself would be born through the lineage of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, through Israel, down through the ages till the birth of Jesus.

      What's inconsistent about that ? and where's the evolutionary progress in man being able to live together in peace ? Apart from God's own Law's & the message of Jesus ?

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      Can you give an example of what you consider inconsistent of the story told ?

      Or what the story is ?

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      The basic point being that the idea that the Bible as God's infallible word isn't consistent with the story that's told.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Antonio,

      The OT depicts God interacting with the Israelites, humans with free will, and shows that He was unable to control their actions.

      So how could God, in the same conditions, accurately author a book through the same means?

    • profile image

      Antonio50S 

      5 weeks ago

      To Jeremy, Just quoting what you said,

      ( Men do as they will. So man's impressions are going to be all over it )

      "That is true of course" That's what we call "FREE WILL" but ( God's impressions are all over the Bible as well ) using mans "Free Will" to communicate with us.

      Assuming we believe in a God, what other way would God use to communicate with man using that very "Free Will" of ours ?

      That's not a trick question, so you don't need to answer it, but to be fair, it's the other way round. On the very subject of "Evolution" ( Everything you and I have been told about it ) is not even fallible opinions, but rather outright "Lies & Deception"

      ( Dr. David Berlinski Refutes Evolution in under 5 Minuites ) You Tube.

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      So how did you learn the truth? What's different about you that you were blessed with the real truth and I wasn't?

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      Bla bla bla its not me thats got you all wrong but yourself fooling yourself your logic is a joke...it supposes from the start that the bible is a collection of stories and you seek evidence to support your conclusion.. this is not logic but mental masterbation and truth of the origins of the bible you are unwilling to accept ... and no the God of the bible and the God of the quran are not the same and the bible and quran say exactly the opposite the latter uses many of the same people but completely changes the truth to lie ie: Jesus just a proffit not the son and on and on and on and you the olny scripture you are interested in all have to do with the lord christ and his genealogy... you are a tool a mouthpiece of the quran wether you know it or not your logic and your source information comes from them

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Of course. And you believe in your opinion.

      How do you know what you believe is true and what I believe is not?

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Keith,

      You have me all wrong. I'm just not comfortable treating the bible as if it's straight from God's lips to our ears. There's a lot of finger prints all over it.

      The authors were men. The people who took all the different pieces, translated them, and bound them into a book were all men.

      God doesn't control men like puppets. Men do as they will. So man's impressions are going to be all over it.

      I'm just using the brain God gave me to apply some sense and logic to it all.

      Everything you and I have been told about God and the bible is fallible opinion that generations before us didn't know for sure either. And they knew way less than we know now.

      You and I live in this modern age where we have a lot more information than was available to the fathers of the churches in the days when they were studying the bible.

      Re: Atheist/Quran

      You do realize the first books of the Quran and the bible are the same books, right? They both start with God creating Adam and Eve in the garden. Yes, they differ towards then end there, but the God of the OT and the God of the Quran are the same God. Some believe Jesus. Some believe Muhammad. But all believe in the same God.

      Therefore, followers of the Quran are not atheists. They believe in God. Whether they're Christian or not.

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      So what of it? You believe in you and your opinion

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      answer this Jesus Christ son of God or profit? And yes you are an atheist becouse you believe that the bible is just a bunch of stories writen by men about God. .you believe in you and your opinion you seek to change the bible becouse you say its ben "edited by men you exclude the 5th chapter Genisis and all other books you dont agree with in fact you subscribe to the belief that "NEW INFORMATION" has been revieled that proves the bible has many things that are untrue and need to be changed. ..these are the marks of an atheist following the quran

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      I am Jeremy and I am the one that created and maintain this article.

      Again I ask, if I'm an atheist, how can I also be a follower of the quran?

    • HeadlyvonNoggin profile imageAUTHOR

      Jeremy Christian 

      5 weeks ago from Texas

      Keith,

      Did you just say I'm an atheist because I believe the bible is just a bunch of stories written by men, then accuse me of being a follower of the quran?

      Wouldn't I believe the same of the quran? If I were an atheist, how could I also be a follower of the quran?

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      Once again this is an article created and maintained by the followers of the quran the olny thing christian about jeremy is his last name t

    • profile image

      Keith 

      5 weeks ago

      To Antonio. ...brian is correct this man jeremy is an atheist not becouse of his views on adam but becouse he believes the bible is just a bunch of stories writen by men about God... this is a websight built and mantained by the followers of the quran. ..plain and simple dont fall into this trap the olny thing christian about jeremy is his last name ....that he made up for the pourpose of this article to fool men seeking the truth ...

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, owlcation.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://owlcation.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)