Closed Typical christian apologetic excuse

[treskia]

yung story of Genesis (ang pasimula) kung anuman ang nagtranspired, kaganapan o pangyayari noon, though naganap na yun nung time na nasa paraiso sa lupa (Eden) pa ang pisikal na presensya ng Diyos (sa unang daigdig) kasama ng mga early fathers na nananahan sa mga lupain sa palibot sa labas ng paraiso at bago ito gunawin o wasakin sa baha, dahil iyon ay naitala sa Kasulatan ay maituturing nga na pisikal at historical na naganap,

Early fathers? diba si adam and eve lng ang tao nag exist nung time na yun? at after sila na exiled sa garden of eden mayroon pa silang dalawang anak si Cain and Abel and so on which leads to another problem which is Genetic Mutations caused by inbreeding but that's another story back to topic,..
Source:You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

Hindi po ba ang Genesis story ay hanggang kay Enoch and Noah (early fathers) din.. at nagtapos sa kamatayan ni Joseph (mga Israelite) sa Egypt?

Nababasa ninyo naman siguro yung statement na

Enoch walked with God...
Noah walked with God...

Alam naman natin ang nangyari kay Abel

kaya Cain went away from the presence of the Lord and settled east of Eden

Ang tanong kung iaalis natin ang 'reason' sa pag interpret...

Sino ang babaeng napangasawa ni Cain gayong dalawa pa lang silang anak na nabanggit sa Genesis at ang pumalit kay Abel na si Set ay ipinanganak nang 130y/o na si Adan?

Alam naman natin na tao na sila Eba at Adan at hindi sanggol o mga bata pa nang likhain, so siguro naman sa loob ng 130 taon marami na silang mga anak na lalaki at babae by the time of Seth's birth, lalo pa ang mabuhay sila at ang kanilang mga anak at apo ng halos tigsasanlibong taon, kakalatan nga talaga nila ang sangkalupaan sa maikling panahon nga. Tapos samahan pa ng mga Nephilims that defiled the lands...

Ang early fathers na tinukoy ay silang mga na account sa Kasulatan mula kay Adam, Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, hindi isinama si Cain sa lineage sapagkat tinakwil nga siya sa presensya ng Diyos...

Hindi natin alam kung bakit hindi ina account sa lineage ang ibang mga anak na lalaki at babae at lalo pang karamihan mga inapo nila, don't expect any detailed genealogy mahirap itala lahat lalo pa noong araw po.

 

[m9soymax]

yung story of Genesis (ang pasimula) kung anuman ang nagtranspired, kaganapan o pangyayari noon, though naganap na yun nung time na nasa paraiso sa lupa (Eden) pa ang pisikal na presensya ng Diyos (sa unang daigdig) kasama ng mga early fathers na nananahan sa mga lupain sa palibot sa labas ng paraiso at bago ito gunawin o wasakin sa baha, dahil iyon ay naitala sa Kasulatan ay maituturing nga na pisikal at historical na naganap,




Hindi po ba ang Genesis story ay hanggang kay Enoch and Noah (early fathers) din.. at nagtapos sa kamatayan ni Joseph (mga Israelite) sa Egypt?

Nababasa ninyo naman siguro yung statement na

Enoch walked with God...
Noah walked with God...

Alam naman natin ang nangyari kay Abel

kaya Cain went away from the presence of the Lord and settled east of Eden

Ang tanong kung iaalis natin ang 'reason' sa pag interpret...

Sino ang babaeng napangasawa ni Cain gayong dalawa pa lang silang anak na nabanggit sa Genesis at ang pumalit kay Abel na si Set ay ipinanganak nang 130y/o na si Adan?

Alam naman natin na tao na sila Eba at Adan at hindi sanggol o mga bata pa nang likhain, so siguro naman sa loob ng 130 taon marami na silang mga anak na lalaki at babae by the time of Seth's birth, lalo pa ang mabuhay sila at ang kanilang mga anak at apo ng halos tigsasanlibong taon, kakalatan nga talaga nila ang sangkalupaan sa maikling panahon nga. Tapos samahan pa ng mga Nephilims that defiled the lands...

Ang early fathers na tinukoy ay silang mga na account sa Kasulatan mula kay Adam, Seth, Enosh, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, hindi isinama si Cain sa lineage sapagkat tinakwil nga siya sa presensya ng Diyos...

Hindi natin alam kung bakit hindi ina account sa lineage ang ibang mga anak na lalaki at babae at lalo pang karamihan mga inapo nila, don't expect any detailed genealogy mahirap itala lahat lalo pa noong araw po.

Well so means na inbreeding yung way of reproduction not once but twice nila ginawa (after the flood) well we know the consequences of it diba genetic diseases impossible parin ang tao na mag survive for thousand years kasi nga sa limitations of human biology.
One theory of life expectancy is that the maximum life expectancy is equal to the oldest known (there’s the first problem since it is impossible to see all humans at once) individual of that species. Most biological species have limits (as determined by there genes). In other words even if you were super fit and given all the nutrients and supplements that your body needs you will not live to a 1000 years. 200 years would be a more realistic goal.

A 1000 years would only be achievable through the use of science and medication which gives rise to the age old question: Will we still be classifiable as “humans” (Homo sapiens sapiens) if our characteristics are no longer the same as “normal” humans? This question meaning that after genetic manipulation, medications and mechanical (i.e. robotic) enhancements will we still be humans? Probably not since a human who can live through extreme environments, live to a 1000 and “upgrade” that which is lacking isn’t really human anymore. It is the defects and such that makes us human. The biological limits makes any species exactly who they are.
Yes as we all know Nephilims don't exist there is no evidence to back them up no fossil records or anything

 

[treskia]

Well so means na inbreeding yung way of reproduction not once but twice nila ginawa (after the flood) well we know the consequences of it diba genetic diseases impossible parin ang tao na mag survive for thousand years kasi nga sa limitations of human biology.
One theory of life expectancy is that the maximum life expectancy is equal to the oldest known (there’s the first problem since it is impossible to see all humans at once) individual of that species. Most biological species have limits (as determined by there genes). In other words even if you were super fit and given all the nutrients and supplements that your body needs you will not live to a 1000 years. 200 years would be a more realistic goal.

A 1000 years would only be achievable through the use of science and medication which gives rise to the age old question: Will we still be classifiable as “humans” (Homo sapiens sapiens) if our characteristics are no longer the same as “normal” humans? This question meaning that after genetic manipulation, medications and mechanical (i.e. robotic) enhancements will we still be humans? Probably not since a human who can live through extreme environments, live to a 1000 and “upgrade” that which is lacking isn’t really human anymore. It is the defects and such that makes us human. The biological limits makes any species exactly who they are.
Yes as we all know Nephilims don't exist there is no evidence to back them up no fossil records or anything

Good point now you're bringing up your scientific argument, Sir.

But I like this part here where you're almost like the very Christian person you're bragging about in this thread...

"Just as it was in the BEGINNING, so also shall it be in the end."

Nope that verse is specific for the second coming not related to the creation story

When a contradiction or an error in the Bible is pointed out to a Christian, more often than not, the Christian will have some lame excuse to try and show that what you are reading is not really a contradiction or an error at all. These are some of the many arguments I have encountered for explaining the fallacies in the Bible.

Verse taken out of context

This is probably the more common excuse used to try and explain away an error or a contradiction.

------------

Now, these are the verses that is somewhat related to the second coming...

Matthew 24:37
For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Luke 17:26
Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man.

Sensya na TS, same naman tayo nag taken out of context, that means we both are also a Christian.

 

[Delta India Charlie Kilo]

Typical trilby atheist. Have a good day.

 

[m9soymax]

Typical trilby atheist. Have a good day.

care to defend that or you will just post and run?

 

[m9soymax]

Good point now you're bringing up your scientific argument, Sir.

But I like this part here where you're almost like the very Christian person you're bragging about in this thread...

"Just as it was in the BEGINNING, so also shall it be in the end."



When a contradiction or an error in the Bible is pointed out to a Christian, more often than not, the Christian will have some lame excuse to try and show that what you are reading is not really a contradiction or an error at all. These are some of the many arguments I have encountered for explaining the fallacies in the Bible.

Verse taken out of context

This is probably the more common excuse used to try and explain away an error or a contradiction.

------------

Now, these are the verses that is somewhat related to the second coming...

Matthew 24:37
For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

Luke 17:26
Just as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Man.

Sensya na TS, same naman tayo nag taken out of context, that means we both are also a Christian.

ok I see your point but I'm not a christian either
Btw thanks for sharing your thoughts

 

[Delta India Charlie Kilo]

care to defend that or you will just post and run?

Defend what exactly? I thought you are smart enough to know.

 

[m9soymax]

Defend what exactly? I thought you are smart enough to know.

you came here to put some claim about it try to defend it why I am a typical trilby to you?

 

[Delta India Charlie Kilo]

You know what a trilby/fedora atheist is.. I don't want anymore religion vs. science sh!t posting argument. No thank you.

 

[PesteM DiabolicaE]

ito na sinasabi.. easyhan ninyo lang.. respect guys.. uulitin ko.. respect

 

[m9soymax]

I know what it is but it seems you are implying something else

 

[Delta India Charlie Kilo]

I know what it is but it seems you are implying something else

Very nice to aggravate my statement, it seems that you want me banned. My point is plain straight and simple I called you a trilby atheist.

 

[ravage]

Continue with your discussion.
Out ka muna dito rapidox ... thanks.