abelcainsbrother wrote:Well I'm going to try and bring a different perspective to this discussion. First off there was no man or woman until God created Adam and Eve although there were man-like creatures before this that existed.We know both hominids and Neanderthals existed but often time this evidence is looked at from an evolution perspective which I don't do. I do not look at the evidence from an evolution perspective,instead I first try to go by what the bible says and then try to see if there is evidence to back it up.
The bible tells us that God created Adam and Eve and so this means they were new creations of God,however we have hominids and Neanderthals that are often seen as creatures man descended from and I think this causes a flawed view of the evidence. We simply had man-like creatures in the former world that were not man and then after the regeneration of the heavens and the earth in the six days God created Adam and Eve. I see no problem with this interpretation both biblically and scientifically,but I'm not at all influenced by evolution. This does not mean there are no problems to confront just like with the other interpretations that run into issues they are confronted with.It is no different with this interpretation.
Some issues are that scientists have found human DNA in Neanderthals and so it can imply they were related,but it does not really prove it.There is a lot of debate and disagreement even amongst scientists themselves but since they are looking at everything from an evolution perspective it is easy to just say they are related. However,there are other explanations like fallen angels tampering with DNA in Genesis 6 or going after strange flesh. If they tampered with DNA in Genesis 6 or went after strange flesh then why couldn't they have done it in the former world also?
Another problem is the Greenland ice sheet that is at least 100,000 years old,but this does not necessarily disprove a gap.
Now once we confront these issues we are set and are going by the bible and science. And now we can say that Noah's flood effected this world approximately 5000 years ago.
My beliefs mirror these in evolutionist terms. I do not ascribe to evolution as being "change within genetic diversity". Change within genetic diversity, is rigidly based on the codex of the helix structure of DNA, and the specified patterns that prevent cross-species genetic mixes or transformation mutation (unless altered by manipulation) from one species or phylum into another. And I believe that no matter how long a time expanse this constant will not change. Id Est: A goat can become a ram, ibex, antelope, deer, sheep, cow, wildebeest. But a goat will never become a cat. A cat will be any order of variant felines. Birds will become innumerable birds, but everything "after its kind" as it states in the Bible.
I believe there is and advanced ape line that is not humanity's. Erectus and Heidelbergensis, are clearly the product of that line, because of skeletal similarity. But the Human skeleton is so different that there is hardly any comparable continuity. Neanderthal is said to be a cross by some, and by other to be genetically linked to the Erectus line. But I disagree. When I look at human and Neanderthal skeletons I do not see what most anatomists and paleoanthropologists do. I see evident resemblances, and then there is the DNA similarity. I think what you're looking at is opposite to what we consider truth about the two. I think they build a case for the difference in pre-flood longevity and post-flood frailty.http://www.amendez.com/NAES/Noahs_Ark_Articles_files/NAS%20The%20Scientific%20Evidence%20for%20Biblical%20Longevity.pdfhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lktmmd7YnD8
We do not mature like we did in antiquity, because we rarely live past 100. we die with frail baby bones, weakened by our irradiated environmental conditions and our toxic dietary habits, we mutate into deformity more often then ever because our genetic stock is weakened. Hormonal food additives, and drug abuses also play a role in deformity, and we are extended deeply into racial groups from long periods of regional isolation in sedentary communities. Inbred, on a macrogenetic level. Unlike the nomadic, transient Hebrew races who originated in the Fertile Crescent, as caravan drovers to the Sumerian kings. Who went east and west following the Euphrates or south along the coasts to Egypt, from one region to the next, finding mates along the routes of varying peoples, to keep them more viably sound. And extending the first true multi-regional empires.
On the topic of the flood: I think the flood was 1,600 years after Seth was born, thousands of years before Abram. And the age from the time of the gaining of the: "knowledge of good and evil", to today is roughly 14,600 years. The ages in the Bible span about 6,000 years. The Old Testament: 4,000 years from Adam to the Rededication of the Temple. And 2,000 years later the birth of Christ. It's been 2,000 years (roughly) since Christ's life and resurrection. But the Earth could be vastly more ancient. But there is a gap of how many ages were between Noah and Abram.
Age of the Earth: If we say that it was indeed created in the 7 days it took God to make it. Then he created Man on what, the 6th day? Or there about? Then he said to him: "go forth, be fruitful and multiply." Are we assuming Moses meant for us to assume they obeyed him? Or did they disobey his first commandment? Or are the Popes right, and God commanded them to commit sexual sin? No, it wasn't sinful, yes, they did multiply and God saw that it was good. Who can guess how long a period of time passed before the sin at the tree of Knowledge. Well at least 100 years. Adam was numbered at 130 when he begot Seth.
We know this, there can be upwards of 4 generations born in 100 years today, and we don't know they had any children, but they might have had many, and must have had at least 1 boy and 1 girl. After the commandment to multiply they sinned, then, Cain was born. This was after the fall from grace, not in the happy garden life before. And Cain slew Abel, was cursed, exiled: "and Cain took a wife, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden".
Who was she?
Where did Nod come from?
This is where I build my case. Cain was not the first child of Adam & Eve. He was first born under the yoke of sin. He did not marry his sister, he married a descendant of Adam & Eve, a cousin. When God kicked Man out of Eden, he kicked "Man" out, not just two people. And in the hundred or so years after the first people Cain was born.
Anyway not relevant to the age, nor do we know how long a time 7 days are with God. Or do we?
"one day with God, is as a thousand years" isn't it?
So say creation was at least 7,000 years long. So here is an ideological quagmire for those who know its not recommended, but can't help pondering endless ideologies. If 1 day is as a thousand years, and man was created on the 6th day, then doesn't that mean 1 millennium in Eden before Cain was born? In that case, Nod, was well established by then. And this is where I get my figure of 14,600 years.
And on a side note. I think we have roughly 1,000 years left until the final tribulation. Based on the principle of 3. 3 Part's of God, 3 Part's of Man, 3 Day's till resurrection, 3 thousand years from the ascension or 3 days with God until the final trump. Lest these day's be shortened.