Runboard.com
Слава Україні!



Runboard.com       Registered Members Will See No Ads - CLICK TO REGISTER FOR FREE  LOGIN

Page  1  2  3  4  5  6 

 
kalel126 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

New Member
 


Registered: 08-2005
Posts: 7
Reply Quote
Re: Is it really science vs. Creation?


as a response to Loud G

a levite is a jew. the word levite just means that he was descended from levi, a son of jacob

jesus was a jew. simple as that
he had some problems with it, but he considered himself to be jewish.

abraham was the first jew. I don't see where you get off making stuff up like this.

religion has been around for thousands of years. don't start telling me that it didn't exist in the year zero, until christ came around.

from what I infer from your post, I assume you are christian. I have no problem with it at all, believe me, but when you start making things up to convert people, that offends me.

kalel


Last edited by:
kalel126, 28/Aug/05, 7:20
28/Aug/05, 7:15 Link to this post Email   PM 
 
Loud G Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Senior Member
 


Registered: 01-2005
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 273
Reply Quote
Re: Is it really science vs. Creation?


umm.... excuse me. but you may be a Jew. but all that means is that you are a decendent of Judah.

There were 12 tribes. Judah was one. Levi was one. etc etc.

The levites were given the priesthood instead of a land inheritence in the promised land. So they went with Judah (the Jews) because they were the governing body of the house of isreal. Because Ruben lost his birsthright by marrying outside the covenent. Thus there were two spaces left open for inheritance into the 12 tribes (left by Levi and Ruben) These spaces were taken by Ephraim and Menassah. (From the house of Joseph)

There was no Judaism before Judah. Abraham was given the Abrahamic covenant that all his posterity would be blessed. As far as they were obedient.
Jacob/Isreal was the chosen line. and he had the 12 sons I have mentioned.

I come from the House of Ephraim. You come from the house of Judah.

The Levites and the Jews eventually mixed together but that doens't mean that they were always like that.

Jesus was a Jew, he was of the house of Judah, through the line of David.

I have not made anything up. It is not my fault if you do not know your own history. I have widely studied this matter.

Before Judah was chief in Isreal, it was the God of the Hebrews, from Heber an ancestor of Abraham. Abraham was a Hebrew. The Patriarch of the Covenant. But the covenant was not with Judah alone, but with all the house of Israel.

As for the other tribes, they and Judah had a falling out, forming their own kingdoms. Judah and Levi to the North and Ephraim and the rest to the South. There were many of various tribes who stayed in Jerusalem, effectively becoming one with the Jews like Levi.

The remainder of the House of Isreal was taken away captive by successive wars with the Assyrians and Babylonians (IE. Turkey and Iraq, I believe). They then spread out and mixed into other countries such as in Europe, etc.)

I come the branch that moved north to Europe.
These are generally refered to as the lost ten tribes, as they were separated from the promised land in Jerusalem.

I'm sorry, if they have combined or changed terminology in recent years, but what I stated earlier is what happened.

---
Writing: Eriadhin

28/Aug/05, 19:49 Link to this post Email   PM  AIM  Blog
 
markkoenig Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

New Member
 


Registered: 10-2005
Posts: 1
Reply Quote
Re: Is it really science vs. Creation?



Firlefanz wrote:

Article on Evolution in the Lab.

Laboratroy Test of Evolutionary Theroy...

It is rather technical, but might be rather interesting. It's also an article from the forefront of science.



I'm just joining this post, and runboard for that matter. I'm neither a scientist, nor a Christian (in fact I would say I'm a born-again atheist), and even though most of the discussion on this topic occurred over a year ago, the last few being about bible interpreations, I'm interested in this topic. So I may just be rattling a empty cage here, but given all the recent media on the subject, maybe there's still someone out there who's interested in responding.

I'm someone on the fence of the issue. I think evolution is a great theory, with a few holes, and creationism (the bible, for that matter) is a nice story with a great cast of characters, really good special effects, and even a not-bad plot.

I was interested in the above quote and article, whose author tries to make a case that proves evolution. In my opinion that study doesn't prove it. It only proves that there can be significant genetic variation within a species. Luthor Burbank proved that at the turn of the 20th century with potatoes, cactuses, roses, and dozens upon dozens of other plant species. We can see that variation when we compare a Chihuahua with a Saint Bernard. One will survive a snow storm and the other will not. Like the author's bacteria, one will survive harsher environments and the other will not. But they're both still the same species of bacteria. The Chihuahua and the Saint Bernard, like these two bacteria, still share 99.99% of the exact same DNA. Theoretically, they can still inter-breed. If the bacteria "evolved" into an amoeba or a paramecium, or even an entirely new species of bacteria, that would be newsworthy.

Someone in an earlier post was trying to distinguish between mutations and "successful" mutations. The design of any DNA is to correct or kill any mutations, before they become cancerous and kill the organism. Are there any real examples of "successful" mutations from one species into another? For such a thing to happen, even in a bacteria, it would require the DNA of the organism in question to be malfunctioning for a long, long time. A time so long that it would surely die.

Any thoughts?
27/Oct/05, 3:30 Link to this post Email   PM 
 


Add Reply

Page  1  2  3  4  5  6 






You are not logged in (LOGIN)