What was Adam like? – Ken Ham

http://havefaithorthodoxy.wordpress.com

HAVE FAITH – ORTHODOXY

87b620f651cdbef8e1565f72cd8761a1

What was Adam like?

by Ken Ham

Did Adam have black hair, brown skin, and brown eyes? Was he six feet eleven inches tall? These are questions we cannot answer sure, because we were not there to see Adam. However, from reading Genesis, and armed with a basic knowledge of genetics, we can learn a lot about what Adam was probably like.

Did Adam have a Navel?

But, how much detail can we go into concerning this man? Did he have a navel (belly button) for instance? This is something I have often been asked. Actually, I believe we can have a definite answer here. Your navel is really a scar formed from the attachment via the umbilical cord to your mother. After birth, the cord was cut, and where it was attached to your body it shrivelled up and formed a scar known as your belly button.

Adam was the First Man

Now think about Adam. Was he born in the same way you or I were? He certainly was not. He was made directly by God from the dust of the earth. In Genesis 2:7 we read, ‘And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the Continue reading “What was Adam like? – Ken Ham”

Eve created from Adam’s rib – Russell Grigg

http://orthodox-heart-sites.blogspot.com

ORTHODOX HEART SITES

f3ba722e82357c69f7298ea80298ec27--into-the-woods-country-roads

Eve created from Adam’s rib

by Russell Grigg

Why did God make Eve from Adam’s rib? After all, if God had so desired, He could easily have formed Eve from the dust of the ground. In fact, He made Adam this way, (Genesis 2:7), as well as “every beast of the field” and “every bird of the heavens” (Genesis 2:19). So why did God make Eve differently? Perhaps He wanted to instruct us not only about the roles of Adam and Eve, but also concerning that of “the last Adam”, the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:45).

The first “not good” statement

Before God created Eve, He said: “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Genesis 2:18). In the creation narrative, the reader should be jarred by this statement, because up until now, every time that God has surveyed His creation, He has pronounced it “good”, as we would expect it to have been before the Fall. Man’s being alone is the first “not good” thing that required a solution.

So God created Eve as “a helper fit for him” (Genesis 2:18b). The term ‘helper’ (Hebrew ezer) does not indicate a lesser role or status, but rather function. She was to be his counterpart, his complement. Indeed, the term is used of God when He helps us, as in Psalm 33:20; 121:1–2. In fact, this is the basis for the biblical name Azaria(h) = God helped. Adam’s words on being presented with Eve were: “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”[1] (Genesis 2:23)

The significance of ‘one flesh’

But was it really necessary for Eve to be made out of Adam’s rib? J. Calvin commented that “if the two sexes had proceeded from different sources, there would have been occasion either of mutual contempt, or envy, or contentions.”[2] And he went on to say that “something was taken from Adam, in order that he might embrace with greater benevolence, a part of himself. He lost, therefore, one of his ribs;[3] but, instead of it, a far richer reward was granted him, since he obtained a faithful associate of life; for he now saw himself, who had before been imperfect, rendered complete in his wife.” [2]

Eve also needed to be related to Adam—if she had been created out of the earth, she would be a completely independent creation. But in a unique way, Eve was descended from Adam, because she was made from a part of him.

Eve’s descent from Adam is also crucial to the possibility of her salvation. The prophet Isaiah wrote of the coming Messiah as being the “Kinsman-Redeemer”[4] (Isaiah 59:20), i.e. one who is related by blood to those he redeems. Hebrews 2:11–18 explains how Jesus took on Himself the nature of a man to save mankind, but not angels (nor hypothetical aliens for that matter). Jesus entered Adam’s line to literally become our relative, to be a part of this one human family (Luke 3:23–38).[5] If all people are not descended from Continue reading “Eve created from Adam’s rib – Russell Grigg”

Biblical Forecasts of Scientific Discoveries – By Dr. Hugh Ross, Astronomer, Canada

Galaxy-Wallpaper-AF3.jpg

Biblical Forecasts of Scientific Discoveries

By Dr. Hugh Ross, Astronomer

Canada

January 1, 1976

Source:

http://www.reasons.org

http://www.reasons.org/articles/biblical-forecasts-of-scientific-discoveries

REASONS TO BELIEVE

Not only is the Bible filled with the fundamentals of science, but it is as much as 3,000 years ahead of its time. The Bible’s statements in most cases directly contradicted the science of the day in which they were made. When modern scientific knowledge approaches reality, the divine accuracy of the scriptures is substantiated. For example:

Biblical Statement Science Then Science Now
Earth is a sphere (Is. 40:22). Earth’s a flat disk. Earth is a sphere
Number of stars exceeds a billion (Jer. 33:22). Number of stars totals 1,100 Number of stars exceeds a billion
Every star is different (1 Cor 15:41). All stars are the same. Every star is different.
Light is in motion (Job 38:19-20). Light is fixed in place. Light is in motion.
Air has weight (Job 28:25). Air is weightless. Air has weight.
Winds blow in cyclones (Eccl. 1:6). Winds blow straight. Winds blow in cyclones.
Blood is a source of life and healing (Lev. 17:11). Sick people must bled. Blood is a source of life and healing.

For centuries the conjectures of science also were at odds with Genesis 1 concerning the origin and development of Earth and of life on Earth. However, science has progressed beyond these conjectures and now agrees with Genesis 1 in the initial conditions of Earth, the description of subsequent events, and in the order of these events. The probability that Moses, writing more than 3,400 years ago, would have guessed all these details is less than one in trillions. Below is a partial list of other fundamentals of science explained in the Bible:

  • conservation of mass and energy (Eccl. 1:9; Eccl. 3:14-15).
  • water cycle (Eccl. 1:7; Is. 55:10).
  • gravity (Job 26:7; Job 38:31-33).
  • Pleiades and Orion as gravitationally bound star groups (Job 38:31). NOTE: All other star groups visible to the naked eye are unbound, with the possible exception of the Hyades.
  • effect of emotions on physical health (Prov. 16:24; Prov. 17:22).
  • control of contagious diseases (Lev. 13:4546).
  • importance of sanitation to health (Lev.; Num. 19: Deut. 23:12-13). control of cancer and heart disease (Lev. 7-19).

In the crucible of scientific investigation, the Bible has proven invariably to be correct. No other book, ancient or modem, can make this claim; but then, no other book has been written (through men) by God.

Copyright 1976, Reasons To Believe

Subjects: Creation Passages, General Apologetics , Two Books

Dr. Hugh Ross

Reasons to Believe emerged from my passion to research, develop, and proclaim the most powerful new reasons to believe in Christ as Creator, Lord, and Savior and to use those new reasons to reach people for Christ. Read more about Dr. Hugh Ross.

 

 

If God created the world and everything else, who created God ?

http://heartquestionsandanswers.wordpress.com

HEART QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

If God created the world and everything else, who created God ?

The answer is no one! God is the ‘Uncaused Cause’ or ‘Prime Mover’. Only things that have a beginning (e.g. the Universe) require a creator. God, on the other hand has existed from all eternity. He is an infinite spirit, not restricted in any way by time or space.

What does the Bible say about dinosaurs? Are there dinosaurs in the Bible?

http://animalsofmyheart.wordpress.com

ANIMALS OF MY HEART

What does the Bible say about dinosaurs?

Are there dinosaurs in the Bible?

The Bible does mention dinosaurs, though it never actually uses the word “dinosaur.” Instead, it uses the Hebrew word tanniyn, which is translated a few different ways in our English Bibles. Sometimes it’s “sea monster,” and sometimes it’s “serpent.” It is most commonly translated “dragon.” The tanniyn appear to have been some sort of giant reptile. These creatures are mentioned nearly thirty times in the Old Testament and were found both on land and in the water.

In addition to mentioning these giant reptiles, the Bible describes a couple of creatures in such a way that some scholars believe the writers may have been describing dinosaurs. The behemoth is said to be the mightiest of all God’s creatures, a giant whose tail is likened to a cedar tree (Job 40:15). Some scholars have tried to identify the behemoth as either an elephant or a hippopotamus. Others point out that elephants and hippopotamuses have very thin tails, nothing comparable to a cedar tree. Dinosaurs like the brachiosaurus and the diplodocus, on the other hand, had huge tails which could easily be compared to a cedar tree.

Nearly every ancient civilization has some sort of art depicting giant reptilian creatures. Petroglyphs, artifacts, and even little clay figurines found in North America resemble modern depictions of dinosaurs. Rock carvings in South America depict men riding diplodocus-like creatures and, amazingly, bear the familiar images of triceratops-like, pterodactyl-like, and tyrannosaurus rex-like creatures. Roman mosaics, Mayan pottery, and Babylonian city walls all testify to man’s trans-cultural, geographically unbounded fascination with these creatures. Sober accounts like those of Marco Polo’s Il Milione mingle with fantastic tales of treasure-hoarding beasts. In addition to the substantial amount of anthropic and historical evidences for the coexistence of dinosaurs and man, there are physical evidences, like the fossilized footprints of humans and dinosaurs found together at places in North America and West-Central Asia.

Source:

Ken Ham, The Great Dinosaur Mystery Solved! A Biblical View of These Amazing Creatures, MASTER BOOKS / 2000 / PAPERBACK

Scientists’ conversions from Evolution to six 24-hours days Creation

https://godandscienceorthodoxy.wordpress.com/category/conversions/

Scientists’ conversions from Evolution to six 24-hours days Creation

Former evolutionist: Jerry Bergman, PH.D., Biology [Professor at the University of Toledo Medical College in Ohio, USA] 

Former evolutionist: Jerry Bergman, PH.D., Biology

Professor at the University of Toledo Medical College in Ohio, USA

I have always loved science, partly due to the influence of my engineer father, who was heavily involved in research and development. While growing up, my free-time diet consisted of Mr. Wizard, Disney nature films, and doing science experiments.

At Wayne State University, where I earned my bachelor’s, master’s, and Ph.D. degrees, I was exposed to evolution. Influenced by my atheist father and my professors, I accepted this worldview, as did most of my peers. We also accepted the atheist philosophy that came with it. The university invited a number of speakers to lecture on religion, at least tangentially, all of whom were quite negative toward Christianity. One even stressed that we have given Christianity 2,000 years to fix up the world, and it was high time to try atheism.

As I became more involved in the atheist movement, I got tired of hearing that all the problems in the world were the fault of Christianity and that if we got rid of all the Christians, the world would be a wonderful place. What especially bothered me was that my atheist peers were determined to suppress Christianity by any means, legal or illegal—first by banning it from the public square, then in the private domain. Atheists seemed to feel that the ends justified the means, so they ruthlessly sought to crush Christianity. I soon realized this goal was evil because in the end it always did more harm than good—and yet it has been tried in so many places.

As I studied evolution (the doorway to atheism), it eventually became apparent that the theory has some major problems. The first example I researched in detail was the “vestigial organ” claim. There are over 100 claimed vestigial organs. These are supposedly non-functional evolutionary “leftovers,” yet I found uses for all of them. I went on to study the fossil record, and then I examined the natural selection claim, concluding that natural selection only explains the survival of the fittest, but the essential problem in Darwin’s day, and today, is the arrival of the fittest.

Sexual selection, instead of explaining sexual differences between males and females, actually serves to reduce deviation from the average. It does not cause evolutionary development that requires deviation from the average. Research that documents this conclusion includes a computer program that combines the faces of many women to produce the most beautiful women; ugliness is viewed as a deviation from this average and thus is selected against.

After exploring all of the major arguments for evolution, I eventually concluded that Darwinism has been falsified on the basis of science and realized that the evidence demands an intelligent creator.

The biblical age question was more difficult to deal with, but in my mind a major factor that supported a young creation was the profound evidence for genetic degradation. It is well documented that each new generation of humans adds about 100 to 150 mutations (genetic errors) per person, and an estimated 99.9 percent of these mutations are near neutral, harmful, or lethal. Consequently, there is no way that life could have first evolved 3.5 billion years ago and still be around today because life would have become extinct long ago from genetic meltdown and cell catastrophe.

Another important finding that supports the creationist view was the discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur bones that were claimed to be over 65 million years old. This is a problem because destructive forces such as cosmic rays would have destroyed soft tissue long ago.

The evidence against Darwinism was a critical factor in my acceptance of creationism, which opened the door to my acceptance of Christianity, biblical reliability, and a young-earth creation worldview. Like many scientists who came before me, I discovered that the evidence supports the truth of the Bible.

Cite this article: Jerry Bergman, Ph.D. 2015. Creation Conversion: From Atheist to Creationist. Acts & Facts. 44 (2).

Source:

https://www.icr.org/article/creation-conversion-from-atheist-creationist

ICR – INSTITUTE FOR CREATION RESEARCH