Wednesday, June 1, 2022

ON AiG, 30.V


Here's Why Most Pastors Aren't Biblical
30th May 2022 | Answers in Genesis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx0JIbQol-o


4:05 By 1900, I think the Catholic priests who were still Young Earth Creationist may have been c. 37 %.

Depends on country, Italy was better than France. The Catechism of Pope St. Pius X involved no compromise stated with Evolution or Old Age, in 1909, day age got a pass, but inserting evolutionist ideas into chapters 2 to 11 didn't, and at the even of Vatican II, a cardinal Oddi or Ottaviani, preparing the council, planned to dogmatise "God created the world as stated directly in the Bible, reinterpretations not needed" - though they were outvoted by people from elsewhere. And actually, their "schema" was not individually put onto a vote even.

The document that is there now is ambiguous, Dei Verbum does have a passage on interpreting according to genre (which you know how evolutionists will take to their advantage), but so is § 3:

"3. God, who through the Word creates all things (see John 1:3) and keeps them in existence, gives men an enduring witness to Himself in created realities (see Rom. 1:19-20). Planning to make known the way of heavenly salvation, He went further and from the start manifested Himself to our first parents. Then after their fall His promise of redemption aroused in them the hope of being saved (see Gen. 3:15) and from that time on He ceaselessly kept the human race in His care, to give eternal life to those who perseveringly do good in search of salvation (see Rom. 2:6-7). Then, at the time He had appointed He called Abraham in order to make of him a great nation (see Gen. 12:2). Through the patriarchs, and after them through Moses and the prophets, He taught this people to acknowledge Himself the one living and true God, provident father and just judge, and to wait for the Savior promised by Him, and in this manner prepared the way for the Gospel down through the centuries."

17:54 One problem is considering actual paedophilia (exclusive attraction to children) acceptable (for self and others).
But another one is considering things that aren't paedophilia as such, and relations which could have been marriages 100 years ago (if mended after the initial sin) as "statutory rape" and "sign of paedophilia" - and St. Paul doesn't make an exception for teens in I Cor 7:9.

And this other problem is already here.

18:14 The horrible ambiguity of it!

Adults sexually attracted to people who are not just minors but even children is not OK to act on, and also not OK to harbour in one's heart.

Sexual attraction to people of the opposite sex who are legal minors but already in or past puberty is a totally different story.

It's OK to act on in different ways, in a Christian world view:
  • get to a state where you can marry (if I couldn't marry a girl of 16 in France any more, I could so in England);
  • or wait till the minor is no longer minor (the parents of St. Francis of Sales were engaged when the mother was 8 and they obviously waited, saw each other only in her parents' presence to when she was 14 and could legally marry in Savoy)
  • if a sin is committed, treat it as other sins of premarital sex, try to get married esp. if making a baby.


19:45 I don't think it is just paedophilia or child sex abuse.

I think they are trying to get hebephiles attracted to legal minors they could have married in other jurisdictions drafted into the company of actual paedophiles.

Death penalty for murder, arseny and jaywalking.
Level 4 consequences for arson, physical assault or calling Georgina Kirrin "her"
Measures adapted for paedophilia applied to Satanic group rape of babies, to Afghan (non-Taliban) abuse of boys age ten, and to a man who could have married a girl, if the couple had been living a few decades earlier.

It's not just calling evil good, it is also calling good evil.

20:00 Getting rid of the police (or most of it) - actually feasible. Yes, even after Adam sinned.

The police was mostly introduced at the Renaissance or later. After models in the Muslim world.

A city in Antiquity or Middle Ages didn't have one. But they did have every citizen armed and required to know how to use arms and required to use them in defense of own or neighbour's rights, like going after a thief running from a shop with a merchandise.

One Church Father said "other cheek" applies to your own rights, but not God's or the neighbours'. Another one, St. Augustine, considered, it applies not even to your own rights when you get to the point when you can bear it no longer. So, Christians were not outside the system of not a police, but a citizens' militia.

20:00 bis (update). In France, yellow vest protesters against higher fuel prices have been both tear gassed by police and some had their eyes blown away by police using sth like paintball bullets on their eyes. This is old news, there was a caricature of a police prefect who was collecting eyes like beads on a string these last years.

Ted Morris has sth to say about Liverpool supporters getting tear gassed at Stade de France.

Today, police wanted to stop a car, and when the driver tried to get away, he and a female passenger were shot at, brought to hospital and could be dying.

In Brazil, there were more dead from police, doing sth other than their normal job, than there were in Uvalde from a guy stopped by the police. Also recent news.

You say that citizens' militias (what Europe had before the police forces) could end with chaos? Well, so can the police.

28:36 "after Babel" - let's look at the dates a bit.

"Sediment analysis at Denisova cave indicates the Denisovans occupied the site from 300,000 to 50,000 years ago."*

300 000 YA - nothing like C14, irrelevant.
50 000 YA - some C14 dating.

How soon after Flood do you think an object would have sufficiently low carbon 14 to date 50 000 YA?

And how long after the Flood would it take for Denisovan to diversify from common type of man?

It actually makes more sense to say:
  • 50 000 YA = a real date before the Flood
  • Denisovans had up to 2242 years to diversify after Adam and didn't get into the Ark
  • except someone with part Denisovan heritage did get into the Ark!


youbetyourwrasse
No one can say for sure that the carbon dating is accurate, unless one has (ie) 50,000 years of data. So carbon dating can say anything and we can believe it. BUT it is NOT scientifically accurate unless we have actual carbon as a reference in the lab we've been watching for 50,000 years. Which we don't! Satan is wanting us not to believe the Bible .. we forget Almighty God can make anything appear any way.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
@youbetyourwrasse Two things.
  • 1) I was not contradicting the Bible, and if God can make anything appear anyway, He is also truthful;
  • 2) I was not saying uniformitarian carbon dating is correct - I am saying a carbon date like 50 000 BP depends on a very low initial carbon 14 content, and such is likelier just after or even before the Flood.


This means, I think, precisely Biblically, carbon dates exceeding 40 000 BP (you can discuss the exact limit) = samples from and up to the Flood. Not after Babel.


29:24 With Denisovans, it is not just anatomy from very incomplete evidence, but genome from fairly complete one.

And Pääbo found Denisovan genome fairly well matches the one of Antecessor in Atapuerca, and that has a morphology matching Heidelbergians, who were really big.

There were giants in those days, anyone?

Blue eyes = genome, evidence in tooth.
Food = calculus, evidence on tooth.

By the way, blue eyes is Neanderthal, Denisovan are brown eyes, and yes, the genes for either can be taken from a molar.

* Australian Museum : The Denisovans
Fran Dorey, 20/04/20
https://australian.museum/learn/science/human-evolution/the-denisovans/

No comments: