Did Jesus create mankind (Adam)?

[Subduction Zone]

Do you have reliable sources which provide an alternative explanation for the four-spoken wheel Ron Wyatt photographed in the Red Sea?

Chariot Wheels in the Red Sea

wyattmuseum.com

Oh my FSM?? You are a hoot! Those are modern day ship's valve wheels That is the work of Ron Wyatt, a well known fraud and huckster. You can't be serious.

 

[Ebionite]

Oh my FSM?? You are a hoot! Those are modern day ship's valve wheels That is the work of Ron Wyatt, a well known fraud and huckster. You can't be serious.

Reliable sources, thanks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Reliable sources, thanks.

Are you asking for them? After linking to a known fraud? You need to be a lot more polite than that.

 

[Ebionite]

Are you asking for them? After linking to a known fraud? You need to be a lot more polite than that.

No, I'm demanding them. Like you said, there is no reason to trust you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, I'm demanding them. Like you said, there is no reason to trust you.

No, you do not get to be rude and make demands. Especially after linking to a site that a 5th grader would have known was fake.

Be polite and I will help you. Be rude and obnoxious and I will just tell you to pound sand. I mean seriously, Ron Wyatt?

 

[Ebionite]

No, you do not get to be rude and make demands. Especially after linking to a site that a 5th grader would have known was fake.

Be polite and I will help you. Be rude and obnoxious and I will just tell you to pound sand. I mean seriously, Ron Wyatt?

As serious as a heart attack.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As serious as a heart attack.

Then you disqualify yourself from debate. Ron Wyatt apparently found everything that was missing in the Bible. You should read his list of claims. Those wheels were modern valve wheels. Egyptian chariots. even the few decorated ones would not have had solid gold wheels. For one thing, and you may not have noticed this, but gold is rather expensive. It is also heavy and not very strong. But it is very very very ductile. That means that you can take a small piece of gold and repeatedly strike it with a hammer and flatten it out. With the right tools and care one can hammer it out so that it is very very thin and light. That is called "gold leaf". Gold leaf has been used for decorations for thousands of years. If there ever were any Egyptian chariot wheels they would have been wood with gold leaf. Do you know what happens to wood if it is underwater for a long time? It breaks down. Those were very new bronze valve wheels. You got taken in by a fraud And then you got mad at me instead of yourself. You should be angry. But not at me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, I'm demanding them. Like you said, there is no reason to trust you.

I need to remind you that it does not work that way. You rudely (well you may not have known how badly you failed) offered Ron Wyatt as evidence. And that was after I warned you. But here is the quote where I first offered to give evidence. It is on the previous page:

"Because I can link to reliable sources if needed. You do not have to trust me. You could try to find the sources yourself. But if you ask politely for sources I will gladly link them."

Did Jesus create mankind (Adam)?

Good answer! Can you elaborate on your answer? She won't, probably because you are in denial, but I will. Not everyone believes your claims in the OP. Not even all Christians. In fact worldwide most Christians accept the fact of evolution. They understand that Genesis is just...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Ebionite]

Then you disqualify yourself from debate. Ron Wyatt apparently found everything that was missing in the Bible. You should read his list of claims. Those wheels were modern valve wheels. Egyptian chariots. even the few decorated ones would not have had solid gold wheels. For one thing, and you may not have noticed this, but gold is rather expensive. It is also heavy and not very strong. But it is very very very ductile. That means that you can take a small piece of gold and repeatedly strike it with a hammer and flatten it out. With the right tools and care one can hammer it out so that it is very very thin and light. That is called "gold leaf". Gold leaf has been used for decorations for thousands of years. If there ever were any Egyptian chariot wheels they would have been wood with gold leaf. Do you know what happens to wood if it is underwater for a long time? It breaks down. Those were very new bronze valve wheels. You got taken in by a fraud And then you got mad at me instead of yourself. You should be angry. But not at me.

"credible sources" ROFL

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you have reliable sources which provide an alternative explanation for the four-spoken wheel Ron Wyatt photographed in the Red Sea?

Chariot Wheels in the Red Sea

wyattmuseum.com

No, because all of them are still laughing their heads off.

Here is a photo from your article:

Now if you knew anything about archaeology at all you would know that archaeologist always have an object for scale right next to what they are photographing if there is any question about its size. Why didn't Ron have a picture of a ruler or something like that? There is no excuse not to.

But I will this one time give you a link. This article explains how people know that Wyatt was a fraud:

Fake News In Biblical Archaeology

 In a world of fake news and internet hoaxes it’s important to carefully check your sources before you inadvertently spread misinformation. The world of archaeology is no exception to sensationali…

biblearchaeologyreport.com

 

[Subduction Zone]

"credible sources" ROFL

Yes, you screwed up big time. You failed at finding a credible source and then you could not follow my instructions. You were rude. That always happens when the ignorant are shown to be wrong. That is why I told you that to demand evidence you needed to be polite. I posted that before you were rude. Before you asked for evidence.


It is still there.

 

[Ebionite]

No, because all of them are still laughing their heads off.

Here is a photo from your article:

View attachment 80856

Now if you knew anything about archaeology at all you would know that archaeologist always have an object for scale right next to what they are photographing if there is any question about its size. Why didn't Ron have a picture of a ruler or something like that? There is no excuse not to.

But I will this one time give you a link. This article explains how people know that Wyatt was a fraud:

Fake News In Biblical Archaeology

 In a world of fake news and internet hoaxes it’s important to carefully check your sources before you inadvertently spread misinformation. The world of archaeology is no exception to sensationali…

biblearchaeologyreport.com

"Ron Wyatt had no training to interpret the discoveries he says he made."

Stop, you're killing me
ROFL

 

[Ebionite]

Yes, you screwed up big time. You failed at finding a credible source and then you could not follow my instructions. You were rude. That always happens when the ignorant are shown to be wrong. That is why I told you that to demand evidence you needed to be polite. I posted that before you were rude. Before you asked for evidence.


It is still there.

No, no more, stop it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Ron Wyatt had no training to interpret the discoveries he says he made."

Stop, you're killing me
ROFL

He didn't. He was a hack. Prove otherwise. Where are his peer reviewed papers? Did you not read that article at all? The work of Ron Wyatt is such a joke that no serious archaeologist did a professional refutation.

Where are his photos for scale? Why doesn't he had precise locations so that others can check his work. By all of the standards of archaeology he is joke.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, no, more, stop it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

How old are you? This site may not allow underaged children post here. No adult reacts that way, even when they are wrong.

 

[Soapy]

I know that you do not like the trinity, but there are valid arguments for it. One can always say that those verses refer to the three as one.

In the Bible you have John 1 1-5:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

and then John 1 14:

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

That indicates that Jesus was the "Word of God" (whatever that means). That he was with God from the start. And that he became flesh AKA Jesus.

There are other arguments as well, but that part of the Bible does indicate rather strongly that if one wants to accept all of the Bible that Jesus was at the very least with God and was key to making the Earth.

That the Bible has endless contradictions is not news. You have to pick and choose which verses to believe at times.

You state that there are three - but you only mention two…

That is a typical trinitarian failing that gets overlooked constantly… like how trinity says it can prove there are three by: ‘I and the Father are one’!!!

Also, Genesis 1 says that there was God, and there was the Spirit of God… and that is proof in trinitarian math which proves there were THREE in the beginning.

And, of course, ‘Let us make man…’ proves there were three persons conversing together… though why it took three, or two, or ten, or a host (hint !) to decide if they were all one being… is a matter for some kind of alternative dimensional argument and logic!! The most obvious question is how is it decided that ‘Us’ means three?

And, finally, there is absolutely no mention of ‘Jesus’ (as in ‘Son of God’) in the creation story, nor, in fact, in the whole of the Old Testament EXCEPT AS A PROPHETIC SETTING… ‘To come’!!

For instance, ‘The seed of the woman’, ‘for unto us a child is born’, ‘Behold my Servant … on whom I will put on my Spirit’ (‘Son’ and ‘Servant’ have synonymous meanings)

The upshot of all this is that it is an untenable link at the least, and blatant deception at the most…

I notice that no one seems to understand the information I show that the CREATOR is called ‘FATHER’.., in all instances of usage for all things created the word is ‘Father’ yet Jesus (‘Son… of … the Father) is not ever called ‘Father’ EXCEPT in the one instance WHICH IS EVEN YET A FUTURE TIME when Jesus “GIVES ETERNAL LIFE” to those whom he judges as worthy at the second resurrection. Being the one who grants them eternal life makes Jesus Christ their ‘ETERNAL FATHER’…‘He who gives [eternal] life’ by the third definition point I gave out.

It is therefore clear that there is something deviously mistranslated or purposely misconceived in the New Testament claims NOTING THAT the New Testament was written (or translated at least) BY TRINITARIAN GREEK TRANSLATORS who would have had an agenda to to push the trinitarian view after it was ratified, underwritten, demanded as church gospel, BY THE ROMAN RULER, Constantine… who had no interest in Christianity (p.s. I’m not saying that Arianism was right, either!!)

 

[Subduction Zone]

You state that there are three - but you only mention two…

I thought that you knew what the trinity was. I did not want to insult you. By the way, how can you argue against something that you have no clue of? The Trinity is thought to be God the father, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost. The three in one oil of deities.

That is a typical trinitarian failing that gets overlooked constantly… like how trinity says it can prove there are three by: ‘I and the Father are one’!!!

Your language is improper. I did not say "prove". You have not proven anything. There is only evidence and that is biblical evidence for the trinity. If you do not understand that then you do not understand the nature of evidence.

Also, Genesis 1 says that there was God, and there was the Spirit of God… and that is proof in trinitarian math which proves there were THREE in the beginning.

Why do you think that all three would be needed to be mentioned? If I talk about my brother and myself does that mean that I do not have a third brother. You are not thinking rationally when you use that argument.

And, of course, ‘Let us make man…’ proves there were three persons conversing together… though why it took three, or two, or ten, or a host (hint !) to decide if they were all one being… is a matter for some kind of alternative dimensional argument and logic!! The most obvious question is how is it decided that ‘Us’ means three?

And, finally, there is absolutely no mention of ‘Jesus’ (as in ‘Son of God’) in the creation story, nor, in fact, in the whole of the Old Testament EXCEPT AS A PROPHETIC SETTING… ‘To come’!!

Oh please do not abuse the Bible that way. Most of those so called prophecies are just verses taken out of context. And sometimes the writers wrote the stories to match what they thought were prophecies. The failed nativity myths show that.

For instance, ‘The seed of the woman’, ‘for unto us a child is born’, ‘Behold my Servant … on whom I will put on my Spirit’ (‘Son’ and ‘Servant’ have synonymous meanings)

The upshot of all this is that it is an untenable link at the least, and blatant deception at the most…

I notice that no one seems to understand the information I show that the CREATOR is called ‘FATHER’.., in all instances of usage for all things created the word is ‘Father’ yet Jesus (‘Son… of … the Father) is not ever called ‘Father’ EXCEPT in the one instance WHICH IS EVEN YET A FUTURE TIME when Jesus “GIVES ETERNAL LIFE” to those whom he judges as worthy at the second resurrection. Being the one who grants them eternal life makes Jesus Christ their ‘ETERNAL FATHER’…‘He who gives [eternal] life’ by the third definition point I gave out.

It is therefore clear that there is something deviously mistranslated or purposely misconceived in the New Testament claims NOTING THAT the New Testament was written (or translated at least) BY TRINITARIAN GREEK TRANSLATORS who would have had an agenda to to push the trinitarian view after it was ratified, underwritten, demanded as church gospel, BY THE ROMAN RULER, Constantine… who had no interest in Christianity (p.s. I’m not saying that Arianism was right, either!!)

One can "prove" almost anything if the only quote some verses and ignore others. I was merely pointing out some of the verses that you ignored.

 

[Betho_br]

In the Book of Genesis, the two accounts of Adam have been interpreted in various ways throughout history, leading to different theological and philosophical approaches. These interpretations generally fall into two main lines of thought: the physical-evolutionary approach and the metaphysical approach.

In the first chapter of Genesis, we find a narrative that many consider more symbolic, where Adam is seen as representing humanity as a whole. In this context, Adam can be understood as the result of the evolution of life, a being that emerges over eras and is connected to God's creation. He is the physical embodiment of humanity in its diversity.

However, in the second chapter of Genesis, we encounter a narrative that can be interpreted in a more metaphysical way. Here, Adam is created directly by God from the dust of the earth and receives the divine breath, the Spirit of God. This symbolizes a unique spiritual connection between Adam and the Creator, emphasizing the spiritual dimension of humanity. It is in this context that the fall occurs, and Adam becomes the Sinful Adam, the first to disobey God.

The idea of a restored Adam at the end of the ages is a theological interpretation that many have explored over time. It suggests that, at the end of history, humanity will be redeemed and restored to its original communion with God. This restored Adam symbolizes the reconciliation and spiritual redemption of humanity.

In aesthetic terms, this narrative can be seen as a spiritual journey of humanity. From the evolutionary Adam representing the diversity of life to the metaphysical creation of Adam as the being with a special connection to God, through the Sinful Adam representing humanity's fall, and culminating in the Restored Adam symbolizing hope for spiritual redemption. These different facets of Adam create a rich and complex narrative that reflects the varied interpretations and beliefs throughout history.