(September 23, 2015 at 5:39 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:(September 23, 2015 at 4:09 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: 1) Everything we know about genetics is wrong, and humans once had incredibly long lifespans that worked in some way despite everything we know about cellular aging through copying errors during mitosis, orYou assume that copying errors are inevitable. They are common now, but that does not mean they always were.
(September 23, 2015 at 4:09 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: 2) The Patriarchs' 900+ year lifespans are taken from the Sumerian mythologies in the land of Ur, from whence the family of Abraham originated, and they changed the legends from Sumerian God-Kings who lived 900 years to Hebrew Patriarchs who lived 900 years.It could easily have worked the other way around. Sumerian mythology corrupted history.
Um, no. Copying errors are a byproduct of how the chemistry works. You'd have to argue that there were no oxidants anywhere in nature, that ultraviolet radiation didn't exist, and that, again, everything we know about how genetics and cellular biology today is wrong. If Adam had "perfect DNA" that was "corrupted by sin", as Hovind (et al) have proposed, then "sin" also causes universal and identical endogenous retroviral scars, junk DNA like the deletion in our gene for the final stage of making ascorbic acid (Vitamin C), and identically transposed elements within the genome.
As to the "Sumerian mythology corrupted history" quip, are you implying that the Hebrew monotheistic culture is older than the Sumerians, and that the Sumerian Empire's God-Kings were modeled after the patriarchs of a nomadic tribe that once lived in their territory before moving to Canaan?
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
