Dear God, Eve what have you done?

[Drich]

You suck at metaphors. I don't. Here's a better one:

when one encounters a weak or failed metaphore one disassembles it and explains why it is not valid, not provide another one. Here is an example:

We meet on the street. You say to me "isn't my dog awesome?". I see nothing but a leash dragging on the pavement. I ask "what dog?". You shake the collar and insist that not only is the dog standing right there next to you, but that I'm refusing to accept that there's a dog standing right next to you. When I ask you to prove to me that there's a dog standing next to you, you ask me to describe the dog.

You metaphore centers around the idea that based on your experience god is not real hence the missing dog. this has nothing to do with the point I was making. In that if you do not know what you yourself are looking for then how is it am i expected to help you find it?

In my metaphore the dog is the evidence or process of evaluation you need to accept God. not God Himself. Why? because you would/do not except God Himself, you are slaves to what you believe to be the 'proof' process. Therefore in order to find God we must first find your missing dog. However in order to do that you must be able to describe him.

What do dinosaurs have to do with anything?

If the Garden was set a part from the rest of the world (not made to go through the evolutionary process) a perserve that God made on the 3rd day to reflect the state of the world at the time of the fall 6000 years ago, there would be no dinosaurs, unless they existed 6000 years ago. (which per the book of Job is a possiablity in one form or another.)

The fossil fuels we use are, at best, a fraction of a percent dinosaur. The overwhelming majority of it comes from plant matter, which makes up a far larger total biomass.

which would be consistant with what i have said. The Existance of the Garden that lasted for billions of years in that area would be a very very large long lasting source of plant bio matter.

Most of the translations have it as all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years. If he was immortal and lived for billions of years before that, then 930 years does not account for "all the days". But, I guess you know more than the authors of the Bible.

All translations source material describe Adam's life pre fall as: חַי chay which means life.

The 930 years adam lived is חָיַי chayay or 'restored life.'

So prefall God gave Adam life, we can confidently assume adam ate from the tree of life, which made Him immortal per Genesis 3.

Then at the fall Adam ate from the tree of knoweledge, and per the Promise of God Adam died that day, or rather the immortal Adam died that day. God then restored Adam to life, per the use of the word Chayay. It is to this Chayay that Adam live another 930 years.

I knew you'd be dishonest and redefine 'death' in order to avoid conceding the point, but it's still disappointing.

---

No fossils have ever been found in my backyard either. Does that mean my backyard is Eden, or does it mean that the formation of fossils is a rare occurrence?

We are not talking about your back yard we are talking about an area the size of 2/3rds of North America that shows evidence of a lush plant life in that region for a very long long time. They even found fossils in antartica, this is the only region on earth that fossils have not been found.
What other land mass on this planet of that size is without fossilized remains?

Yeah, how did you distinguish between the two when you formulated your idea?

The bible says Man/Adam in the garden was made a living Spirit. or rather made in the image of God.

So why not provide my proof? I define it as what convinced you that this was true; if you're as rational and equipped with the truth as you think you are, that proof will easily convince me too.

You haven't done it yet: why not?

Again I have but because you are looking for something else you appearently have not recognized it, therefore what I have as proof is not something you understand to be 'proof.' therefore I need the specifics of what you consider to be proof.

Was the paper published in a mainstream, peer reviewed scientific journal, or just Dreamland Monthly?

I didn't ask, it was enough for me to have been told a revised version had been published.

Tell me, what scientific organization accepts "holy spirit" as evidence?

What evidence would any scientific organization accept for two people having lived for billions of years in a garden paradise with God?

If you can not provide prameters that define the evidence needed then it can be said that the 'scientific process' you repersent is fatally flawed to grasp or accept anything that it currently does not understand to be true. Kinda like those who believed the earth was flat.