@mBoong, apa khabarnya Melkisedek dan para anak tuhan? Atau Pak @Yusfliak, eh @Yusfiq bisa ngebantu? Ga silaukan? --- In [email protected], "ndeboost" <rambitesemak@...> wrote: > > Loh sampai sekarang masih jadi misteri makluk Loknes, Bigfoot, Yeti atau > lainnya. Jadi apa yg nT mau maksudkan? > Nah kalau yg namanya > 1. Para anak tuhan pernah diberitakan Bibel, bagaimana asal muasalnya > dan bagaimana nasib mereka kini? > 2. Juga yg namanya Melkisedek yg tiada awal, tiada akhir dan tiada > bersilsilah? > Silahkan mBoong (& Yusfliak, Benscong dan Crosstian) cari/telusuri > jejaknya. > > --- In [email protected], "sunny" ambon@ wrote: > > > > > http://english.pravda.ru/science/mysteries/11-04-2011/117524-dinosaurs_b\ \ > ible-0/ > > > > > > Dinosaurs In The Bible? > > 11.04.2011 > > By Babu G. Ranganathan > > The Bible doesn't mention everything under the Sun, but, > interestingly, the Bible gives a description of an animal in the Book of > Job 40:15-24 that can only refer to what we now know as a "dinosaur." > The passage in Job says that the animal that God calls "Behemoth" has a > tail like a cedar tree (no animal today has a tail like a cedar tree), > and bones are like tubes of bronze and its limbs like the bars of iron. > > > > Dinosaurs may have well existed in the time of Job who lived only a > few hundred years after the worldwide flood described in Genesis. > Dinosaurs were created in the sixth day of creation week along with > other beasts and man. > > > > Before the worldwide flood, Noah was commanded to build an ark to save > a remnant of human kind and other landforms of life. According to the > Genesis 6:14-16, the Ark was at least 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 > feet high. It was one long box that would be stable and couldn't capsize > or overturn during the ravaging period of the flood. > > > > Noah wasn't required to take every animal into the Ark, only two of > each "kind," male and female of the land animals. Many of the sea > animals would have been able to survive through the flood. The first > pair of dogs in the Ark would have carried the recessive and dominant > genes for producing all the varieties of dogs we have today. The same > would be the case with all the other animals. God says in Genesis 1 ten > different times that all life must reproduce after its "kind." We know > from science that there are genetic limits to biological variations in > species. A dog will always be a dog no matter how many varieties come > into being. All the biological similarities between species are due to a > common Designer (God) Who designed similar functions for similar > purposes in all the various forms of life. > > > > God created species as complete and fully functional from the very > beginning. They couldn't survive any other way. A half-evolved dog, for > example, wouldn't be able to survive. Darwinian evolutionary theory > would have us believe that, by the random forces of nature, > partially-evolved species came into existence along with > partially-evolved skin, muscles, nerves, tissues, organs and then > survived over millions of years as they eventually became complete. What > utter nonsense! > > > > What about natural selection? Natural selection is a passive process > in nature. Natural selection can only "select" from biological > variations that are possible and which have survival value. Natural > selection itself does not produce biological traits or variations. The > term "natural selection" is simply a figure of speech. Nature, of > course, does not do any conscious or active selection. If a biological > variation occurs which helps a member of a species to survive in its > environment then that biological variation will be preserved and be > passed on to future offspring. That is what we call natural selection. > > > > Natural selection is just another way of saying "Survival of the > Fittest." But, this is exactly the problem for Darwinian > macro-evolutionary theory. How can a partially evolved species be fit > for survival? A partially evolved trait or organ that is not completely > one or the other will be a liability to a species, not a survival asset. > How could species have survived if their vital organs were still > evolving? > > > > The only evolution in nature that is possible and that can really be > called science is micro-evolution, which is variations within biological > kinds such as varieties of dogs, cats, horses and cows. Only > micro-evolution is observable and can be measured by the scientific > method. > > > > Macro-evolution, which teaches that variations in life can occur > across biological kinds, is not science but faith. > > > > The genes exist in all species for micro-evolution but not for > macro-evolution, and there is no scientific evidence that random genetic > mutations caused by natural forces such as radiation can or will > generate entirely new genes for entirely new traits. Random forces in > nature have no ability to perform genetic engineering so as to bring > about entirely new genes. > > > > Mutations produce only variations of already existing genes. They do > not produce entirely new genes. > > > > Random genetic mutations caused by environmental forces will not > produce entirely new genes anymore than randomly changing the sequences > of letters in a cookbook will change it into a book on astronomy. > > > > What about "Junk DNA"? The latest science shows that "Junk DNA" isn't > junk after all! It's we who were ignorant of how useful these segments > of DNA really are. Recent scientific research published in scientific > journals such as Nature has revealed that the "non-coding" segments of > DNA are very useful, after all, and even essential in regulating gene > expression and intracellular activities. > > > > Noah didn't have to seek for the animals. God said He would bring the > animals to Noah. God may very well have caused the animals to hibernate > in the Ark so feeding and taking care of them wouldn't have to be a > problem. No doubt, dinosaurs would have very easily fit in the Ark. > > > > We can surmise from the Bible that conditions on the earth were ideal > before the Flood, but after the Flood the world was a hostile place > where severe competition was necessary for animals to survive. God had > placed the genes in species for limited adaptation in so that they could > survive through the changing environment on earth after the flood. > > > > Genesis 7 says that much of the water that flooded the whole world > came from under the ground. We know even today of vast reservoirs of > water that are under the earth. Obviously, if the Genesis account is > true, there was much greater amount of water underground in the earths > past. Genesis 7 says that this water burst through the surface of the > earth. The colossal effect changed the entire topography and climate of > the earth. A major consequence of such a flood would have also been the > Ice Age. > > > > The Old Testament (i.e. Psalm 104) describes God as raising high > mountains from the earth after the worldwide flood so that the waters > would recede into the ocean basins. The tremendous velocity and pressure > from such receding water is what most likely caused the formation of the > majestic Grand Canyon packed with its billions of fossils. > > > > The Bible says that the Ark landed somewhere in the mountains of > Ararat where the modern nation of Turkey is now located. There have been > reports from individual mountain climbers of having seen the Ark. The > eyewitnesses claim that the Ark had split in two or more sections and > became petrified and is well-preserved in the freezing ice and cold > temperatures at its altitude high up in the mountain range of Ararat. > However, there is no concrete evidence yet of the Ark's existence. > > > > If we should find the Ark, it would definitely be strong evidence for > a worldwide flood. But, even without discovering the Ark we have > physical evidence for a worldwide flood from the billions of fossils of > plants and of animals in the earth. > > > > What about the fossils? Hasn't science proved the earth and universe > to be billions of years old? The articles (below) will answer these > questions. Visit the author's site for more answers. > > > > No Half-Evolved Dinosaurs > > > > Evolutionary Dating Not Infallible Science > > > > The author, Babu G. Ranganathan, has his bachelor's degree with > concentrations in theology and biology and has been recognized for his > writings on religion and science in the 24th edition of Marquis "Who's > Who In The East." The author's articles may be accessed at > www.religionscience.com. > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > >
------------------------------------ Post message: [email protected] Subscribe : [email protected] Unsubscribe : [email protected] List owner : [email protected] Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
