No the scriptures show the animal kingdom and man got along just fine. Man at that time was told every seed bearing herb was good for food. This would account for how Noah had an easy time getting the animals.

It is an important question Abra.

We here about how our religion is a made up fairy tale.

Yet it describes the earth being darkened as science has said now.

It describes all the animals and how man came to be again.

Science can not do that.

4000 years ago thier is no way any human could of possibly even thought of the earth being darkened that in later years this would prove to be true and why the extection of the dinasors and man as he was known. Before this time man is known as close to an animal. After when man is placed back on earth it says Yahweh breathed and man became alive. This breath of Yahweh is his spirit which inturn is knowledge.

Thus man now becomes dominant over the animal kingdom. Neatheral man was not.

We here constantly about proof and reasoning.

This reasoning relays truth of proof.. Shalom..Miles

"Feralcatlady" ..what are you talking about ... anyone that took a chance on eating a Chicken McNugget experienced faith

miles........

is it not debate that SEPERATE OPINION FROM TRUTH?

is not debate answering all logic of all others?

if "truth" be declared from the hilltops by one, then does this not invite a need for questions?

do any that do not like to be questioned not despise questions?

how can each and every speaker demand what response they wish for in return?

would not this not lead to no accountability of any words as truthful, as each speaker gets to choose the action that is truth as well, lol.........

will not anyone that seek agreement most be easily offended with disagreement?

is not offense based on each individuals perception, which are as different as the faces of each person?

can free expression be had by a speaker and not by all others as well?

are not all these things even more important within a family?

all scriptures you refer to are percieved as each individuals perception allows, and this be thru the "eyes" of all ones own life........all ones own love, all ones own fear, all ones own desire, and all ones own understanding, and all ones own intellect........

your words do not stand up to the scrutiny i demand of myself, and for myself, as they hold no logic, and are yours to believe with all due dilligence.......

questions are aimed at provoking thought, and challenging logic, and are for learning and discourse, and uncovering truth..........

indeed, MANY things you say i certainally agree with in full, and why I DENOUCE ALL SCRIPTURES AS MY GUIDE, and do not believe that ANY SHOULD FOLLOW, so any that say follow, will not i provide questions seeking WHY, and these are never answered back by any that profess to be believers, lol

if one need to quote secondhand from anything and declare it truth, then how do they have any understanding of their own?

does not looking for words that support what one already believe lead right back to what one already knew......a circle of self indulgence

praise and adulation and kind words do not eqaul truth, so who that wish most for these, care most about the truth..........

DB:

perhaps there are some other scriptures i am not aware of that make these not apply........


tribo:

David, many do not read the word carefully enough, though i am not a christian i do know that Paul states this in 1st Corinthians, vs 12 - " But to the rest speak "I" " NOT THE LORD" and continues on from there - it is Paul saying these things - not god/Jesus/HS stating such as you comment on. So much of paul's writings are of Paul and not directly from god you have to look carefully as to whether it is him speaking or not. just a clue, though I'm sure it will be shot down by the others who believe every word is given by god even when Paul so adamantly states the contrary.

QS........

who that declare themself wise has any wisdom?

why does one thank another unless they sought affirmation most?

who that seek praise most hear anything but praise?

how can one believe all things are personal unless they have personal agenda most?

what feelings have any bearing on the truth?

who that declare their own perception as wisdom be not blind?

who that declare themself as speaking for god should not possess all god was said to be?

who that hates questions is not unquestionable?

what that profess itself believe does not declare mercy for itself?

what that accuse another is not guilty of the same in accusing?

who that teach is not most guilty if they tresspass what they teach?

who that condem and judge anothers heart has learned even the first commandment of god?

who that say follow me is worthy to be followed?

what righteouss declare it's own righteoussness?

the delusion that come from the pictures of mind, that make one believe perception does not decieve, leading to pits of misery, when mercy is sought, but what mercy can be found, for one that proclaim for itself, and what grace can be had, by what demands itself worthy, and what that declare itself first, make itself not to be last, and what that spew hell on others, has not sent a message preparing for their arrival......

no peace in the valley shall be had until the valley consumes........peace in the end

I have more faith than most people on this forum. I have faith that I exist.

JB

"PROOF" that's a strong word Miles. Can anyone show proof of anything in all honesty when it comes to spiritual things? You say it's "safe to say man did not show back up either after the extinction of the retiles" ?? Is it really safe to say such? Can you "prove" such to be the case? could not some have been in caves or other places and been such that they were able to survive - even if only a few? were their not also things in the oceans that could not have done the same and even smaller creatures on the earth? How can we "PROVE" anything past what we now know as we live and breath? All is subject to debate and wonderment and educated guesses at most. I cannot "PROVE" anything but that i exsist, and i could be wrong about that!

I know Tribo.

But i get this religion is a fairy tale..thier is no proof at all..it is in your mind..

All i was trying to say look i can take what the bible says about the beginning and explain how man came about after apperently about every living mamal died.

man could not of made up such a story about the face of the earth was dark 1st. Why would he?

So he had know idea 4000 years later we would know this did happen.

So the bible is showing proof.

Science can not match that proof. Science has no real explanation.

The scriptures do.


So all i am saying is if you want to claim proof i am going to turn it around if i can and put it back in your ball park.

Fair is Fair Right.. Blessings Tribo..Miles

hmm?? I might agree with you miles except i don't think man has evolved past what he knew in the beginning - if anything he has "devolved" Between you and me i think man was much more intellegent in the beginning than he is now. Can i prove it? nope! Just my take on all i have learned of mankind so far that's outside the box so to say.

yea a study of all the acracy and where it was put of the Great Pyramid.. says what you believe

maybe solomon was right when he said "theres nothing new under the sun" - i was always fond of solomon.

have you ever studied the great pyramiad..And something of that undertaking i do not believe thier are any records of why or how it was built. we ould have a very hard time matching it today

Tribo,

I'm sorry to tell you this Tribo, but you don't really exist. You are a holographic projection animated by one of my alternate personalities and are connected to a single life stream coming from my higher self. You're doing a great job though.

JB

Well of course it was built by an advanced civilization who had a different kind of technology. Back the, things were a lot lighter in density they say.

your a goofball....and of course the perfect example of what I say....can't speak on what you truly don't know...or have not experienced....ya baby

that is a given my sweet....and has nothing to do with faith...so I would say what I said before....applies also to you JB.

ok then baby honey..now explain how you know what I know or don't know or have not experience ..

Response to 'Trout:
So is saving the world something an omnipotent and
omniscient God actually cannot do?

If God knows all that ever was and ever will be, then why would he make a devil, and by proxy be responsible for death and evil unless he intended it?

If in fact God has intended this (and so far passed the validity test) then both "good" and "evil" are facets of the divine and part of God's plan. Therefor the concept of salvation is irrelevant as no matter what path in life you choose you are participating in the divine plan and doing the will of God.

Any other conclusion necessarily infers that God is either not Omnipotent, not Omniscient, or at best insane and malevolent, else why would a divine entity create the setting for harm and suffering to befall his creation in a universe he supposedly has absolute control over?

So is saving the world something an omnipotent and
omniscient God actually cannot do?

Yeah. That was proved in Genesis with Adam and Eve and also in Genesis with Noah and the ark. Unless he wanted humanity to be just like the angels but it didn't even work in heaven with the angels because Satan was an angel once. Consider Isaiah 14:12 and Revelations 22:16. Lucifer is a name frequently given to Satan in Christian belief because of a particular interpretation of a passage in the Book of Isaiah. More specifically, it is supposed to have been Satan's name before being cast out of heaven.

In Latin, the word "Lucifer", meaning "Light-Bringer" (from lux, lucis, "light", and ferre, "to bear, bring"), is a name for the "Morning Star" (the planet Venus in its dawn appearances). The Latin Vulgate version of the Bible used this word twice to refer to the Morning Star: once in 2 Peter 1:19 to translate the Greek word "Φωσφόρος" (Phosphoros), which has exactly the same literal meaning of "Light-Bringer" that "Lucifer" has in Latin; and once in Isaiah 14:12 to translate "הילל" (Hêlēl), which also means "Morning Star". In the latter passage the title of "Morning Star" is given to the tyrannous Babylonian king, who the prophet says is destined to fall. This passage was later applied to the prince of the demons, and so the name "Lucifer" came to be used for Satan, and was popularized in works such as Dante's Inferno and Milton's Paradise Lost, but for English speakers the greatest influence has been its use in the King James Version for what more modern English versions translate as "Morning Star" or "Day Star".

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken, the nations!

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

thnx for giving me life JB, hmmm?? or maybe not - now i have someone to blame

Everything you speak of is of freewill.

lucifer is a direct purposely mistranslation of his name.

Isaiih was written in Hebrew probally Paleo Hebrew.

Lucifer is a latin concoction to make lucifer out to be this star.

The family of the spirit world end in El. All angels names end in El.

this does no more than say who they are.

yahshua on the other hand Yahweh said which of the Angels have I called my son.

Answer None.

So for satan to be the bright and morning star can not be true.

Only Yahshua as you quoted in Rev can be this.

You see this el and yah ending names throughout the prophets. As all Hebrew names have deep meaning.