I believe exactly that

My ancestors escaped through the caucas mountains and populated the world,namesake follows throughout ,identified from Jacob, sons of which.
Jacobson,.Johnson,Olson,Anderson Benson, Abrahamson,Ingrabritson,Peterson,Helgerson.Carlson,ect...

Isnt Homey what Black people say for Homo?

Like "hey man dat my Homo"

the idea that science is out to destroy christianity has been around since the middle ages. guess what? the earth isnt flat and the sun revolves around it

I don't think science and Christianity are mutually exclusive! Science follows the development and changes of man over time. Christianity establishes rules that man can live by so we don't kill each other off. When the rules of Christianity are thrown out you get what you have today in the inner cities and nationwide, a lot of lost souls that will eventually become extinct and a new species will emerge. The death jab I believe is that extinction tool. The purebloods will rule the new world.

This isn't at all accurate but it's repeated often. Many of the first scientists in the era of the Renaissance believed in God and sought evidence for scientific questions in Scripture and in nature. From them came great scientific discoveries.
As far as the earth being flat. That was (and still is on TicToc :D) a secular tenet for the most part. in Job 26:7 and Isaiah 40:22 and on into the New Testament with the physician Luke, the writers all describe a spherical earth.

It's quite interesting how falsehoods get spread but the good news is God gave us all rational brains, set apart from the other animals, and that is a blessing beyond scientific measure.
God is the creator of all things and that includes science.

Blessings,
Mark

what is a pureblood?

P.S. Mark, it is 100% accurate

I always considered true science to be bits of the revelation of God's design. As for the science of today, it seems to be opinion based more than scientifically based.

Danny, I wasn't arguing the point. I was giving clarity. On this forum of opinions.
It's not accurate at all. If anyone knows theological history, they discover that after not too much digging in.

I realize you feel the need to continually chastise and disparage people who believe in God but our worldview is who we are - an eternal perspective if you will.
You don't have to feel sorry for us or ask what planet we're living on because amidst all the things of this world, joy comes from the rest we can get from the only Person where it's found.
It's better than a 300 coyote season
And the reward is way better too.

Blessings,
Mark

Danny the world was never flat to begin with so could not be no longer flat.

The DNA test I did some years back noted a huge amount of my DNA being from around the north black sea area. Three of my grandparents being full Swedes that was confusing until I read that from that area came the population that migrated to southern Sweden in the several hundred years BC.

I have read a lot of interesting developments in the Smithsonian on-line if anyone cares to look at that.

BTW, I have no argument with the bible and as someone else mentioned; who is to say exactly how man was created? What is a "day" to God? Literal interpretations of the good book will always fall short in my opinion.

Now back to "us homos"....

So probably some of you know the difference between mitochondrial DNA and nuclear DNA. Nuclear you inherit from both parents, whereas mitochondrial is only from mom to daughter. We have inherited nuclear DNA from Neanderthal but as of yet no mitochondrial DNA has showed up. One possible explanation is our ancestors (H. sapiens males) did not ever successfully mate with Neanderthal women...it only happened the other way, Neanderthal men mating with H. sapiens women! That gives you something to think about. I'm thinking that is clear evidence that beer and wine had not yet been invented!

There are different views about what constitutes a species. Some would draw the line at the inability to produce viable offspring, others are pretty free with their species concepts and are happy to apply a new species name to anything that appears slightly different. Many taxonomic debates (in whatever field, my experience is mostly in botany) are debates between the Lumpers and the Splitters, i.e. those that lump various groups together and those that split them into separate entities. Either way, for species to differentiate, specific populations of organisms have to experience genetic isolation (usually maintained by the constraints of geography or sexual selection) for some period of time. Obviously, the longer the isolation occurs, the more likely it is that any two populations will diverge far enough that interbreeding will become impossible even if the two come into contact again later. Neanderthals were, at the very least, a divergent hominid population that did not remain isolated long enough to make interbreeding impossible. Whether that makes them a completely separate species depends on whether you're a lumper or a splitter.
.
This makes perfect sense, since humans evolved and arose in Africa. It was the dispersal out of Africa that led to genetic isolation (and therefore the loss of genetic diversity within the dispersing populations). Populations that remained in Africa would have had a greater gene pool to work with and would have been less geographically isolated from other hominid populations.

For what it's worth...I think a careful reading of the Hebrew Bible depicts a three-tiered universe that was more like a snow-globe than anything else. The seas below, with the land supported on pillars above that, then the heavens (or sky) above that. The waters of the skies were held back by a kind of dome (translated as the firmament or vault sometimes. Modern translations often use "expanse" which forces the text into something closer to our modern understanding (of atmosphere or space), which is a shame. The Hebrew word [rakiyah] clearly indicates something like a smooth dome.) - remember Genesis 1 where this is described. Also in the Noah narrative remember when God de-creates the world by opening the windows in the sky-dome to let the waters above meet the waters below (here springs and wells open so the water below can come up to meet the water above) and swallow the dry land. Later Moses and the elders see the sky-dome at the top of Mt. Sinai. The sun, moon, and stars were not viewed as orbs circling or being circled by Earth. They were literally called "lamps". they were also said to be signs or symbols, and their purpose was to govern or rule in the heavenly realm (much like humans are intended to rule on the dry land). It seems that what they govern/rule is time...separating night from day, serving as signs of seasons, days, and years.

Here and elsewhere, there seem to be two viewpoints: 1) the Bible's depiction of the physical universe is wrong/antiquated, therefore the Bible is wrong/worthless. 2) The Bible is right/good, therefore I must find ways to make ancient Hebrew cosmology match our modern scientific cosmology (otherwise maybe view 1 is right!). I find neither of these options to be very good. The Bible comes from an ancient "pre-scientific" culture, so it's understanding of the physical nature of the universe does not match ours. Period. However, the point of the Bible is not to be a science textbook! It is depicting the story of the relationship of humanity and its Creator. That story (I think, anyway) is true, but it does not depend on, or intend to inform us about, the physical nature of planetary bodies in the solar system. If we can try to read and understand the Bible as an ancient-near-Eastern-average-Joe would have read it, I think it actually makes a lot of sense, and these weird old stories become very profound rather than controversial. There are my two cents.

beaverpeeler. If you watch some episodes of the Jerry Springer show or the Maury Polvich show it will be clearly proven that homo sapian women are still regularly interbreeding with neanderthal men.

I suspect there was as much rape in the ancient world as there is in a chicken house

jht, good knowledgeable post. The kind of discussion I was hoping to attract. And I'm of the opinion that over time our split with our neanderthal and denisovan cousins makes them H. sapiens neanderthal and H. sapiens denisovans....apparently capable of interbreeding with our direct ancestors H. sapiens sapiens.

I would think that far back it was probably more of one male with multiple females. Until the one male was relieved of his duties by a stronger male. Survival of the Fittest. But yes like a chicken house.

What your saying would support the Genesis 6 theory, If the sons of God where fallen angels then there Giant DNA would have come from male angels to female daughters of men like in the text. Not from male men to female fallen angles, of which there is no mention of female angels in Scripture. Like I said before just a theory and food for thought.

Gen 6 is not a theory Giant Sage.
It’s what the Bible says, at least every book I’ve cross referenced. Scholarly people have tried to misinterpret it, but the Words speak for themselves.

Nothing in the Bible makes sense except in the light of the angelic view of Gen 6.