Are radiometric dating methods reliable datingnorge com

Posted by / 07-Sep-2017 02:22

In this the pre-Adamites were soulless beings which all perished in a catastrophe called ‘Lucifer’s Flood’, which allegedly occurred between verses 1 and 2 of Genesis 1 “in the far-distant dateless past”.

century, with the rise of Darwinism and the continued discovery of allegedly very old human-like fossils, many evangelicals compromised by adopting theistic evolution. Stott (who also compromises the Bible’s teaching on eternal conscious punishment for the unsaved because it offends his sensibilities).

However, his adjusted range of dates does not solve the problem.

If it is possible that Adam and Eve lived 10,000 years ago, then this implies it is possible that such indigenous people are not descendants of Adam and Eve (which would mean that they could not be saved through Christ, our kinsman/redeemer—Isaiah ).

Hence pre-Adamism took the form of , or multiple creations of different races.

Proponents of this idea often thought that non-whites were inferior beings who could be treated as slaves.

Pre-Adamism thus became the scientific justification for slavery, and a defense for racism.

Pre-Adamites were also an integral part of the now-discredited gap theory.

But they have assumed that the alleged Pre-Adamic fossils constitute a reliable record; i.e.

And leading ‘progressive creationist’ Hugh Ross teaches something similar when he says that “bipedal, tool-using, large-brained primates roamed Earth for hundreds of thousands (perhaps a million) years”.

Ross does not believe in biological evolution, although he accepts cosmic and geologic evolution and the evolutionary timescale.

the fossils have been interpreted correctly in both anatomy The Bible tells us that Adam was the first biological man—in Genesis 1–5; Deuteronomy 32:8; 1 Chronicles 1:1; Luke ; Romans ; 1 Corinthians , 45; 1 Timothy ; and Jude .

So, how many parts of the Bible are they willing to concede as being ‘errant’, or in need of ‘reinterpreting’, in order to accommodate the evolutionary/uniformitarian interpretation of the fossil record?

are radiometric dating methods reliable-1are radiometric dating methods reliable-17are radiometric dating methods reliable-27

John Stott writes: “The flood seems to have been a comparatively local—though widespread—disaster.” Christian creationist anthropologist Marvin Lubenow describes the evidence of a sin nature in the (allegedly pre-Adamic) human fossil record, including examples of cannibalism, and injury due to violence, scalping and disease, including syphilis.