Featured Ellen White's Amalgamation of man and Beast Revisited

Though I believe the day of worship is still Sabbath, any theory of Ellen G White is heresy.
Her tomb is decorated with Obelisk.

Eliyahu

 

Basic facts that are not at all difficult to read.

Genetic engineering is the claim being made for events before the flood.

This is irrefutable.

Mixing of races is not the same thing as genetic engineering

This is irrefutable.

The creation of new species of animals was the claim for preflood mankind through some sort of amalgamation is specifically addressed in that text.

This is irrefutable.

The number of species on planet earth today far outnumbers the number of species that could have fit on the ark - so some form of mixing had to have occurred since the ark, regardless if man did it or not.

This is irrefutable.

"Races of men" are not "new species"

This is irrefutable.

There is no quote provided here that says "mixing animals with men in the 1800's gave rise to new species or new races"

This is irrefutable.


in Christ,

Bob

 

As I said - irrefutable and so you provide nothing to refute it except to confirm my signature line.

There is not one quote from Ellen White or the 28 Fundamental beliefs of Adventists arguing for new "species" of man. For such fiction we would need "Vooks" as our text.

"When reason vacates in regard to a given subject, the only weapons of argument left are in the hands of emotion. The simplest emotional weapons to wield are name-calling ,disparaging remarks, vitriol and acrimony for those deemed adversaries. All such ad hominem tactics provide nothing of persuasive substance, except to those whose reason has also been vacated on that same subject. "

Your demonstration of that fact -- noted.

If this is your way of saying there is nothing really here and that the irrefutable points cannot be refuted just as I noted -- well I guess we are done with your preference of subject.



in Christ,

Bob

 

The only thing true is that your prophetess was wrong on this issue, as on so many others, and that mankind is all ONE race, who was a direct creation of God, and there are only sinners and the saved!

 

Amalgamation of beasts - mixing species and creating new ones... obviously.

Whatever else they were doing before the flood we do not know - and how it affected humans we do not know since only Noah and his family cross over from preflood to our post-flood-age.

Did you want to "make up a story" about what it was before the flood - for us??

Did you want to "invent a story" for us about what races are new since the day of Noah and 8 people getting off the ark? All in the ONE species of man.

Are you "quoting you" again???

Why would I be using "Vooks text" instead of something a bit more reliable??

in Christ,

Bob

 

The problem with BOB is not only does the bible deny what the SDA teaches regarding this, science does also, as there as NEVER been shown a different species coming out of another one in Nature!

 

You are quoting "you" ad nauseum and asking me to justify your irrational source 'which is you'.

I have pointed this out repeatedly - and yet nonsensically - you insist on doing it over and over.

hint: Post something of substance.

“But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of GOD, and caused confusion everywhere. GOD purposed to destroy by a flood that powerful, long-lived race that had corrupted their ways before him.”—Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 64.

“Every species of animal which GOD had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which GOD did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men.”— Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, Page 75.

[FONT=&quot]1. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No mention of “confused species of man’ [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No mention of “confused races of man after the flood”.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No mention of “sin in so many races of man after the flood”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]PRIOR to the flood “long-lived race corrupted their ways before Him” just as we see in [/FONT]

Gen 6
[FONT=&quot]12 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]13 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I do not know what experiments existed before the flood – but we do know that there are more species of animal and more races of men today than could have come off the ark.
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]That is just stating the obvious.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Still at no point do we see a statement that “after the flood there are confused races of man” or “confused species of man” or “the races of man after the flood are the result of sin”. For that sort of text we need to quote 'the vooks text" and so far the only person willing to use Vooks as their text -- is Vooks.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]in Christ,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Bob
[/FONT]

 

1. there are MORE species of animal today than could have fit on the ark a result of isolation and also mixing - irrefutable - product of some form of amalgamation "mixing" within the animal kingdom.

2. There are more RACES of men today then got off the ark - a product of mixing within the human species between races.

3. None of this is said to mar the image of God after the flood.

4. None of this is said to result in confused races of men.

irrefutable.

Your question about GMO - genetic engineering before the flood, intelligence etc was addressed.

There would have been mixing before and after the flood - between animals and also between races of men - but there was also GMO before the flood that 'marred the image of God' and as Genesis 6 says "all flesh had become corrupt" - not said after the flood.

Just stating the obvious. Not using "Vooks" as my text.

Nothing in the Bible said "Noah first discovered the technology of making wine after the flood" for all we know they had it before the flood as well.

We do not have an exhaustive audit of those first 1500 years before the flood - as we all know.

For example in Genesis 6 we are told about clean vs unclean animal differences - but no text before the flood tells us how they knew to distinguish them -- only Lev 11 tells us.

WE do not have an exhaustive audit of every word or every invention before the flood -- only that they managed to "corrupt flesh" on the planet. Gen 6.

in Christ,

Bob

 

That would be "vooks text".

We don't have to support what vooks makes up.

There was mixing before and after the flood but there is also GMO before the flood that "defaces the image of God" and as Gen 6 says "corrupts all flesh".

Ellen White did not say that the image of God is marred by this after the flood and Genesis does not say all flesh is corrupt after the flood.

Irrefutable - so the Vooks text is fiction.

Again - vooks text. there is not statement about confused species of men - or even confused races of men mentioned in the writings of Ellen White.

you need to get out more -- "read more".

in the south the Southern Baptist argued in favor of slavery - Ellen White argued against it - she argued for the full humanity of all human races.

The point remains.

irrefutable.

in Christ,

Bob

 

It all sort of boils down to this irrefutable post - and then the fact that back in the 19th century the Southern Baptists were supporting slavery while Ellen White condemned it as she argued that all races of man are fully human.

 

Have been addressing that in my posts - but you apparently do not actually read the posts. Is there some other purpose that you have here if you are not interested in reading the actual posts and responding to the points??