• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Ellen White's Amalgamation of man and Beast Revisited

vooks

Active Member

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
This is the most comprehensive treatment of the subject by an Adventist
http://www.academia.edu/8051351/Tru...tion_Theory_Revisited_Spectrum_Magazine_2010_

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxrT0F-mwJf1M3ZzU1lEYVZmSUU/edit?usp=docslist_api

His conclusion is simple; EGW was talking of beastiality and not sinners and the righteous union. Whyc do Adventists go out of their way to DENY this rather obvious fact? To uphold the 'inspiration' claims of their 'prophet'

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
 

vooks

Active Member
Her claims to inspiration, and elevation to the prophets shocks me. How do you defend as inspired the idea that Some races (AFricans) descended from apes?
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
This is the most comprehensive treatment of the subject by an Adventist
http://www.academia.edu/8051351/Tru...tion_Theory_Revisited_Spectrum_Magazine_2010_

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxrT0F-mwJf1M3ZzU1lEYVZmSUU/edit?usp=docslist_api

His conclusion is simple; EGW was talking of beastiality and not sinners and the righteous union. Why do Adventists go out of their way to DENY this rather obvious fact? To uphold the 'inspiration' claims of their 'prophet'

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
 

vooks

Active Member
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

Clearly you have NOTHING to say:laugh:
I would be surprised if you did
Your specialty is inventing your own arguments and winning them and bagging medals

Sad

You have time to save face.
What is amalgamation of man and beast?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

vooks

Active Member
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
Sorry, duplicated
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
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
 
Last edited by a moderator:

vooks

Active Member
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

Playing dumb or is it obtuse?
"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."1
1. Amalgamation is the sin ABOVE all. How is animals mating a sin?
2. How does it deface the image of God?

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."2

1. What are these 'certain' races of men?
3. Since when did sin spawn a confused race?
2. What race are you Bob?
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
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

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!
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
1. Amalgamation is the sin ABOVE all. How is animals mating a sin?

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??


1. What are these 'certain' races of men?

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.

Again
3. Since when did sin spawn a confused race?

Are you "quoting you" again???

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

in Christ,

Bob
 

vooks

Active Member
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.

How did you conclude there was AMALGAMATION before the Flood in the first place? Who told you? Are you not simply regurgitating EGW hallucinations?

Give me proof OUTSIDE her writings of this or her sources

Did you want to "make up a story" about what it was before the flood - for us??
It is your godess who cooked up preFlood theories and passed them as inspiration.

Who told her there were confused species BEFORE the flood?




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.
Dithering. What 'certain races' are product of amalgamation?
It is. Fact we have races from 8 people. The question is, what 'certain races' are products of amalgamation.

Why are you being silly? Is anybody disputing existence of races?

Are you "quoting you" again???

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

in Christ,

Bob
what 'certain races' are products of the most base sin of amalgamation?
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How did you conclude there was AMALGAMATION before the Flood in the first place? Who told you? Are you not simply regurgitating EGW hallucinations?

Give me proof OUTSIDE her writings of this or her sources


It is your godess who cooked up preFlood theories and passed them as inspiration.

Who told her there were confused species BEFORE the flood?





Dithering. What 'certain races' are product of amalgamation?
It is. Fact we have races from 8 people. The question is, what 'certain races' are products of amalgamation.

Why are you being silly? Is anybody disputing existence of races?


what 'certain races' are products of the most base sin of amalgamation?

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!
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
How did you conclude there was AMALGAMATION before the Flood in the first place? Who told you? Are you not simply regurgitating EGW hallucinations?

Give me proof OUTSIDE her writings of this or her sources


It is your godess who cooked up preFlood theories and passed them as inspiration.

Who told her there were confused species BEFORE the flood?

Dithering. What 'certain races' are product of amalgamation?
It is. Fact we have races from 8 people. The question is, what 'certain races' are products of amalgamation.

what 'certain races' are products of the most base sin of amalgamation?

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]
 

vooks

Active Member
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]
The amalgamation before and after the flood were the same. If amalgamation before the flood was genetic engineering, so was the one after. Is there proof of existence of this knowledge before 20th century?

You have thawed your brain to maintain EGW inspiration.

Here is SDA gutters from 1931;
Common sense tells us that we are shut up to the view that what was really meant is that there has been a vast amount of hybridizing among animals, and also among distinct types or kinds of men which the Lord de*sired to keep separate and distinct. If we can admit that the expression as printed in "Spiritual Gifts" is not as clearly worded as we might desire, this would clearly be the meaning, and no difficulty would arise. Surely this position is reasonable.
https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1931/04/the-problem-of-hybridization



So there were 'types' or 'kinds' of men God desired to keep SEPARATE and DISTINCT

Interracial marriages are 'extreme' and 'fanaticism'
"You have no license from God to exclude the colored people from places of worship. Treat them as Christ's property, which they are, just as much as yourselves. They should hold membership in the church with the white brethren. Every effort should be made to wipe out the terrible wrong [slavery] which has been done them. At the same time we must not carry things to extremes and run into fanaticism on this question. Some would think it right to throw down every partition wall and intermarry with the colored people, but this is not the right thing to teach or practice.""
http://m.egwwritings.org/publication.php?pubtype=Book&bookCode=2SM&lang=en&pagenumber=483

There is EGW's dim view of negroes; don't INTERMARRY. That's what her gods were telling her. And she claims it was 'light' from lord. What lord?

"In reply to inquiries regarding the advisability of intermarriage between Christian young people of the white and black races, I will say that in my earlier experience this question was brought before me, and the light given me of the Lord was that this step should not be taken; for it is sure to create controversy and confusion. I have always had the same counsel to give. No encouragement to marriages of this character should be given among our people. Let the colored brother enter into marriage with a colored sister who is worthy, one who loves God, and keeps His commandments. Let the white sister who contemplates uniting in marriage with the colored brother refuse to take this step, for the Lord is not leading in this direction. Time is too precious to be lost in controversy that will arise over this matter. Let not questions of this kind be permitted to call our ministers from their work. The taking of such a step will create confusion and hindrance. It will not be for the advancement of the work or for the glory of God"
http://text.egwwritings.org/publica...tion=all&pagenumber=344&paragraphReferences=1

Bottom line is, whether amalgamation meant interracial unions or beastiality, it does not meet scriptural nor scientific threshold. Either way, she was racist and in an attempt to whitewash her idiocy, she promoted racial segregation
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by vooks
Bob, do you believe genetic engineering was practiced by pre-Flood people, and was somewhat lost for thousands of years only to be rediscovered in 20th century?
Is amalgamation genetic engineering?
Mankind 250 years ago was still using horse and buggy as the fastest "technology" for getting from one place to another -- just as they were doing in the days of Noah. ALL of our technology has been created in that 250 year window. Passing knowledge on from generation to generation. Starting the next generation 'from zero' and bringing them up to speed then they have a few decades to improve on the old. Bit-by-bit. 60 to 75 years max of productive science advancement "tops" that each generation could contribute.

By contrast before the flood mankind lived not for75 years not for 250 years but for 900+ years - just ONE scientist, just ONE Einstein with vastly superior mental ability to start with and during that entire time. Yet they had many more than "ONE".

You do the math.




You are not smart at all. Here is why, AMALGAMATION before and after the Flood


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.


is the same thing. So if preFlood was genetic engineering, post flood must have been genetic engineering.
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
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
The amalgamation before and after the flood were the same. If amalgamation before the flood was genetic engineering, so was the one after.

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.

Bottom line is, whether amalgamation meant interracial unions or beastiality, it does not meet scriptural nor scientific threshold.

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.

Either way, she was racist

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
 

vooks

Active Member
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

Ellen white would not suffer negros marrying whites. That was her 'light' from her god
 

vooks

Active Member
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

You are obtuse. That's a necessary skill to maintain EGW inspiration :laugh:

Answer these questions;
1. What is AMALGAMATION
2. Was there AMALGAMATION before the Flood?
3. Was there AMALGAMATION after the flood?
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
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.

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

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
You are obtuse.... <obligatory rant deleted here>

Answer these questions;
1. What is AMALGAMATION
2. Was there AMALGAMATION before the Flood?
3. Was there AMALGAMATION after the flood?

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??
 
Top