<<So, once and for all, I have never suggested that MODERN man existed 2
million years ago. You must have been reading someone else.>>
Then Noah, 5.5 million years ago, was not a "modern man"? The theory is more
confusing now.
Glenn wrote that right after the Flood "I believe...there were very few humans
(defined as creatures made in the image of God)."
So he HAS suggested that creatures "made in the image of God" existed then,
though very few.
Now he writes these were not "modern man." So there are two classes of "human
beings" now. That's a new one. First, "image of God" man; Second, "modern man.
Are there any anthropologists who believe this?
Next, before the Flood the Earth was widely populated with human beings who
had tools, language, etc., according to the Bible. Glenn agrees this was a
"civilization," but that there was a Dark Age between then and now, to wit:
<< Our civilization is separated from theirs by a huge dark age. >>
But then he suggests these people were not "modern." I'm finding it
increasingly difficult to piece together what Glenn is actually asserting.
Here is another example:
I wrote:
>> Are you saying
the Noahic line proceeded to re-populate the Earth in this 3.5 million year
dark age, yet at the same time evolution was forming the basis for what would
develop into modern man? How can this be?<<
Glenn responded:
<<I am saying that Noah's body morphology may have been different from ours.
period.>>
This doesn't answer my question. Are we descendents of Noah, as the Bible
states? Or did human evolution take place at the same time, leading to us
independently?
<< Now if you
suggest that God gave Noah and his descendents the technology, then I can't
argue with you. God may have done it. But I don't see that in my Bible.>>
I don't see any 3.5 million year gap in my own Bible. I don't see a
"pre-modern" morphologically-dissimilar human form described, or concurrent
evolution of human beings alongside Noah's line.
And I don't see any of this in science. I asserted that NO ONE in the
scientific community thinks man existed 5.5 million years ago. Can you cite
anyone who does? Can you give us any article that asserts tools and language
were known 5.5 million years ago? That there is a 3.5 million year dark age
for man?
For me, your theory is too dependent on what is not there (what you are
"asking for") than any hard data. Especially the idea that fully functioning
man existed 5.5 million years ago.
I would love to hear from others on this. Does anyone else out there believe
this? Maybe I'm missing something--some data, some experts, some positive
evidence. I'd truly love to hear it, so jump on in.
Jim