His sister

Or niece. Incest was allowed until sometime in Leviticus.

Sister

You answered what Lucifer was not who and while youre attempting that answer back up and answer the rest of my questions if you can because ive certainly answered yours

Ah, so Cain was an Alabama fan.

I would have to say his sister also

Please list your questions in a clear, concise format contained in one post, and we will do our best to give you answers to them all.

No its not really clear if Alabama is mentioned in scripture so it doesn't exist and never did

Here you go

Kent Hovind (Dr. Dino) is awesome!!! Yeah, he got jailed for tax evasion, but that was really a pissing contest between him and the government (I think they came after him because he was a such a force against them). One thing in particular that he said that I still chew on today...In the middle of a long list of genealogies, he draws attention to a man named Peleg and notes that he's the only one who had a qualifier ("in his days the earth was divided"). Divided? Well, if you look at the lifespan of the men before him, they lived hundreds of years. And those who lived after him had substantially shorter lives, like half as long. What happened? The flood!!! Peleg lived during the flood. So why did people begin dying at half the age afterwards? Hovind suggests that prior to the flood there was a canopy of water in the earth's atmosphere, literally a layer of water encompassing the earth. Water blocks UV rays, and UV is the worst degenerator, it kills! God wouldn't have created the earth originally without protection from the UV rays of the sun. Hovind says there wouldn't have been enough water within the earth to flood the whole earth (think about it, that's basic science really), so the bulk of the water came from that atmospheric layer. Whatever caused the flood was such a catastrophic event that it collapsed that water layer. (FYI, that could also be what killed the dinosaurs, along with the flooding) Anyway, you see where I'm going with all that, and it connects to what we've been discussing above.

Mold, probably. Mold is bad ju-ju.

Why not just create the Sun to not be harmful? Why create a harmful sun then a water canopy that floods the Earth and kills everyone regardless of their relationship with God. Unless somehow the sun only became harmful after original sin, which I doubt that's the cause of skin cancer.

HA!! THATS A GOOD ONE!!

The thought is that the atmosphere didn't contain as much oxygen in the years after the flood of noah

He was the angel in charge of worship.
The throne refers to God's throne, which he dwelt around. He wanted that throne because he wanted to be viewed as or more important than God.
Also, Ezekiel 28 is about as clear as mud as to whether he was talking about an earthly king, satan, or a combo of both (most theologians hold this theory).

Before sin, there was no death and no sickness, we were meant to live forever. So yes, the origins of skin cancer can be traced back to the original sin. I'm not going to enter the "harmful/harmless sun water cloud argument."

Don't forget about the mold.

I'm staying out of this particular thread for the most part. I've written extensive posts and have had extensive discussions and debates on here on these topics in years past. I'm tired so I'm not getting into it again.

One thing strikes me though, so I'll comment.

People prior to Adam, a flood before Adam...some have mentioned that that is kind of way out there....no proof at all...kinda whack. I'd agree. But so is Evolutionary Theory! Manmade, manipulated data and coverups to fit a Progressive agenda that gained enough support to be considered "fact" by just saying it is fact without real hard evidence. Kinda whack also.

ikillbux is spot on regarding the real issues at hand. People cherry pick when to apply God's word as True and Authoritative to fit themselves and their own beliefs.

Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.

Lucifer makes it clear that it has a throne and wants it to be greater than Gods.
WHere do you see he was an angel in charge of worship?

You left out the part in EZE where it says he has been in Eden.
Also what man has been in the holy mountain of God and walked in the midst of the stones of fire.
You left out the priestly adornment too

Yea I get that I just think disease coming about from a man eating an apple from a talking snake is allegory and not literal

*Not to mention the fact that the mere existence of "sin" denotes it has a creator, which in Biblical terms must be God, which is contradictory to the abilities of omnibenevolent being. You could argue not true because he only gave free will and then we chose to sin, but still he is denoting what is defined as sin. The roads led back to the Creator because everything has to come from somewhere. What I'm getting at is trying to reconcile Omni benevolence with sin and creation.

The ratio of 13C to 12C (stable isotopes) is used for a slight correction of the 14C data, which decays with time. My comment wasn't in reference to corrections for radiocarbon needed to fine-tune the calibrated ages. My point is that 14C is not used to date anything past about 40,000 years. Using 14C for dating rocks containing fossils from dinosaurs is like saying you can use a pipe wrench to fix a Rolex (not even remotely the right tool for the job, can't be done).

Other radioactive isotopes are needed to figure out the age of some rocks (not all rocks can be dated). For example, radioactive uranium eventually decays to stable lead through a crazy complex process (see below). I'm all about debate, but we're all going to be beating our heads against the wall with what is being said about science (14C to date dinosaurs) being so far from accurate.

The age of the earth, etc. was something that literally kept me up at night when I was in my mid-20s. I did several years of research and afterwards my faith was stronger than before. I also accepted that there were some things that I would never figure out, and I'm perfectly OK with that.

I see a couple options with there being many many lines of observations that the earth is very old (radiometric dating, plate tectonics, etc.).

1) The earth is very young but what we can observe is simply there to deceive us (fossils in rocks of organisms that never lived, chemistry of rocks altered to make us thinks rocks are older than they are, actually using GPS to measure landmasses moving is just another trick, along with earthquakes and volcanoes being concentrated around plate boundaries, and the list goes on and on).

or

2) The days of creation are not meant to be literal and the earth actually is very old (which doesn't undermine anything with God being the creator of the universe and Christ redeeming us of our sins). If you are dead set on a literal translation, read Matthew 5:29-30 and report back.