I don't know if it was Wyatt's idea. He may have promoted it, certainly. But I am not smarter than God, nor unscientific enough to say I can prove the non-existence of such a possibility.



The nearest we get to genetics in the Bible has to do with "kinds" and "seeds" such as we see in Genesis 1-3. There's no mention of DNA, ploidy, or any other such detail. As I've said, God is not limited by what we see as possibilities. He has a thousand ways of which we are not aware.


APL, are you God? Was Jesus God or not? If Jesus was 100% God and 100% human, how was He 100% like you and me who are NOT 100% God? Your mathematical logic does not add up with me. It's impossible that He was exactly like us. For one thing, He was NOT a sinner--we are. So He wasn't just like me--and you know what? I am very glad about it!!!

When the Bible says He was "in all things" made like us, you take it to be His DNA? I take it to be His circumstances. He ate as we ate. He lived as we live. He obeyed God as we must. In all such things He was made exactly like us. He was not made a sinner like me--that would not have been a thing, but rather a state of being. He was never 100% like us in terms of His state of being.



Your misrepresentation of my view shows you haven't taken time to understand it yet. When you are careful to first understand it, we might discuss it further--in a different thread.



I'm a biologist, APL, so I know that donkeys don't talk, milch kine don't leave their calves behind, rivers don't just stop flowing, the sun doesn't stand still in the sky, nor does the moon, the unbroken colt doesn't just let a man sit on it without some rebellious bucking, fish don't find nets cast on the wrong side of the boat to be irresistably magnetic, and sticks don't turn into snakes, nor do dry staves bear almond flowers and fruits--yet God, who made the "rules" is powerful enough to make exceptions to them anytime He chooses to. I'm a biologist who has learned from the study of biology just how powerful God is. I respect that power far too much to put God in a box and to say something that He is in charge of, and not me, cannot be done.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Note to Green - there are many more reference to heredity in the Bible. And we know that Christ came to share our heredity, unless you discount the SOP. Hard to match your cryto-logic that West Point so badly wanted you. But what does SCRIPTURE say, it is written, Hebrews 2:17 Why in all things it behooved him to be made like to his brothers, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

But then crypto-logic may say "like" mean "unlike".

Being made like his brother means made like his brothers. And Hebrews 2:14 For as much then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; To me, same means same. Is our flesh made up of DNA and other things? Yep. He was too. And did not have DNA? Fine. You have made a big deal that a baby must have breath... You did say, And this is contrary to scripture as we know John the Baptist in utero responded to Christ in utero, but you say He Christ had not come to this world. Cryto-Logic?And yet, the Bible says Christ was made like His brothers. His brothers had a full complement of DNA. Wyatt concocked a story which he has provided no proof. God does not annul His laws. He does not work contrary to them.

It would have been an almost infinite humiliation for the Son of God to take man's nature, even when Adam stood in his innocence in Eden. But Jesus accepted humanity when the race had been weakened by four thousand years of sin. Like every child of Adam He accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of His earthly ancestors. He came with such a heredity to share our sorrows and temptations, and to give us the example of a sinless life. {DA 48.5}

Christ shared our heredity, not half+1 of it as Wyatt claims.

Jesus was made in likeness of sinful flesh, with all the fallen tendencies, but He overcame the fallen nature of his lineage. He never sinned or had a thought to sin only because of His character which was perfect from eternity.

Jesus came with the covering of a spotless character, overcoming temptation, making it possible through faith in Him to overcome our fallen positions. For it is impossible for an unclean thing to make itself clean.

He was fully man in fallen imperfect flesh, but without spot.

What Mr Wyatt did was discover something that is unfathomable, and he attempted to understand it in a short amount of time when we will think on these things for eternity, and still it will be a mystery even in perfect minds, and you think these things are proof that he was not who he claimed to be? A fraud?

When a man walks into a cave and comes out with evidence that he didn't walk into the cave with, why deny that he walked into the cave? Others were there but only those who were pure of heart were permitted to even be around the event. Then, through disbelief they separated themselves one by one mainly from the pressure that other people placed on them. But Ronny died with these words on his lips. If he was a fraud even the most hardcore liars repent before death if they know ANYTHING about God. Even his sons were fully convicted that he was who he claimed to be to their dying days. Lets see you do that holding on to a lie?

Ron Wyatt said, when the Sunday law comes then we will see the tablets of stone as evidence, ***** STAFF EDIT *****

Brother Ron brought and tested blood samples that had elements that prove it was not from two earthly parents. That's all the evidence I needed. Most of you act like his judge ***** STAFF EDIT *****

Those who have a "wait and see" attitude are much better off than anyone arguing against Ron as a Christian. ***** STAFF EDIT *****

Yeah? Where is the evidence? As EGW says, "God never asks us to believe, without giving sufficient evidence." Ronny's word is insufficient evidence. See: http://www.ldolphin.org/wyatt1.html I know this man for over half of my life. I'll quote a few paragraphs for those who do not want to click the link describing a Middle East trip with Wyatt and the delusion under which he lived. He says that Wyatt was NOT a fraud! Perhaps only mentally ill. Brandstater is always diplomatic in his works, No ***** STAFF EDIT ***** for him. And yet he thoroughly reveals that Wyatt could not produce any real evidence and that he was a fake.

Our team proceeded to the Garden Tomb, whose custodians were expecting our arrival. Wyatt had negotiated cordially and successfully with them. With an assortment of gardening tools we set to work, moving a large pile of rubble and rock which had accumulated where Wyatt had probed earlier. Over several days we were able to excavate our way down into the same cave system that Wyatt had explored two years before. I'm sorry to report that in the end we came up empty-handed. The connecting channel through which Wyatt had claimed to see the furniture was not there. On the final day of excavation, when we could not see the internal cavern landmarks that Wyatt had predicted, Ron himself finally climbed down into the dim space. After a long time he emerged, looking confused. As we waited respectfully to hear his report, he mumbled a few words like: "It's not the same; it's changed. It's not the way I remember it." There was no opening to be seen, giving a view into an adjacent cavern. There was nothing. In the process of our digging we had come up with a few interesting little objects from Roman times, but they were irrelevant to our main goal.

Our team was disappointed, puzzled, disillusioned. We had enjoyed ten days of close fellowship, with daily shared prayer times, and an excited anticipation of momentous events just before us. Now all those hopes came crashing down. And sadly, Wyatt was not man enough to come clean, to apologize for bringing us on a wild goose chase, or to attempt any kind of explanation. We kept expecting some sort of statement, but he just remained silent, withdrawn. And we were too stunned, and perhaps too sorry for him in his confusion, to demand that he explain.

To this day I cannot give a rational account for the extreme misguidedness that Wyatt revealed. What was happening in his head? His participation in our group worship times had left all of us in no doubt about his sincerity and his devotion to Scripture. He was a competent Bible scholar. He was a brother. Yet he had misled us terribly, and had offered no words of regret or apology or explanation. I have reviewed the whole story many times since then, and am convinced that the church administrator was right: Wyatt might be mistaken, but he himself believed that what he had originally shared was true.

From medical school I remember hearing of a rare state of mind, with a long Latin name, that led its victims to concoct marvelously detailed accounts of events that were pure fabrications, yet which the story-teller himself had come to believe were absolutely true. I am inclined to believe that Wyatt was a florid example of this disorder. He was not a deliberate liar, a fraud. And some of his observations had merit. But I am convinced that some of his "discoveries" were matters which underwent transcription in his mind, and he came to believe as true certain ideas and observations that in fact were his own inventions.

This opinion became confirmed in my mind some time after the Jerusalem expedition. Wyatt was trying to convince everyone of the validity of his site for Noah's Ark. And in trying to convince me, he described some extraordinary details of the rock-and-earth formation that he believed gives us an outline of the Ark. He told me of probing with a tool into the earthen mound, and breaking into a cavity in which he could see--actually see--the remains of corroded metal "brackets" that he presumed were part of the Ark's construction. This description caught my attention--all of it. If Wyatt's report was factual, then we should get serious about his site for the Ark. But was Wyatt a trustworthy observer and reporter? Months later I followed up on this story, referring to my long-time friend John Baumgardner, who had personally visited Wyatt's Ark site, and had subjected the whole area to minute scrutiny, including a survey with penetrating radar. When I described to John the eyewitness report of Wyatt, he simply laughed and dismissed the whole thing. He assured me, beyond any doubt, that the Ark site under study revealed no cavitation as described by Wyatt, and that the description given to me was entirely a fabrication.

So there you have it. I am a long-time member of the S.D.A. fraternity, and have a high regard for Scripture and for handling its text in a responsible way. I am embarrassed that Wyatt, who identified himself with my community of faith, should turn out to be an unreliable witness to important archaeological data. I cannot put any confidence in his opinions, his assertions, or his declared eyewitness reports. Yet the man I knew, now at rest, was truly a man of The Word. He knew his Bible, and I heard him give impressive expositions of some difficult passages. In full verbal flight he could be eloquent. I expect his Bible study class was a good one. Yet he was sadly flawed. From close personal acquaintance, I cling to the belief that he was sincere, at the same time as he was woefully mistaken. It was through some quirk of mental dysfunction that he came himself to believe as true certain facts and stories that were his own inventions.

I must add one further cautionary note. Wyatt was a persuasive talker, and succeeded in firing the imaginations of many good people in church pews. But I do not know of any S.D.A. scholar who has given him serious favorable attention. He is an embarrassment to them. I have had some correspondence with Jim Pinkoski,* who was an ardent supporter. I have had no contact with Jonathan Gray; my friends and colleagues in Australia describe him as a publicity man, perhaps devoted as much to profit as to truth. Wyatt's claims have been reviewed and critiqued exhaustively by Drs.Colin and Russell Standish, who published a book on these matters, and also by Dr. David Pennington. These critics are in Australia; they all conclude that his claims and conclusions are in serious error.

Now you can understand why I have laid aside the claims of Ron Wyatt, and only speak my views when a respected colleague turns up with a curious interest. I feel an obligation to help people hear a balanced first-hand report. At the same time I remain grateful to this extraordinary but flawed fellow-pilgrim for opening for me a door into some memorable adventures.

In the name of Jesus APL are you the one claiming to have known Ron Wyatt half your life. I adjure you in the name of Jesus to answer very carefully. Angels are recording your every move here.

I would like to draw peoples attention to some very important points in that so called testimony. Since you APL have made statements against someone you claim to have known half your life (If that is not the case then you intentionally structured the sentence to make it look like you were saying this because that sentence is not in the quote).... This is what you get. Bear false witness, get the wrath. In that article it is stated by Dr Brandstater...

#1; I had first met him (Ron), many months before, in the Hotel Ararat in Dogubeyazit, at the foot of Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey. The hotel's humble foyer was buzzing with the comings and goings of men hunting for Noah's Ark. Amongst them all, Wyatt stood out, a tall impressive bearded figure, striding around with great self-assurance."

"The hotel was BUZZING with the Comings and goings of men hunting for Noah's ark"? Why? BECAUSE RON HAD SHOWED THE SITE TO THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT AND THEY BELIEVED HIM BECAUSE OF THE PROOF! They built a million dollar road and visitor center around that site because of the PROOF, and this is the ONLY reason Bernard Brandstater was there, he was STALKING RON after hearing of the discovery like every other blood sucker that "mysteriously" showed up there that summer. I would love to hear Dr Brandsteter defend that. Ron HAD found the site, they weren't LOOKING any more, they found it! It wasn't like there were a hundred different groups of people BUZZING that tiny little hotel to look elsewhere, they were all there because of Ron. That's why the DR showed up in TURKEY! Then Ron took him under his wing and showed him everything and the ingrate turned on him because God wouldn't permit that unfaithful Judas to see the Ark.

#2 "Our team proceeded to the Garden Tomb, whose custodians were expecting our arrival. Wyatt had negotiated cordially and successfully with them."

How many of you fraud claimers say Ron never got ANY permit to dig IN THE GARDEN TOMB AREA? But here Bernard Brandstater is testifying that Ron had not only been given permission but that this was one of the several times he had already dug there. This one piece of evidence proves most of those who deny his claims are liars. So according to the antiquity officers in Israel, Mr Brandstater is a liar because they claim they never issued ANY permits or permitted him to dig in any case! (One of the biggest points he argues publicly about in the WIKI page he started)

#3; "With an assortment of gardening tools we set to work, moving a large pile of rubble and rock which had accumulated where Wyatt had probed earlier. Over several days we were able to excavate our way down into the same cave system that Wyatt had explored two years before... then he says "We had enjoyed ten days of close fellowship"

In TEN DAYS USING GARDENING TOOLS they dug down 30 feet then buried the site again (which was demanded by the Israeli antiquity officers) ??? He keeps saying "OUR TEAM" when it was him and Ron and his son. EVEN IF THEY DUG FOR A MONTH they couldn't do that. WITH GARDENING TOOLS hahahahahahaha. That's too funny.

#3 "It had been hidden there, he said, by the priests during the Babylonian siege in 586 BC. As he told it, it was a gripping story, and somewhat believable to someone with a romantic bent. It wasn't hard to imagine the senior Levites, foreseeing the imminent collapse of Jerusalem's defenses, plotting to hide the precious furnishings, during midnight darkness, in a secret cavern in the no-man's land outside the city walls. Wyatt not only constructed this story... I am a long-time member of the S.D.A. fraternity."

So as a long time member of the SDA "FRATERNITY" Mr Brandstater should believe the Spirit of Prophecy eh?

Ellen White wrote...

"Before the temple was destroyed, God made known to a few of His faithful servants the fate of the temple, which was the pride of Israel, and which they regarded with idolatry, while they were sinning against God. He also revealed to them the captivity of Israel. These righteous men, just before the destruction of the temple, removed the sacred ark containing the tables of stone, and with mourning and sadness, secreted it in a cave where it was to be hid from the people of Israel, because of their sins, and was to be no more restored to them. That sacred ark is yet hid. It has never been disturbed since it was secreted."--4SG 114, 115 (1864);1SP 414 (1870); SR 195.

That was in 1864 that she wrote this and if Mr Brandstater really is a Seventh Day Adventist (Works at Loma Linda University) and as "close acquaintance" with Ron as he claimed he should have known this quote existed, because Ron used to quote it ALL THE TIME. So who is right? GOD and His Spirit given through Mrs White or Mr Brandstater? As Seventh Day Adventists you should be able to answer that question, if you really are an Adventist.

#4: "Many months later Wyatt suddenly turned up in my town, Redlands. He phoned me and I invited him for an update chat."

After Mr Brandstater stalked Ron all the way to Turkey he has the nerve to claim this? Mr Brandstater had a man crush on Ron as you should be able to tell by his earlier statement "Amongst them all, Wyatt stood out, a tall impressive bearded figure, striding around with great self-assurance." Or does anyone really think that Mr Brandstater just happened to show up in Turkey during one of Ron's visits there? The man is a glory hound and that is why he stalked Ron all the way to Turkey.

#5 "it was a gripping story, and somewhat believable to someone with a romantic bent." "What could I say to an invitation like this? Was this serious archeology, or was it an Indiana Jones adventure?"

In HIS MIND maybe, but that was not what motivated Ron Wyatt.

This idiot even gets into arguments with Wikipedia about these issues... This is posted on the WIKI page he started to berate Ron after his death...

"Why hasn't the wiki-Editors (one of which is also editor of the anti-creationist website Talkorigins.org) continued to put forth an unsubstantiated view that Ron Wyatt was a nurse-anesthetist in Nashville in 1960, even after this post was listed? And further, if Wiki cannot substantiate the fact with documentation that he was a nurse-anesthetist in 1960, why do they continue to allow that to go into print? Why is this article written like an anti-Wyatt tractate? 99.170.65.102 07:53, 21 April 2008"

Then in the article you quoted APL after one paragraph of what happened in Israel when Ron brought him there and he wasn't permitted to see the Ark, he starts a rant about how Ron was mentally ill.

God would not let this man anywhere near the ARK because HE (LIKE DANNY SHELTON) was not of the right mind. GOD sees the heart, Ron could not, so when he would bring someone God did not want there he would make it impossible to find the access.

If you knew anything about this situation you would hold your tongue APL, but it amazes me how people like you are willing to attack what you don't know.

EVERY TIME Ron brought others who were not of pure heart God would not open the path, it looked like a solid rock surface or the cave direction would change. Israeli records prove that 6 men died trying to recover the ark claiming to be of the tribe of Levi which is IMPOSSIBLE to claim. RON WAS AMAZED that they had found the entrance because NO ONE ELSE had been permitted in. "...secreted it in a cave where it was to be hid from the people of Israel, because of their sins, and was to be no more restored to them.

Those men who insisted on moving it, THEY DIED, get it? Do you want that result for yourself? Are you so bold as to reach out and attempt to steady the Ark without God telling you to? WOW! Sounds a lot like UZZAH! and seeing the result of that mans testimony I can see why he was not permitted in.

In this article; http://wyattmuseum.com/first-century-jer...0991#more-10991

Richard Rives and Wayne Farris got permission to dig and guess what they found?

"IN 2005 subsurface excavations resulted in the preliminary documentation of the crucifixion site as described by Ron Wyatt. In addition we were able to gain new insight as to the surrounding buildings and the cistern with its plastered walls." (EXACTLY AS RON CLAIMED)

"Those excavations were extremely dangerous. After consulting with safety engineers from the Israel Antiquities Authority it was determined that the only reasonable way to continue was to remove the material that had been deposited over thousands of years – an excavation requiring the removal of as much as twelve thousand cubic feet of debris – the equivalent of forty dump truck loads."

But Dr Brandstater says they dug it out and put it back in ten days? HAHAHAHAHA hahahahahahaha. ROTFL.

These men weren't permitted either because they also have their own motivations, but they haven't gone as far as you to try to discredit the man.

God led Ron so the faithful will know when the tablets come to light. It's in God's time but you will not like what is about to happen to you APL and every other person willing to lie in the name of Jesus.

In this article; http://wyattmuseum.com/first-century-jer...0991#more-10991

Richard Rives and Wayne Farris got permission to dig and guess what they found?

"IN 2005 subsurface excavations resulted in the preliminary documentation of the crucifixion site as described by Ron Wyatt. In addition we were able to gain new insight as to the surrounding buildings and the cistern with its plastered walls." (EXACTLY AS RON CLAIMED)

"Those excavations were extremely dangerous. After consulting with safety engineers from the Israel Antiquities Authority it was determined that the only reasonable way to continue was to remove the material that had been deposited over thousands of years – an excavation requiring the removal of as much as twelve thousand cubic feet of debris – the equivalent of forty dump truck loads."

But Dr Brandstater says they dug it out and put it back in ten days with gardening tools? HAHAHAHAHA hahahahahahaha. ROTFL.

These men weren't permitted either because they also have their own motivations, but they haven't gone as far as you to try to discredit the man.

God led Ron so the faithful will know when the tablets come to light. It's in God's time but you will not like what is about to happen to you APL and every other person willing to lie in the name of Jesus.

I have read some of his 'discoveries' and I personally feel he means well but tries to tie them to Biblical claims whether they really are what he claims. Need to wait for others to examine them and give feedback whether positive or not.

Note to APL: Green didn't dispute the existence of other references. Furthermore, "heredity" is a loaded word that often has little to do with DNA. For your benefit, let me point out that "often" does not mean "always." (I know how you like to jump sometimes to less-than-obvious conclusions, so just helping you out here. In other words, you can correctly infer that I am allowing "heredity" to relate to DNA in some cases...well, now that I've made it explicitly clear, no inference is necessary on your part. That must be awesome, right?)



Jesus wasn't a sinner. Sinner and sinless are as opposite as east versus west. Yes, you may infer that I mean "unlike."


How did you infer that I might have said that?

At this point, we see a need to re-read the pertinent passage of scripture to see if what APL alleges is based in any provable facts.



What we see here is that the Bible makes no mention of the babe leaping at the presence of Jesus, but rather at the presence of His mother-to-be, i.e. Mary. John leaped at the presence and voice of whom? That of Mary.



"His brothers" also had sin. They also had different DNA than He had, presumably. For sure, women did. Are they somehow inferior because they are "sisters" and not "brothers"? I thought you were more egalitarian than this. You see, you cannot have a Christ who is EXACTLY like any one of us, and it is even less possible, via DNA, to make Him be like all of us collectively. I would think a high school biology student would have learned sufficient to recognize such pragmatism.



Mrs. White does not say that Jesus' heredity involved DNA. Nor can you prove that is what she meant. What is heredity? Why do so many arguments these days revolve around misunderstandings of the foundational definitions of words? Satan is really going places with word meanings, and none of it is good. Words are used to mean what they were never intended to mean, so that old truths are lost and new errors are introduced into men's thinking.

Sigh. Back to definitions.


That is the FULL definition of the word from Webster's Dictionary in Ellen White's day. Not a single one of those definitions directly addresses DNA. The closest it comes to DNA is the "diseases." But Mrs. White tells us Jesus was never sick. Pride would have been a sin, so Jesus never had that either. What did He have? He had our weakened, mortal body. We simply cannot be so arrogant as to presume to know the makeup of His divinity + humanity, especially as pertains to His DNA for which there is only silence in Scripture.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.