Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his firstborn was a prophecy of what God would do with his firstborn Son. There's also the Passover Lamb of Moses, which Jesus was the sacrifice without blemish that would atone for the people's sins and allow them to elude the angel of death.

check it out, there are specific verses that directly allude to her being the New Ark of the covenant: Exodus 40:34–35: “Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting, because the cloud abode upon it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.” (The Greek Septuagint uses episkiasei / overshadow.) Luke 1:35: “And the angel answered her, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.’” (Same Greek verb episkiasei.)

Corroborating history between the Chinese, Sumerians, Greeks, Hebrew, and even the Incan people would disagree with you. Just because you deny history for the sake of your belief system doesnt make it false. The Chinese date the global flood to about 2200 BC, the Sumerians date it to the end of the age of Taurus (Gilgamesh slaying the celestial bull) around 2300BC, and the Hebrew records, the most precise, indicate it happened around 2304BC +/- 11 years. It is historical fact. If you assume that other cultures lived through this era, you would have to look at their own writings and realize no culture dates their own existence through the Great Flood. Any culture that is dated through this timeline is merely modern day speculation without any historical evidence from the given history of any given culture

No, as I showed you, the early church fathers said he did not write it originally in Greek, the Greek texts are copies passed down from the original, so your point is meaningless. It was unanimous among early church fathers that Mark wrote his gospel after Matthew: “The Gospels containing the genealogies were written first.” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.14.5–7) “Matthew… composed his Gospel… Mark… made his record… Luke also… John last of all.” (Hist. eccl. 3.24.5–7) “Mark followed Matthew as his follower and abbreviator.” Augustine of Hippo 'De Consensus Evangelistarum' Book 1 ch w “Mark… made a Gospel according to what he had heard from Peter… but following Matthew’s order in many places.” Jerome 392 AD (Letter to Hedibia)

Actual evidence that demonstrates that picture. Most atheists just rely on pictures like that but dont realize theres countless pieces of evidence that defy the picture shown above. Dinosaur footprints in the same strata as human human footprints alone disproves the evolutionary narrative

it has been estimated that the probability of a new relevant functional protein fold emerging through mutating the DNA strand is approximately 1 in 10e77, which is: 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000......000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 "the estimated prevalence of plausible hydropathic patterns (for any fold) and of relevant folds for particular functions, this implies the overall prevalence of sequences performing a specific function by any domain-sized fold may be as low as 1 in 10e77, adding to the body of evidence that functional folds require highly extraordinary sequences." (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1532…) With this data we can estimate exactly how long it would take for mutations to be able to create a new functioning portion on a protein. In order to make this estimation, we will take into consideration all the bacteria on the planet, and the average mutation rate to determine how many total bacterial mutations occur per year. Also note, "e" simply means exponent. So 5e30 means 5,000,000...(with 30 total 0's) : total number of bacteria on earth: 5e30 mutation rate per generation: .003 generation span: 12 hrs on average First we have to determine how many mutations happen per bacterial line in a year. There are 8760 hrs in 1 year. Therefore 8760 hrs in a year divided by the 12 hrs in a bacterial generation = 730 mutations per year per bacterial generational line. To determine the total number of mutations of all the bacteria on earth per year we simply multiply the number of bacteria by the number of mutations per bacterial line per year: 5e30 x 730 =3.65e33 Given that the odds of a beneficial mutation to an enzyme fold are approximately 1 in 1e77, This global mutation rate is clearly not enough to satisfy even one successful enzyme fold change even over trillions upon trillions of year The reason an enzyme fold is so difficult to mutate is because it requires a long sequence of specific DNA changes that must be able to create an electrochemical function capable of performing a specific task. This is the operable part of proteins and enzymes that allow them to do anything at all, so it is absolutely necessary to know how something like this could emerge by simple genetic mutations. And the probabilities are unimaginably low. Now going back to the 3.65e33 mutations per year for all bacterial life on the planet. If the odds are 1e77, then that means it would take 2.7e43 years just to make ONE successful mutation to an enzyme fold. That means it would take: 27,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years ...to make one functional change to an enzyme fold through mutations to the genetic code. Given that the known universe is theorized to have existed for only around 14,000,000,000 years, we see how insufficient this amount of time is to create proteins through mutating genomes. Keep in mind that ATP synthase for example has multiple enzyme folds throughout, and that the electron transport chain itself has a multitude of proteins. All of which need to be in place and function properly for metabolism to be possible! So we are quite clearly seeing that even in the billions of years that have been ascribed to our universe, that would be vastly insufficient for allowing this probability to hit even once.

The "basic evidence in science" shows that organisms and populations can adapt but they cannot go outside of the genetic bounds of their kind. Mice remain mice, fruit flies remain fruit flies, and E. Coli remains E. Coli, despite countless generations of artificial selection conducted in lab experiments. 75,000 generations of E. Coli in the long term evolution experiment (LTEE) gave no indication that E. Coli was starting to become another bacteria. 75,000 generations in homicide years (given a 20 year generational gap) is 1.5 million years of hominid evolution. So if a bacteria can't become another bacteria in that time, how could an ape-like creature transition into a human? All the adaptive changes that are contributed to evolution are rather due to epigenetics, which is the change of genetic expression based on environmental cues. Antibiotic resistance for example is caused by turning up the gene for a detoxification pump which allows the bacteria to withstand higher toxic loads. The hallmark that shows this is the quick reversibility of antibiotic resistance if you remove the antibiotic from the population. Dont appease evolutionary theory, its the secular origin mythos and it has caused many to stray from the faith, including me at one point, thats why I'm so passionate about this.

Gilgamesh, the Sumerian's Noah, was said to have slayed the celestial bull after the flood. This is an astrological reference to the end of the age of Taurus, around 2300 BC. The Chinese date the flood to Gun-Yu around 2200 BC. The Hebrew account also puts it at this date if you follow their chronology. The Peruvian global flood account was also recorded by the Incan Historian Fernando de Montesinos to have occurred around 340 years prior to the conclusion of the second sun in 1,957 BC, which is 2,297 BC according to the Gregorian Calendar source. Again, this is very close to the Hebrew, Mesopotamian and Chinese date for the global flood. academia.edu/21067469/The_Qu…

There are 25,000 proteins, and on average their sequence length is 450 amino acids long. Let's assume about 100 different possible sequences for each protein: 25,000 x 450 x 100 = 1,125,000,000 or 1.1e9 sequences that would form a working protein. This still doesn't even put a dent in the probability lolol. From grok's numbers the probability of forming a specific 100-chain amino acid is 1 in 10^130, so even with 1.1e9 possible working chains, it still would be about 1 in 10^121 odds of getting ANY working chain whatsoever. Your theory is cooked dude.