Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
The geology of Jersualem area is interesting. My opinion so far, of when the flood was, is somewhere around the KT level. That would mean, if I was correct, that the ark landed at that time.
There is a legend that the skull of Adam was on the ark.
He was supposedly led to the area by an angel, or maybe Melchizedek, who of course is Jesus.
The geology of the area is as follows
"On the high hills overlooking Jerusalem on the East, Southeast and Southwest there still remain strata of considerable thickness of those chalky limestones of the post-Tertiary period which crown so many hilltops of Palestine, and once covered the whole land. On the "Mount of Olives," for example, occurs a layer of conglomerate limestone known as Nari, or "firestone," and another thicker deposit, known as Ka`kuli, of which two distinct strata can be distinguished. In these layers, especially the latter, occur pockets containing marl or haur, and in both there are bands of flint."
So we have the first Adam, if this is true, buried where the second Adam (Jesus) was sacrificed. That would mean that a pre flood human skull was there as well. And that the flood was very deep in the geologic column. Since it fits with other things I have come to accept, I think it may possibly be true. Any takers?
Also of interest, is that they claim Eve was buried in the cave of Macpela, where Abraham (that tithed to Melchizedek, by the way) somehow wanted to bury his wife in!
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
Adam's skull? You mean he didn't return to dust?
Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Adam's skull? You mean he didn't return to dust?
Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.
Most people that die take some time to have their bodies get down to dust. That is why they find a lot of bones, and skulls.
If Adam lived 930 years, if the flood was something like 15, or 16 hundred years after creation, his remains would only be several hundred years old. (at time of the flood) Do you seriously think that is any concern?
Now, the mountains of ararat, were not where they are today, if the continental separation happened after the flood either. In fact, when I run Pangea animations, it looks like it may have been closer to Israel at the time. If the mountain building also came after the flood (pushed up land mass mountains, as opposed to smaller original ones) then those ark hunters are way off the scent!
All that is needed to make it possible, is a different universe fabric at the time. That way, the moving land masses would not produce deadly heat all over earth.
If we look at creation week, we also see a big water and land movement, that likewise did not produce the killing heat.
We also need to look at where the Tigris and Euprates rivers, etc were at the time. Not where they now run.
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
You are assuming it was a literal week, yet you don't take Genesis literally when it says Adam would return to the ground and turn to dust instead of having his dead carted around in the ark. If Adam had not returned to the ground, was his skull's brow still sweating as it worked to make bread?
As for your idea the universe had a different fabric, that is pure fantasy without any support in either science or scripture, it is simply something you made up to try to reconcile your interpretation of Genesis with the fact that the scientific evidence contradicts it. Just because it suits you to explain the discrepancy between your interpretation of scripture and the real world, doesn't mean it is what actually happened. Pointing out problems in Creationism like the tendency for creationist geological explanations to boil the planet, is not evidence supporting your idea, it is simply a problem with creationism.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Assyrian; 20th September 2009 at 07:37 PM.
You are assuming it was a literal week, yet you don't take Genesis literally when it says Adam would return to the ground and turn to dust instead of having his dead carted around in the ark. If Adam had not returned to the ground, was his skull's brow still sweating as it worked to make bread?
No, I do not assume that Adam was supposed to return to the ground creation weeek. Get serious.
As for your idea the universe had a different fabric, that is pure fantasy without any support in either science or scripture, it is simply something you made up to try to reconcile your interpretation of Genesis with the fact that the scientific evidence contradicts it.
No. Actually. No more than the new heavens cannot be this temporary universe that shall pass away. You heard of that? You believe it? You have any science to tell us the future universe state? No. What do you have?
Just because it suits you to explain the discrepancy between your interpretation of scripture and the real world, doesn't mean it is what actually happened.
Pointing out that this present is different from the new heavens coming means it is exactly that. Care to dispute it? Go ahead..make my day.
Pointing out problems in Creationism like the tendency for creationist geological explanations to boil the planet, is not evidence supporting your idea, it is simply a problem with creationism.
There are no problems with a new heavens coming, or with the creation state past. None. harping on a te,poral state present as if it must be the measure of the unknown future and past is insane.
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
Sadly there isn't a relevant point in the whole post.
Originally Posted by dad
No, I do not assume that Adam was supposed to return to the ground creation weeek. Get serious.
Never said you do.
No. Actually. No more than the new heavens cannot be this temporary universe that shall pass away. You heard of that? You believe it? You have any science to tell us the future universe state? No. What do you have?
You know, I have heard about it. It is mentioned in the bible quite a few times. Unlike your complete change in the laws of physics at the time of Peleg. Even science tells us this present universe is not going to last for ever, though if God were to bring the universe to an end before then, it hasn't happened yet, so there is no evidence for science to study. There is no reason for science to see any earlier change in the universe in the future. However there is plenty science can study that would have undergone your change in the laws of physics if they ever happened, from the geology, the radioactive isotopes in the rocks, astronomy, even our very genes should show evidence for the laws of physics changing a few thousand years ago.
So with the future change, we have evidence in the bible, evidence in science the universe will not last forever and no reason to predict and earlier change which hasn't happened yet, while your change in the laws of physics has no support in scripture and no evidence in science which should have plenty of evidence indicating a massive change you claim has already happened.
Pointing out that this present is different from the new heavens coming means it is exactly that. Care to dispute it? Go ahead..make my day.
No, I don't dispute the new heavens and earth, just that their relevance to your claim the original heavens and earth changed at the time of Peleg.
There are no problems with a new heavens coming, or with the creation state past. None. harping on a te,poral state present as if it must be the measure of the unknown future and past is insane.
So basically you don't have any evidence whatsoever supporting these wild claims.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Best I can tell, the change was complete about the time of Peleg, in the days when the earth was split.
What has Peleg got to do with it anything There is no mention of the laws of physics changing when he lived, however Peleg did live at the time of Babel when the earth, (or land it is the same word erets), being divided into different languages and nations. David even uses the same word divide, palag, to refer to languages being confused Psalm 55:9 Destroy, O Lord, divide their tongues; for I see violence and strife in the city. This is how the word was used, it fits the context of Genesis, there is no suggestion in the text of a breakup of Pangaea or a change in the laws of physics.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
You know, I have heard about it. It is mentioned in the bible quite a few times. Unlike your complete change in the laws of physics at the time of Peleg.
False. No change in our laws. No more than the new heaven state will be a change in our laws! There will be new ones. And, if the biblle is to be believed, there had to have also been a change in the created state.
Even science tells us this present universe is not going to last for ever, though if God were to bring the universe to an end before then, it hasn't happened yet, so there is no evidence for science to study.
False, that gets into so called science. The redshift and CMB that they use for an expanding universe is interpreted only within this state. Therefore it is religion, unless you prove this state always existed.
There is no reason for science to see any earlier change in the universe in the future.
I agree, no reason at all, it is too small and limited, and utterly unable.
However there is plenty science can study that would have undergone your change in the laws of physics if they ever happened, from the geology, the radioactive isotopes in the rocks, astronomy, even our very genes should show evidence for the laws of physics changing a few thousand years ago.
Nonsense! Noo change IN this state happened. We, along with the present decay and light, etc are the change! You miss the whole thing.
So with the future change, we have evidence in the bible, evidence in science the universe will not last forever and no reason to predict and earlier change which hasn't happened yet, while your change in the laws of physics has no support in scripture and no evidence in science which should have plenty of evidence indicating a massive change you claim has already happened.
No, science has squat. They have no clue, no possible clue, being a creature solely of this temporary state. The bible tells many things about the creation week, and early times of earth, that require a different state! In order, of course to be true.
No, I don't dispute the new heavens and earth, just that their relevance to your claim the original heavens and earth changed at the time of Peleg.
The lifespans evidence that. The impossibility of waters being above the earth in this present state, the slow growth rate and evolution we see here, and light, etc. If the bible is true, the past and future are not the same as this present universe state.
But, forget what state the earth was in, science doesn't know! It assumes. So you sure don't. FACT is that the continents moved. So the ark that landed in the mounts of Ararat, need not have landed in the present location of Armenia.
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
Linear Mode
