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.
For anyone who accepts a literal interpretation of the creation account and flood story, are there any places or landmarks mentioned before the flood that could be identified as a currently existing place?
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
For anyone who accepts a literal interpretation of the creation account and flood story, are there any places or landmarks mentioned before the flood that could be identified as a currently existing place?
Mentioned by who? They are all dead. And their works are all lost.
But, the land would still be the land. What do you want to identify about? Name of the land?
Mentioned by the bible. For example, does the description of the Garden of Eden give us any hints about where it was? Was the town that Noah lived in before the flood a real place in the middle east?
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Since the word 'Euphrates' is mentioned, it's fairly obvious the ancient scribes located Eden in Mesopotamia.
Is this an "official" creationist stance? Was Eden in Mesopotamia? Juvy can you comment?
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Is this an "official" creationist stance? Was Eden in Mesopotamia? Juvy can you comment?
I know what you are going. You think you are setting a trap, which would make literal interpretation difficult.
The problem is obvious and you are not the first one who noticed it. Everyone would think the Garden could be at the present Iraq. I am not sure what would be your argument. There could be several versions of it.
But, my thought is that the Garden is not on the current earth. Somehow, the "earth" then is different from the earth now. The idea is inspired by the "multiverse" theory in physics. If the Garden still existed today (must have a purpose), then we can not see it unless our spirit leaves our body. (everything in there should still be the same as it was when Adam left it).
Nevertheless, this should not be included in the question asked in the OP. The Garden will never be affected by the Noah's Flood. Any place mentioned in the Bible before the Flood, but after the sin, should still be on the current earth. I could not remember. But is there any such locality be named in Genesis during this period of time?
I know what you are going. You think you are setting a trap, which would make literal interpretation difficult.
The problem is obvious and you are not the first one who noticed it. Everyone would think the Garden could be at the present Iraq. I am not sure what would be your argument. There could be several versions of it.
But, my thought is that the Garden is not on the current earth. Somehow, the "earth" then is different from the earth now. The idea is inspired by the "multiverse" theory in physics. If the Garden still existed today (must have a purpose), then we can not see it unless our spirit leaves our body. (everything in there should still be the same as it was when Adam left it).
Nevertheless, this should not be included in the question asked in the OP. The Garden will never be affected by the Noah's Flood. Any place mentioned in the Bible before the Flood, but after the sin, should still be on the current earth. I could not remember. But is there any such locality be named in Genesis during this period of time?
So the multiverse is a silly idea but we'll borrow from it to make a metaphysical explanation of Genesis work since a physical explanation goes against the evidence. Hmmm....
What about the mention of specific rivers as mentioned earlier, are they references to the rivers that we know?
__________________ For free printable drum lessons with audio check out my website. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
So the multiverse is a silly idea but we'll borrow from it to make a metaphysical explanation of Genesis work since a physical explanation goes against the evidence. Hmmm....
What about the mention of specific rivers as mentioned earlier, are they references to the rivers that we know?
I don't think you want to say that. It is not my idea. Top notch physicists said it.
Was that river mentioned in Genesis again after the sin?
I guess you may wrap up the discussion and this thread should come to an end.
Was that river mentioned in Genesis again after the sin?
Gen 2:14 And the name of the third river is the Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Gen 15:18 On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates,
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Gen 2:14 And the name of the third river is the Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Gen 15:18 On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates,
One is about the Garden and one is after the Flood.
Linear Mode
