Another Flood Question

[AV1611VET]

Meanwhile this is a favorite picture of mine, no flood believer has been able to explain how this was formed,

LOL -- Just what I figured ... meandering streams.

And how many times have I explained those now; and explained them with Scripture?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Makes a good statement... are you sure no competent person, other than Peter (2 Peter 3: 4-8) would offer an explanation of some kind? Or is a little bit of water and a whole lot of time the only answer?

That has nothing to do with the topic at hand. But, yes, a bit of water and a lot of time is the only answer, or to put it another way, all flood explanations have been thoroughly refuted in multiple ways. It is an error to interpret Genesis literally, by doing so you end up claiming that God lied, whether you realize it or not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

LOL -- Just what I figured ... meandering streams.

And how many times have I explained those now; and explained them with Scripture?

Not once. You are a prime example of someone that only has failed explanations. But then you also have admitted to believing in a lying God, though you later of course deny that.

 

[I'm_Sorry]

-_- did you just quote me as "..." to avoid actually addressing anything said in my post?

No

 

[Ophiolite]

-_- I just can't understand people never noticing the moon out during the day. Especially not with the recent solar eclipse hype in the United States.

In fairness to them I recount this tale. Several decades ago, while living in Singapore, I was moving aparment. This involved three trips one evening using a pick-up and assisted by a colleague. As we drove through the city we noticed several people looking up at the sky and we exchanged puzzled looks with each other, thinking "what are they looking at". The following morning there were newpaper reports on the previous night's lunar eclipse! Almost anyone is capable of stupidity, but I agree it requires a special dedication to deliver it continually.

 

[PsychoSarah]

No

Then why didn't you respond to anything I actually said?

 

[I'm_Sorry]

Then why didn't you respond to anything I actually said?

Because I don't want to go tit for tat. (convicted not to, in my heart)

Instead I took the path of the real reason I am here.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Be careful where your mind and carnal tradition leads you

Are you taking your own advice?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[christianforumsuser]

Anyone can say things...what use is telling you if I think I do as my own witness
If I were carnally minded I'd be quite a fool on the wrong track

 

[inquiring mind]

That has nothing to do with the topic at hand. But, yes, a bit of water and a lot of time is the only answer, or to put it another way, all flood explanations have been thoroughly refuted in multiple ways. It is an error to interpret Genesis literally, by doing so you end up claiming that God lied, whether you realize it or not.

What exactly are you referring to... that has nothing to do with the topic at hand?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Anyone can say things...what use is telling you if I think I do as my own witness
If I were carnally minded I'd be quite a fool on the wrong track

The Russian Orthodox have a word, prelest, it doesn't have a direct translation into English, but roughly translates to "spiritual delusion"--it is false spirituality, in thinking that one is spiritual when one isn't; it is a spiritual disease. The person suffering from prelest thinks they have attained a spiritual state, or a place of holiness, but in truth they are merely full of pride and all their "spirituality" is mere hubris.

It is frequently the person who thinks themselves spiritual and calling others carnal minded that suffers from the delusion of false spirituality--they imagine themselves enlightened, holy, or closer to God and others lesser.

And no, I have no misgivings, I know I'm not spiritual--Christ have mercy on me and save me, a sinner.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[PsychoSarah]

Because I don't want to go tit for tat. (convicted not to, in my heart)

Instead I took the path of the real reason I am here.

-_- it's not a battle to address the points I make, and it makes you far less convincing if you are unwilling or unable to address anything I say about your position.

 

[I'm_Sorry]

-_- it's not a battle to address the points I make, and it makes you far less convincing if you are unwilling or unable to address anything I say about your position.

God requires Faith.

What would convince you if He has hidden Himself for the above requirement?

The greatest evidence for Him is His Son, and that I have communicated with you.

 

[I'm_Sorry]

-_- it's not a battle to address the points I make, and it makes you far less convincing if you are unwilling or unable to address anything I say about your position.

I reason from the Word of God, the bible.

In Genesis the sun and moon and stars are created on the 4th day, their place is in the firmament. Genesis 1:14-19

Chronologically this means heliocentricm is untrue (and the formation of planets).

The waters were divided by the firmament.

Genesis 1
6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.

The flood:

Genesis 7
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

This is where the waters for the flood came from.

Now I know the devil is real and men are lovers of money and this love for money is the root of all kinds of evil.

NASA is questionable and the date of the earth cannot be determined without, what I consider, fake space rocks within the paradigm of the heliocentric deception.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What exactly are you referring to... that has nothing to do with the topic at hand?

We were discussing the flood. Proving that the flood story is not to be taken literally is not attacking the
Bible as you implied with that verse. It may attack your own personal beliefs, but that only tells us that your own personal beliefs are almost certainly wrong, at least in this matter.

 

[HitchSlap]

If the account of the Worldwide Flood wasn’t in Genesis... would it be a conventional scientific theory today?

It's not a "conventional scientific theory." The only reason people assert a literal flood is because of religious reasons, not scientific.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I reason from the Word of God, the bible.

In Genesis the sun and moon and stars are created on the 4th day, their place is in the firmament. Genesis 1:14-19

Chronologically this means heliocentricm is untrue (and the formation of planets).

The waters were divided by the firmament.

Genesis 1
6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.

The flood:

Genesis 7
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

This is where the waters for the flood came from.

Now I know the devil is real and men are lovers of money and this love for money is the root of all kinds of evil.

NASA is questionable and the date of the earth cannot be determined without, what I consider, fake space rocks within the paradigm of the heliocentric deception.

So much misinformation. Let's start with the Lunar Landing, it is not dependent upon Moon Rocks at all. We know it happened because many of us saw it first hand. The trip to the Moon and back was tracked by both professionals and amateurs. If it was fake the Russians would have denounced it. The videos could not have been faked with the technology of the time. The retroreflector on the Moon proves that we were there, the list goes on and on and on.

 

[I'm_Sorry]

So much misinformation. Let's start with the Lunar Landing, it is not dependent upon Moon Rocks at all. We know it happened because many of us saw it first hand. The trip to the Moon and back was tracked by both professionals and amateurs. If it was fake the Russians would have denounced it. The videos could not have been faked with the technology of the time. The retroreflector on the Moon proves that we were there, the list goes on and on and on.

I don't trust freemasons.

Smoke and mirrors, secrets and deceitfulness.

Initial List of 33rd Degree Masons

 

[christianforumsuser]

How can anyone trust the methods science uses to "prove things"....as they have equipment and project charts and prophesy and predict and it doesn't come to pass
Weathermen can't do s))
Science is a mess...just trial and error and yet still barely learning a pattern
Tell me it's not so
I could bring in an expert pastor or scientist or whatever PhD and hear him talk on and on and on

I'm an elephant....I'm a sheep...I can fly....
Look...the graph says so...
Look...I say so....All my buddies say so....
But what evidence and reputation is there....so much money and time used

 

[AV1611VET]

Not once.

Excuse me?

You've read every one of my posts, have you?