Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes but of course that is only poetry. That civilization would not have had ANY CONCEPT of underground water systems or anything to that regard.The atmosphere was not the only source of water for
the world wide flood, according to the Hebrew Bible.
Scientific evidence you produced is useless when
they/you do not even know exactly what the bible says.
"all the fountains of the great deep broken up..
Genesis 7:11, Genesis 8:2
Nothing you said is supported by scripture and simply not true.Christ not only confirmed the world wide events of Noah’s day, He said the
same worldwide destruction would come about in our day—only this time in
the form of nuclear world war, he will come to save mankind from extinction.
The Apostle Paul wrote, “By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not
seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house;
by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness
which is by faith”.
Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noe were,
so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
This verse has nothing to do with the temple's destruction in 70 a.d.
When Adam and Eve decided to eat the forbidden fruit
they decided to reject revelation imparted by God.
1 First they rejected direct revelation from God.
2 They used there own observations.
3 They used experimentation, and then
4 They used human reasoning.
Precisely the ‘scientific’ method mankind used by modern science.
Precisely the reasoning you use, to get around the sure word of God.
"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man:
but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
How did Jeremiah know “[T]he host of heaven cannot be numbered.” ?
God asked Job Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Declare, if thou hast understanding. Job 38:4 (KJV)
For some the sure word of God is not sure enough.
I would posit that if water came up from 600km below the earth's surface, there would DEFINITELY be evidence of that; moreso if it happenned in the last 5000yrs.The atmosphere was not the only source of water for
the world wide flood, according to the Hebrew Bible.
Scientific evidence you produced is useless when
they/you do not even know exactly what the bible says.
"all the fountains of the great deep broken up..
Genesis 7:11, Genesis 8:2
Massive ocean discovered beneath the Earth's crust
containing more water than on the surface
There was plenty enough water to have a world -wide flood.
The Bible is not a science textbook.Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.
View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513
Absolutely 100% agreed Christians do not need to contend with science at all. Science poses no threat to both creation and the flood stories of the Bible at all. Once believers realize the creation is simply revealing truths about God, man, and their relationship in creation and the faith. And that the flood was strictly a regional one and perhaps God did it to protect the Messianic bloodline because Satan was running wild amongst corrupt primordial man and probably even endangered the salvation of Enoch (so God took him before he became corrupt too). Both are beautiful stories that do not need to fight against science.The Bible is not a science textbook.
All that matters is the spiritual truths we gain from the Genesis account of creation and the flood we don't need to contend with science and we commit a no greater injustice to text than give it a close-minded throwback literal eisegesis. The flood was regional and so was the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. They are two pairs of a kind. Two floods, Daniel 9:26-27.The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event. Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.
I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith. In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains. Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?
Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account. Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers. To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it. To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?
Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence? I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.
A clearly detailed, literal, historical event?The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event. Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.
I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith. In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains. Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?
Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account. Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers. To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it. To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?
Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence? I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.
The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event. Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.
I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith. In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains. Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?
Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account. Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers. To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it. To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?
Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence? I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.
It's also worth noting that the nephelim survived the flood. See numbers 13:33.
1 and 2 Peter include a lot of language in association with the book of Enoch. In fact, Enoch is referenced in Jude, as are other apocryphal texts.
The book of Enoch's literature parallels that of the mesopotamian apkallu, that is the rebellion of the watchers. And anyone who has actually read any of these texts, 1 Enoch, the book of the giants, ancient near east texts on the mesopotamian apkallu, hesiods theodicy etc. knows full well that they are anything but literal historical texts.
Michael Heiser on the mesopotamian apkallu:
The book of the giants:
1. no proof ive seen its written by moses.The only way to dismiss the Global flood event is to reject the Genesis 6-8 account written by Moses as a clearly detailed, literal historical event.
1. Those verses are referring the custom belief, they are not proof of a flood. I'll grant that their known world was flooded.Doing that requires one to also dismiss Peter's reference to the world deluge in 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:4-5, and 2 Peter 3:5-6, Jesus' reference to it in Matthew 24; 37-39 and Luke 17:26-27; and Paul's affirmation of all scripture being inspired by God and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in 2 Timothy 3:16.
Having a nonliteral interpretarion od this story does not threaten the idea that Jesus died foe my sins. Sorry. It may foe you but id hope you wouldnt trach your children yhat necause eventually it wont be enough.I don't understand why any Christian would take sides with the atheists in arguing so fervently against the Bible, since doing so undermines the very foundation of their supposed faith.
No he didn't. He just gave up trying to convince you.In this case though, even my best atheist friend has enough common sense to accept the realty of a cataclysmic global flood event based upon stories from over 300 cultures covering every continent on the earth and the presence of marine fossils on all of the world's highest mountains.
You keep conflating the "biblical version" with "literal translation".Of course he has to dismiss the Bible's version in order to maintain his secular world view, but what excuse or reason has the Christian to do the same?
If that's the conclusion you studied from people who should not be listened to or respected as scientists or anyone purporting to be rational.Anyone who's studied the matter much knows that there are several published models demonstrating the feasibility of the ark and entire Noahic flood account.
I've never heard one but just because they are reasonable doesn't mean they are correct. Show the evidence.Let the skeptics ask the oft repeated questions, but don't be surprised when they ignore the reasonable answers.
No you cannot.To those who understand and respect the Bible as God's Divinely inspired word, you can have confidence in the historical and scientific evidence supporting it.
You asked if I know more about the world that Peter, Moses and Paul?To those who reject the Bible's Genesis accounts, I'd ask why you think you know more than Moses, Peter, Paul, and Jesus about historical events?
It does not have abundant scientific evidence guy. That's what I keep saying.Here's another way to consider the viewpoint of any Christian arguing against the Bible's historical accuracy or authority, be it the issue of creation or the flood. Is it rational to reject the Bible's Genesis accounts which have abundant scientific evidence to support them while accepting the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus which has very limited scientific evidence?
"Faith is believing I things not seen".I'd suggest that logical consistency dictates that a Christian's faith is based upon the entire Bible's truth and authority - as Jesus and the apostles affirmed.
Theres some interesting docos on the idea that many civilizations have a Flood story across the world which seem to have striking similarities based on some catastrophe around 12,800 years ago.Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.
View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513
Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.
View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513
Where does the bible use the word "species"? It is a concept that seems foreign to the authors. And even scientists are unsure where species boundaries are.Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.
View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513
After rewatching the video some thoughts came to me. They mention a number of anomelies that seem contradictory to the traditional science view of gradualism. Or the gradual gaining of knowledge from simple humans to more technologically based.Theres some interesting docos on the idea that many civilizations have a Flood story across the world which seem to have striking similarities based on some catastrophe around 12,800 years ago.
Wrong. The kind of superhyperevolution visualized by the creationists to get around the limitations of the Ark just didn't happen. If it did, new species would be popping up every month. If it did, it's odd that no one seems to have thought that to be worth mentioning. And literature and art from those early times shows all the species already in place.A large ark and speciation easily account for all of it.
It's questioned constantly. That's how new theories replace old ones. Someone finds a more accurate description of the phenomena.But science has mainly been unquestioned.
you'll need to do better than that.Wrong.
prove it.The kind of superhyperevolution visualized by the creationists to get around the limitations of the Ark just didn't happen.
wrongIf it did, new species would be popping up every month.
No adult really believes stories like this.
Popping out all over the place:Wrong. The kind of superhyperevolution visualized by the creationists to get around the limitations of the Ark just didn't happen. If it did, new species would be popping up every month. If it did, it's odd that no one seems to have thought that to be worth mentioning. And literature and art from those early times shows all the species already in place.
You've taken years off my age! I'm a teenager again!No adult really believes stories like this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?