- Jul 17, 2018
- 3,282
- 676
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
The question is about why you mentioned psalm being written after the flood? What does psalm 36:6 have to do with the flood?
Upvote
0
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.
The question is about why you mentioned psalm being written after the flood? What does psalm 36:6 have to do with the flood?What other question?
And thus another failing of modern scientists exploring the past is revealed.
Why should conditions remain the same when everything is in Flux?
Check the posts before the one in question.The question is about why you mentioned psalm being written after the flood? What does psalm 36:6 have to do with the flood?
Indeed and yes you are wrong the earth wasn't spread out after the flood. Just the opposite long before the Flood as the context dictates in Psalm.Check the posts before the one in question.
That should explain it to you.
It all depends what the Psalmist meant by "spread out" and what you meant by "spread out".Indeed and yes you are wrong the earth wasn't spread out after the flood. Just the opposite long before the Flood as the context dictates in Psalm.
Paslm 136
5 By His insight He made the heavens.
His loving devotion endures forever.
6 He spread out the earth upon the waters.
His loving devotion endures forever.
7 He made the great lights—
His loving devotion endures forever.
8 the sun to rule the day,
His loving devotion endures forever.
9 the moon and stars to govern the night.
His loving devotion endures forever.
It's not about after the floodIt all depends what the Psalmist meant by "spread out" and what you meant by "spread out".
And it can sometimes be difficult to determine what changes are "natural" and what changes are the result of global human causes.We need to tell this to the climate cult guys.
That is a problem, they do not endorse catastrophic theory so they do not know how to deal with catastrophic events.Throw in tidal action, destructive storms, tsunamis and other extreme weather event
More than 3,000,000 men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is less than a million years old years old.Evolution requires an earth that is billions of years old. I recently saw a video of landslips and erosion that occur simply from wave action. That's before we get into earthquakes and volcanoes. Throw in tidal action, destructive storms, tsunamis and other extreme weather events, it's hard to imagine how the earth can be so old. Cliffs are collapsing into the sea in many places, including near where I live. I don't believe that the earth is 6,000 years old as I subscribe to the pre-Adamic theory. However, the earth in its present form is a result of Noah's flood, not billions of years of existence.
How many of those 3,000,000 believe a man can come back to life after being dead for 3 days? Or that a man walked on water? Or that a man healed the blind by mixing spit and dirt and rubbing it in his eyes? How many of them do you think know more about what took place than God does?More than 3,000,000 men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is less than a million years old years old.
Several thousand men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is not even remotely an accurate account of historic events. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of historic events.
I do not subscribe to baseless theories; I subscribe to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the earth that He has ordained that we live on, and to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the Bible that He has given to us.
Scientists are basing their dating methods on assumptions as if on week one of creation everything should’ve appeared as if they were one week old. They don’t expect anything to have any sort of age to it when it was created but Adam & Eve weren’t created as embryos, zygotes, fetuses, or even newborns, they were created as adults with the abilities to speak and comprehend speech. They didn’t have to acquire those abilities over time.More than 3,000,000 men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is less than a million years old years old.
Several thousand men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is not even remotely an accurate account of historic events. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of historic events.
I do not subscribe to baseless theories; I subscribe to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the earth that He has ordained that we live on, and to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the Bible that He has given to us.
Never underestimate the power of a large number number of people making poor assumptions.Scientists are basing their dating methods on assumptions as if on week one of creation everything should’ve appeared as if they were one week old. They don’t expect anything to have any sort of age to it when it was created but Adam & Eve weren’t created as embryos, zygotes, fetuses, or even newborns, they were created as adults with the abilities to speak and comprehend speech. They didn’t have to acquire those abilities over time.
Yeah it’s kind of like when people were saying “if you can’t prove that the earth is a sphere then it’s not a sphere”. The truth is the truth regardless of how many people reject it or whether or not it can be proven. It’s not subjective it just remains constant regardless of popular belief.Never underestimate the power of a large number number of people making poor assumptions.
And when a ignorant(without knowlege) person teaches the next generation... and so on... you get an entire system based on guesses and assumptions.Yeah it’s kind of like when people were saying “if you can’t prove that the earth is a sphere then it’s not a sphere”. The truth is the truth regardless of how many people reject it or whether or not it can be proven. It’s not subjective it just remains constant regardless of popular belief.
Science and religion are two very different disciplines that do not intersect. Therefore, science could not care less about the teachings of religion. However, individual evolutionists and other scientists may have religious beliefs, and among evolutionists we find Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and Taoists, as well as persons with indigenous and ethnic beliefs. Some scientists, however, may have no religious beliefs, and a few of these scientists may be atheists—but atheism is uncommon among scientists because evidence is a major component of science, and evidence that God does not exist is seriously lacking!How many of those 3,000,000 believe a man can come back to life after being dead for 3 days? Or that a man walked on water? Or that a man healed the blind by mixing spit and dirt and rubbing it in his eyes? How many of them do you think know more about what took place than God does?
Again, science and religion are two very different disciplines that do not intersect. Therefore, scientists do not base their dating techniques on anything in the Bible or anything else in any religion. Neither do scientists base their dating techniques on baseless assumptionsScientists are basing their dating methods on assumptions as if on week one of creation everything should’ve appeared as if they were one week old. They don’t expect anything to have any sort of age to it when it was created but Adam & Eve weren’t created as embryos, zygotes, fetuses, or even newborns, they were created as adults with the abilities to speak and comprehend speech. They didn’t have to acquire those abilities over time.
I think the best way to make my point is for you to present the different dating methods and I’ll explain how each one of them are based on assumptions.Again, science and religion are two very different disciplines that do not intersect. Therefore, scientists do not base their dating techniques on anything in the Bible or anything else in any religion. Neither do scientists base their dating techniques on baseless assumptions
The natural sciences are highly competitive! There are more participating scientists than there are sources of money to pay for their research. Therefore, each scientist has to be extremely careful to avoid making even very small mistakes. Moreover, let us not forget that science research articles are published in peer-reviewed journals and the peer reviews are arduous and exacting. Furthermore, even if a journal publishes the article other researchers painstakingly repeat the research themselves to make as certain as possible that the findings from the research are valid.
The very large majority of dates in science are based upon numerous factors rather than upon a single dating technique. Let’s not forget that a single error can cost a scientist his job, his home, and groceries on his families table.
But if religion does not have some basis in observable reality it is in danger of simply being fantasy.Science and religion are two very different disciplines that do not intersect.
If it's popular, there's probably something wrong with it: Mt 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:More than 3,000,000 men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is less than a million years old years old.
Several thousand men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is not even remotely an accurate account of historic events. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of historic events.
I do not subscribe to baseless theories; I subscribe to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the earth that He has ordained that we live on, and to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the Bible that He has given to us.
Sure, and countless highly educated people deny the very existence of God. I do not care how intelligent or educated people are. God's word is God's word.More than 3,000,000 men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the natural science and who are currently employed as scientists believe that the earth is less than a million years old years old.
Several thousand men and women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is not even remotely an accurate account of historic events. Fewer than 5 men and 0 women who have earned at least one doctorate in one or more of the disciplines applicable to the study of the Old Testament and who are currently employed as Old Testament scholars believe that Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of historic events.
I do not subscribe to baseless theories; I subscribe to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the earth that He has ordained that we live on, and to what God has taught us, and is currently teaching us, about the Bible that He has given to us.
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?