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.
I believe that the most likely scenario would be that he cleaned up the mess afterwards then, but what about eastern civilizations? They had civilizations at the same time, but didn't drown (since the flood was to kill everyone except the arks inhabitants).Not if God placed a hedge of protection around them and/or cleaned up the mess afterward.
Take the burning bush for example.
What scientist back then would have believed Moses' account of that bush that burned, without burning up?
They would look at it and say the same thing you guys say about the Flood, viz., "This bush was never on fire, there's evidence that says otherwise."
Same with Daniel's three friends in the fiery furnace.
In fact, in that account, Daniel goes out of his way to mention there was no evidence generated.
Daniel 3:27 And the princes, governors, and captains, and the king's counsellors, being gathered together, saw these men, upon whose bodies the fire had no power, nor was an hair of their head singed, neither were their coats changed, nor the smell of fire had passed on them.
Again, you guys would say evidence shows they were not cast into that furnace.
I believe that the most likely scenario would be that he cleaned up the mess afterwards then, but what about eastern civilizations? They had civilizations at the same time, but didn't drown (since the flood was to kill everyone except the arks inhabitants).
These civilizations came after the Flood, not before it.I believe that the most likely scenario would be that he cleaned up the mess afterwards then, but what about eastern civilizations? They had civilizations at the same time, but didn't drown (since the flood was to kill everyone except the arks inhabitants).
You might -- but someone who knows his Bible and his basic doctrine might be a little more specific.Haha, they will just come back to you and say that the dating of those civilizations is wrong and that the only people alive after the flood were those that were in the Ark.
Right -- and my DNA has "Made in Agaña" on it, doesn't it?Of course, there is a lot of evidence against that too, the stronger one being that all of our DNA points to human origins in sub-Saharan Africa, not the middle-east,
Ya -- you're so sure of what we'll say, you'll even post it on a public forum and look ... not as educated, won't you?... but I am sure they will say that God made the DNA look like that after the flood just to confuse us too.
Lacks of education breed interests in the wrong direction, don't they?Interesting how they will never say that Noah's family was black.
You might -- but someone who knows his Bible and his basic doctrine might be a little more specific.
There's nothing like a non-believer trying to sound like a believer, is there?
Right -- and my DNA has "Made in Agaña" on it, doesn't it?
Does AAA issue birth certificates, or are birth certificates road maps?
Ya -- you're so sure of what we'll say, you'll even post it on a public forum and look ... not as educated, won't you?
Why is it that every atheist, agnostic, and Heinz 57 acts like they've debated Christians for years?
Lacks of education breed interests in the wrong direction, don't they?
But for the record, do you know what this is?
If you do, you wouldn't have made that goofy statement.
For pity's sake.Did you notice that you "answered" to all of my points with questions?
QV please: 84Haha, they will just come back to you and say that the dating of those civilizations is wrong and that the only people alive after the flood were those that were in the Ark.
I don't see how DNA can point to a specific location.Of course, there is a lot of evidence against that too, the stronger one being that all of our DNA points to human origins in sub-Saharan Africa, not the middle-east,
That's a cheap shot.... but I am sure they will say that God made the DNA look like that after the flood just to confuse us too.
Apparently you're not familiar with the Black Heritage Bible, where they say just that very thing.Interesting how they will never say that Noah's family was black.
For pity's sake.
Here, let me try again, without the interrogation points:
QV please: 84
I don't see how DNA can point to a specific location.
That's a cheap shot.
Apparently you're not familiar with the Black Heritage Bible, where they say just that very thing.
(I think ... I haven't read it though.)
I expected that, but hoping for something new. I was not disappointed, this time a got a web page.Haha, they will just come back to you and say that the dating of those civilizations is wrong and that the only people alive after the flood were those that were in the Ark. Of course, there is a lot of evidence against that too, the stronger one being that all of our DNA points to human origins in sub-Saharan Africa, not the middle-east, but I am sure they will say that God made the DNA look like that after the flood just to confuse us too. Interesting how they will never say that Noah's family was black.
Galatia, France, Spain, Wales, Armenia, Turkey, Germany, Romania, Ukraine, Medes, Persians, Iran, India, Greece, Cyprus, Georgia, Moscow, Macedonia, Yugoslavia, Africa, Ethiopia, Egypt, Libya, Palestine, Persia, Iran, Assyria, Chaldeans, Hebrew, Arabia, Lydians, Western Turkey, Syria.Here's why: The Sixteen Grandsons of Noah.
Does this fallacy never get old?Are you kidding me?
I have never said that, and never will.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
And absence of evidence *is* evidence of absence.What I say is: There is no evidence that shows a world-wide flood.
Evidence shows that you do a lot of hand-waving in an attempt dismiss the evidence you don't like.That's different from saying: Evidence shows there was no world-wide flood.
Does this fallacy never get old?
And absence of evidence *is* evidence of absence.
Is it?
A -> B
means
Non(B) -> Non(A)
but it doesn't mean
Non(A) -> Non(B)
It might be that I don't really have the correct definition of evidence, but I do hope that laws of logic still apply.
Is it?
A -> B
means
Non(B) -> Non(A)
but it doesn't mean
Non(A) -> Non(B)
It might be that I don't really have the correct definition of evidence, but I do hope that laws of logic still apply.
For one thing, don't you use calibrated equipment that you built yourselves?
Let's use your example: trips around the sun vs birthdays.
If you assume one birthday per year, then you calibrate the birthday as one exact trip around the sun; this includes automatically accounting for leap year, adjusting for sideral time and whatever else.
But if the person is having a second birthday based on lunar years, then you say, "oops", and readjust for solar years.
False.Are you still playing this silly game? I've already explained to you how science has confirmed the past state of the universe was the same as it is now.
False. That is only what happens in this present state. It cannot be used to explain all we see.Let me explain it again.
Radio dating uses the radio active decay of a material to see how old it is. You can read a good explanation of it HERE. In short, it relies on the known rate at which one material decays into another.
Nope. You make the same mistake of assuming decay however slow or fast!There are several different techniques. For example, we can see how material A decays into material B, and there can be another techniques that measurs how Material X decays into Materal Y.
Now, let's assume that dad is correct for a moment, and in the past we had A --> B decay and X --> Y decay that were at different rates than what we see today. Specifically, let's assume that A decayed to B slower than it does today, and X decayed to Y faster than it does today.
I say last week was real.I say that this "different state past" was everything before last Thursday. I say the universe was created last Thursday, with everything in it, including memories. Everything was created with embedded age and embedded history. Now, prove me wrong.
No. Is he a nice guy?Are you a friend of Gene Ray?
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?