DINOSAURS! Noah's Flood & other awesome questions.

[Hieronymus]

I see, a story passed down through countless generations (several thousand years) before being written down. Using current context of words and phrases ignoring possible meanings and context of the time, which could and is more likely different.

And you are wondering how Jesus walked on water?

Not realy wondering.
You don't believe that either though.
How about casting out demons?
How about feeding a multitude with a couple of fish and some bread?
And healing the sick, and making the blind see?
How about the resurrection?
And his ascension into the Heavens?
How about the Holy Spirit being sent and received later?
How bout his second coming? (in the future)

 

[Speedwell]

It doesn't fit your beliefs, does it?
You have to interpret it differently from what it says, like the worldwide thing, the Ark and its contents, etcetera.
...or am i wrong about you?

There is nothing in the Bible story which requires that the entire terrestrial globe was completely covered with water.

 

[RickG]

Never mind the mess the earth's crust is and the rock layers with millions of rapidly fossilized animals in them...

I am not discounting that. I am quite familiar with geological processes.

 

[Hieronymus]

The creation science does not present a different view, it makes stuff up.

Sorry, that would be the naturalists, with their debunked fossils and tortured radiometric data and only trying to sell their beliefs.
So let's not go there.
Both sides have the same evidence to work with.

 

[Hieronymus]

There is nothing in the Bible story which requires that the entire terrestrial globe was completely covered with water.

Maybe you should read it.

 

[Hieronymus]

I am not discounting that. I am quite familiar with geological processes.

You mean naturalistic models.

 

[RickG]

Not realy wondering.
You don't believe that either though.
How about casting out demons?
How about feeding a multitude with a couple of fish and some bread?
And healing the sick, and making the blind see?
How about the resurrection?
And his ascension into the Heavens?
How about the Holy Spirit being sent and received later?

Hieronymus, you need to understand two things about me. (1) I do not condemn anyone's belief in a literal interpretation of the Genesis story based on the bible and only the bible. (2) I do condemn the use of "creation science" to explain those stories. Not because I don't agree with them, but because they present misrepresented science which amounts to 'bearing false witness'.

 

[Speedwell]

Not realy wondering.
You don't believe that either though.
How about casting out demons?
How about feeding a multitude with a couple of fish and some bread?
And healing the sick, and making the blind see?
How about the resurrection?
And his ascension into the Heavens?
How about the Holy Spirit being sent and received later?

You're referring to the written Gospels, which are a different kind of literature entirely form the Noah story, written at a different time by different authors in a different language for different reasons. You really want to interpret them the same as the Noah story?

In addition, I am not a Protestant and not limited by the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. I regard the signal events in the life of Christ as being conveyed to us primarily by Apostolic Witness and merely corroborated by the written Gospels. So I'm not as worried about it as you are.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

I see, a story passed down through countless generations (several thousand years) before being written down. Using current context of words and phrases ignoring possible meanings and context of the time, which could and is more likely different.

And you are wondering how Jesus walked on water? (1) The story is not contemporary, i.e., no eye witnesses. (2) it occurs at night during a storm. Have you ever been to the beach and walked out to a sandbar that is barely covered by water? From the shore it looks like one walking on water.

That explanation doesn't fit well with the facts as reported by Matthew:-
Mat 14:28 "Lord, if it's you," Peter replied, "tell me to come to you on the water."
Mat 14:29 "Come," he said. Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus.
Mat 14:30 But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, "Lord, save me!"
Mat 14:31 Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. "You of little faith," he said, "why did you doubt?"

The raising of Lazarus from the dead certainly had enough witnesses, as did the resurrection of Jesus, as did the turning of water into wine. Also, I don't know how many years it was since the original events and the recording of same into written format, but remember that God was the author and would have been using His divine influence to make sure that everything was recorded accurately. Certainly as far as the Gospel accounts are concerned, their origins can be traced back to within a few years of Jesus's earthly ministry - much to soon for legend to have crept in. Matthew 14:31 above is just as true today as it was then. Jesus quoted many times from the Old Testament, as did other New Testament writers and not once did they ever give even a hint that what had been written previously was simply myths and fables. Remember, it was predicted that scoffers would come along in the last days and that would seem to be another Biblical prophesy that is unfolding before our very eyes.

 

[RickG]

You mean naturalistic models.

No, physical scientific evidence.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

You're referring to the written Gospels, which are a different kind of literature entirely form the Noah story, written at a different time by different authors in a different language for different reasons. You really want to interpret them the same as the Noah story?

I thought God was supposed to be the author of our Holy book?

 

[RickG]

That explanation doesn't fit well with the facts as reported by Matthew:-
Mat 14:28 "Lord, if it's you," Peter replied, "tell me to come to you on the water."
Mat 14:29 "Come," he said. Then Peter got down out of the boat, walked on the water and came toward Jesus.
Mat 14:30 But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, cried out, "Lord, save me!"
Mat 14:31 Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. "You of little faith," he said, "why did you doubt?"

None of the Gospels were written by anyone who knew Jesus or even of Jesus' time.

 

[RickG]

I thought God was supposed to be the author of our Holy book?

Says who?

 

[Hieronymus]

The only thing I am condemning is the creation science literature because it is misrepresented science.

How about naturalism misrepresenting reality (certainly its origins) because they decide the natural is all there is?
How can you be a theist, when God can not do anything? (serious question, not goading)
And so what if God is beyond the scientific paradigm?
Would you expect Him to be a product of the universe?
Then who made the universe (including the laws of physics)?
Or do you (you probably do...) believe that a pointless point in nothingness exploded into our universe?
The so called singularity, which had to have had all the properties in it to be able to explode into all of this.
Do you believe that God made the singularity with all the necessary properties?
Well, that would be a Grand Feat indeed.
God then would still be beyond the scientific paradigm, of course.

 

[Colter]

I think it probably has to do with the immense (staggeringly-so) amount of potential for variety in the genes of living things, so that they can change dramatically, while still remaining the same type of creature (e.g., birds remain birds, insects remain insects, fish remain fish, humans remain humans, etc). I don't know where this came from, but I've heard it said that the likelihood of a couple having two identical children is in the order of 1 chance in 10 to the power of 2000+, which is incredible, given that the known universe supposedly only has 10 to the power of 80 atoms. The power and knowledge of our creator is just mind-blowing (it would have to be anyway, in order to create our universe out of nothing).

I've heard this before, people who don't believe in evolution suddenly believe everything rapidly re-evolved from the life on the ark, that even Noah's descendants started popping out Chinese kids, Aborigine kids etc.. Its no wonder that these teachings haven't penetrated very far among the ancient dynasties and Aboriginal people who stretch back tens of thousands of years in the America's, Australia and such.

 

[Colter]

Says who?

The holy men who wrote it and derive power from it.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

Which proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the text of Flood story is 100% accurate history, the literal, inerrant, perspicuous and self-interpreting product of plenary verbal inspiration.

Absolutely. If Jesus endorsed it then it has to be true.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

I've heard this before, people who don't believe in evolution suddenly believe everything rapidly re-evolved from the life on the ark, that even Noah's descendants started popping out Chinese kids, Aborigine kids etc.. Its no wonder that these teachings haven't penetrated very far among the ancient dynasties and Aboriginal people who stretch back tens of thousands of years in the America's, Australia and such.

You've probably seen examples of twins being born of parents, where one child is white and one is black. How long did that take and yet aren't they both still fully human?

 

[RickG]

Absolutely. If Jesus endorsed it then it has to be true.

Jesus spoke in parables and made many references to the Torah.

 

[Speedwell]

I thought God was supposed to be the author of our Holy book?

The way I was taught about it, God inspired the human authors of the text.
What was your point?