Do you think that Pangea is Biblical??

[Paul_Wright_luvr]

i'm not sure

 

[InnerPhyre]

It's not Biblical in that the Bible doesn't mention God making one continent and then dividing it, but I don't see anything that says He didn't do so either. Sort of like saying "Is Saturn Biblical?" The Bible doesn't talk about Saturn, but it's up there

 

[BjBarnett]

It's not Biblical in that the Bible doesn't mention God making one continent and then dividing it, but I don't see anything that says He didn't do so either. Sort of like saying "Is Saturn Biblical?" The Bible doesn't talk about Saturn, but it's up there

nope if its not in the bible i dont believe it. show me some verses that says saturn exists

 

[RobNJ]

Is this forum General Theology, or Theoretical Geology?

 

[Lynn73]

What's the Pangea?

 

[PaladinValer]

I echo my Vatican Catholic friends in reminding all that things do not necessarily must be "Biblical" to be true.

We celebrate Easter and Christmas yet those aren't in the Bible either.

Edit: Pangea is the "supercontinent" when all landmasses were actually connected. According to plate techtonics, the natural currents in the mantle layer of the Earth guided each plate away from this supercontinent to, eventually, where they are today.

The word "pangea" comes from the (I believe) Latin, which means all (pan) Earth (gea, or gaia).

 

[plmarquette]

Continental drift ... separate the waters - Genesis ; how the continents seem to fit together .... east coast of USA and West Coast of Europe ...
http://geology.com/pangea.htm

 

[Oblio]

Is this forum General Theology, or Theoretical Geology?

When I first read the OP title, I thought it said:

Is the Panagia Biblical ?

and I thought ...

Of course !

 

[Matthan]

I am a Baptist, and therefore I believe the Scripture to be absolute truth. However, I am also a trained scientist, and I also believe that certain natural functions (such as evolution) also took place. Are these two "beliefs" incompatable? I do not believe so, and I think I could make a convincing case to that point. If anyone is interested, that is.

Matthan

 

[InnerPhyre]

I am a Baptist, and therefore I believe the Scripture to be absolute truth. However, I am also a trained scientist, and I also believe that certain natural functions (such as evolution) also took place. Are these two "beliefs" incompatable? I do not believe so, and I think I could make a convincing case to that point. If anyone is interested, that is.

Matthan

While I agree with you on the nature of scripture and the validity of evolution, I would still be interested in hearing your thoughts on the subject.

 

[ps139]

I think pangea was the world pre-flood. And after the flood the continents began to drift.

 

[Lynn73]

Edit: Pangea is the "supercontinent" when all landmasses were actually connected. According to plate techtonics, the natural currents in the mantle layer of the Earth guided each plate away from this supercontinent to, eventually, where they are today.

The word "pangea" comes from the (I believe) Latin, which means all (pan) Earth (gea, or gaia).

Hmm, I'm not sure whether I think that's biblical or not but thanks for the explanation.

 

[PaladinValer]

As I said; things don't need to be Biblical to be true. The Bible isn't a science textbook, especially considering the fact that the 1) the Hebrews who wrote it had only a fraction of the knowledge we have today of the world and 2) God isn't worldly and therefore won't inspire a worldly Scripture but a spiritual one.

 

[Dad Ernie]

i'm not sure

Greetings Paul,

I for one believe that Pangaia did exist. When you read the account of the Flood, not only did the rain come down, but the waters came up. The earth literally broke up and thus I believe created all the continents. Continental drift took care of the rest. IF Pangaia did exist, that would explain how Noah could accumulate all the animals he took upon the Ark. I do not believe in the local flood theory. If it turns out that the Ark is ever discovered ON A MOUNTAIN, I think that would be sufficient to prove a universal flood.

Blessings,

Dad Ernie

 

[Kripost]

When I first read the OP title, I thought it said:

Is the Panagia Biblical ?

and I thought ...

Of course !

Lol! At first I misread too.

 

[Paul_Wright_luvr]

It's not Biblical in that the Bible doesn't mention God making one continent and then dividing it, but I don't see anything that says He didn't do so either. Sort of like saying "Is Saturn Biblical?" The Bible doesn't talk about Saturn, but it's up there

DUH!! im just sayin, is it wrong 2 believe in Pangea?? i mean, its wrong 2 believe in evalution, or that the earth is millions of years old. i believe in Pangea but i was thinkin that maybe there was a Bible verse that said something. i believe that the continents got seperated during the flood.

 

[Thursday]

its wrong 2 believe in evolution, or that the earth is millions of years old.

I do not recall Jesus ever saying that.

 

[PaladinValer]

Evolution is science; what holds does it have against God and faith?

1. Evolution has always been misrepresented by those who either do not understand it and feel it to be a threat when it isn't. It doesn't say "the Bible is wrong" or "humans came from apes/monkeys," although it is often falsely stated that it does.
2. Evolution, in no way, discounts Christian doctrine, faith, and isn't a salvational issue nor would it interrupt such salvation.
3. Evolution is simply a process. God said, and things happened. Who is to say evolution wasn't that way? Cannot our God work through such marvels that we've discovered?

Pangea is no different. So what if it took millions of years of continental drift? The Creation did take seven days, but folks need to realize that, in Hebrew belief and linguistics, the number "seven" is a holy number rich in metaphore and symbolism. It took "seven days" for the Creation to finish. That's simply shows how special our universe is to God and that, upon finishing it, it truly was a perfect place.

I really wish Hebrew linguistics were a part of a minister's seminary training. I'm not expert, but what little I do know has helped me understand clearer and clearer that the Bible is chuck full of metaphore, symbolism, and hyperbole. What a truly glorious way for God to teach us proper doctrine and faith! What a truly marvelous way of teaching us what salvation takes and needs! What a truly intelligent and wise God we have! Cleverer than anything else possible! Yet we imply this cannot be because of some misinstruction or lack in linguistical study; study that is so essential to reading the Holy Scriptures.

What is Jesus primarily cared about? Some silly squabble about how He made heaven and the universe or how we should not only interreact with each other and that universe and also how we should interreact with our God? I'd say the latter.

 

[merryheart]

The Bible does say that the earth split in the time of Peleg...

Genesis 10:25
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother' name was Joktan. (Peleg: that is Division)

 

[snoopyloopysk8a]

The Bible does say that the earth split in the time of Peleg...

Genesis 10:25
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother' name was Joktan. (Peleg: that is Division)

I was about to post the exact same thing. That's the only verse I can find that does support Pangea. And apparently, Pangea existed after the Flood.