Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Iraq: The cradle of Civilization
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Frumious Bandersnatch" data-source="post: 746048" data-attributes="member: 7449"><p>No you miss the point.&nbsp;&nbsp;The flood of Noah did not&nbsp;totally rearrange the world's geology and geography. &nbsp;The modern Tigris and Euphrates rivers are those mentioned in Genesis. The verses show that the people who wrote Genesis considered Eden to have been relatively near.&nbsp; I don't know about other translations but the King James version also mentions Ethiopia and Assyria, lands that were known to the Hebrews and speaks of the lands&nbsp;in the present tense, indicating that they exist at the time of the writing as they did at the time of the Garden.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;It&nbsp;seems clear that they are trying to explain the geography of Eden using landmarks that would be known to the reader and not&nbsp;using "preflood" names.&nbsp; You would think that if they were using "preflood" names of rivers and countries that just happen to be the same as those that existed&nbsp;after the flood, &nbsp;they would have said so to avoid confusing the reader about the true location of Eden.&nbsp;&nbsp; </p><p></p><p>"Flood geology"&nbsp;is contradicted by nearly all of modern science and by the very book of the Bible that it is trying to defend. </p><p></p><p>The Frumious Bandersnatch&nbsp;</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Frumious Bandersnatch, post: 746048, member: 7449"] No you miss the point. The flood of Noah did not totally rearrange the world's geology and geography. The modern Tigris and Euphrates rivers are those mentioned in Genesis. The verses show that the people who wrote Genesis considered Eden to have been relatively near. I don't know about other translations but the King James version also mentions Ethiopia and Assyria, lands that were known to the Hebrews and speaks of the lands in the present tense, indicating that they exist at the time of the writing as they did at the time of the Garden. It seems clear that they are trying to explain the geography of Eden using landmarks that would be known to the reader and not using "preflood" names. You would think that if they were using "preflood" names of rivers and countries that just happen to be the same as those that existed after the flood, they would have said so to avoid confusing the reader about the true location of Eden. "Flood geology" is contradicted by nearly all of modern science and by the very book of the Bible that it is trying to defend. The Frumious Bandersnatch [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Iraq: The cradle of Civilization
Top
Bottom