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.
Hi, Frumious BandersnatchFrumious Bandersnatch said:Now does any YEC who thinks the entire world was under the waters of a global flood that totally rearranged the earth's geology a few thousand years ago have any actual explanation for the data presented in this thread?
AV1611VET said:Hi, Frumious Bandersnatch
It is not my intent to discuss anything that happened after Day Six of Creation; but thank you for the questions, anyway.
AV1611VET said:Hi, Baggins, nice to meet you.
A young earth would, of course, not support life. When you see pictures of the Garden of Eden, what do you see? Fully-grown vegetation and flora. Same with Adam and Eve: fully-grown and walking around. If Adam and Eve hadn't been created without age embedded, then they wouldn't have been able to walk with God and talk with God.
I hope you're joking, as I just bought a digitally-remastered photograph of the Garden of Eden, as it appeared on Day Six, from a salesman who said he was in a hurry to get back to Florida and had no money.Baggins said:You see pictures, products of men's imagination, they aren't photographs of reality.
AV1611VET said:I hope you're joking, as I just bought a digitally-remastered photograph of the Garden of Eden, as it appeared on Day Six, from a salesman who said he was in a hurry to get back to Florida and had no money.
Paid good moneyfor it, too.
Which is why I am asking what Adam & Eve needed stars to show a red-shift for? How does that relate to their survival?AV1611VET said:Hi, Steen
Who said God needed the universe to "appear" anything? My point is that He created the Universe with age embedded in it --- not: He created the Universe to appear that it has age embedded in it.
Again, according to the well-documented tenets of the Anthropic Principle, it is Adam (as well as you and I) --- not God --- that need the "unique aspects of the universe" to survive.
I reject literal days of any kind in Genesis 1. I see it solely and completely as an allegory.How then did the flora survive without the benefit of the Sun, which was created on the Fourth Day, if, say, the days were n years?
Frumious Bandersnatch said:The question for this thread is whether any believer in a recent global flood that covered the entire earth at the same time about 5,000 years ago can explain the data in the OP and the data linked in post 10 and those presented in post 20. using "flood geology". It appears not.
The Frumious Bandersnatch
That red-shift did nothing for Adam and Eve, but it does for us. It's testimony that the Bible is true.steen said:Which is why I am asking what Adam & Eve needed stars to show a red-shift for?
God put the plan of salvation in the stars - (Psalm 19). Ever wonder why it went dark from 12:00 - 3:00 when Jesus was crucified? There, just above the cross, was Aries --- the Lamb of God, Slain from the Foundation of the World.How does that relate to their survival?
I would too if I had a signature like yours.I reject literal days of any kind in Genesis 1. I see it solely and completely as an allegory.
This is off topic here. If you want to discuss the Omphalos hypothesis I suggest you open an other thread. (Maybe in General Appologetics)AV1611VET said:That red-shift did nothing for Adam and Eve, but it does for us. It's testimony that the Bible is true.
God put the plan of salvation in the stars - (Psalm 19). Ever wonder why it went dark from 12:00 - 3:00 when Jesus was crucified? There, just above the cross, was Aries --- the Lamb of God, Slain from the Foundation of the World.
I would too if I had a signature like yours.
That's because we can't stop laughing long enough to say anything.Frumious Bandersnatch said:Bumped because the data in the OP and other posts of this thread provide clear and unrefuted evidence that geological and physical processes operating today have operated for at least the last 50,000 years with no interruption by a global flood. The YECs here have been really quiet on this one.
In other words you are totally befuddled by scientific refutations of the YEC global flood and you have nothing to discuss.AV1611VET said:That's because we can't stop laughing long enough to say anything.
Tears aren't exclusively produced by extensive laughing, you know.AV1611VET said:That's because we can't stop laughing long enough to say anything.
Ya --- that's twice you've told me that. Steen is the one that brought up the stars.Frumious Bandersnatch said:This is off topic here. If you want to discuss the Omphalos hypothesis I suggest you open an other thread. (Maybe in General Appologetics)
Ya --- if it disagrees with the 1611 KJV --- it's wrong.Do you have anything to say about the scientific data refuting a recent global flood?
That's true --- but crying doesn't have you rolling on the floor, either.MrGoodBytes said:Tears aren't exclusively produced by extensive laughing, you know.
Is there an appropriate answer to this?AV1611VET said:Ya --- if it disagrees with the 1611 KJV --- it's wrong.
Willful ignorance does, apparently.That's true --- but crying doesn't have you rolling on the floor, either.
Fine --- I'll take my expertise elsewhere.Baggins said:
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?