Noah in New Jersey

[joshua 1 9]

Here's perhaps a better picture.

I do believe that Noah's flood is a shadow and a type of what took place in Pangea 225 million years ago.

1 Peter makes use of the word: Figure

3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein * few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us *

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I do believe that Noah's flood is a shadow and a type of what took place in Pangea 225 million years ago.

1 Peter makes use of the word: Figure

3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein * few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us *

What you believe is not superior to what the facts actually show.

 

[RickG]

I do believe that Noah's flood is a shadow and a type of what took place in Pangea 225 million years ago.

?

 

[bhsmte]

?

Common response to his posts.

 

[RickG]

Common response to his posts.

I have no idea what he is talking about.

 

[bhsmte]

I have no idea what he is talking about.

Not sure, he does either.

 

[AV1611VET]

You understand wrongly, as usual.

Sounds more like you're trying to redefine words to suit yourself -- "King James' English" doesn't mean squat when it disagrees with you, does it?

Why?

Are you one of those who believe(d) in a pre-Adamic race?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why?

Are you one of those who believe(d) in a pre-Adamic race?

Irrelevant -- why do you attempt to redefine King James' English?

 

[AV1611VET]

Irrelevant -- why do you attempt to redefine King James' English?

The only way "replenish" can be interpreted to mean "fill up again" in Genesis 1 is if you believe in a pre-Adamic race.

Something I assume you did at one time.

 

[AV1611VET]

Valentine, if you believed in a pre-Adamic race, why did you say this?

"Replenish...." that's an interesting word,

Why would you find it 'an interesting word'?

Was it to try and confuse me?

And if you didn't believe in a pre-Adamic race, why are you talking like there was?

 

[[serious]]

The only way "replenish" can be interpreted to mean "fill up again" in Genesis 1 is if you believe in a pre-Adamic race.

Something I assume you did at one time.

If that's the plain meaning of what you view as the one true perfect version of the bible, wouldn't you need to hold that view yourself?

What happened to "the bible says it, that settles it"?

 

[AV1611VET]

If that's the plain meaning of what you view as the one true perfect version of the bible, wouldn't you need to hold that view yourself?

What happened to "the bible says it, that settles it"?

I explained my view on "replenish."

 

[[serious]]

I explained my view on "replenish."

You stated what your view was, but not why you reject the plain meaning.

 

[AV1611VET]

You stated what your view was, but not why you reject the plain meaning.

The "plain meaning," as you call it, contradicts Genesis 1.

 

[AV1611VET]

Tim, do you believe there was a pre-Adamic race?

 

[[serious]]

The "plain meaning," as you call it, contradicts Genesis 1.

Um, "replenish the earth" is part of Gen 1.

But if the plain meaning of Genesis 1 is self contradictory, then the plain meaning must, as you are fond of saying, take a hike.

This opens the door to day/age interpretations, pre adam civilizations, etc.

Your insistence on which section of Gen 1 to not take literally is thus not biblical, but based on either personal preference or human tradition.

 

[AV1611VET]

Um, "replenish the earth" is part of Gen 1.

But if the plain meaning of Genesis 1 is self contradictory, then the plain meaning must, as you are fond of saying, take a hike.

This opens the door to day/age interpretations, pre adam civilizations, etc.

Your insistence on which section of Gen 1 to not take literally is thus not biblical, but based on either personal preference or human tradition.

Take it up with Google please.

I've wasted enough time with unanswered questions.

You're smart enough to stop just shy of exposing yourself.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The only way "replenish" can be interpreted to mean "fill up again" in Genesis 1 is if you believe in a pre-Adamic race.

Something I assume you did at one time.

What I or you believe is irrelevant -- what did the Jews believe? They're the ones who wrote it...

 

[TLK Valentine]

Valentine, if you believed in a pre-Adamic race, why did you say this?



Why would you find it 'an interesting word'?

Was it to try and confuse me?

And if you didn't believe in a pre-Adamic race, why are you talking like there was?

As mentioned, what I or you believe is irrelevant -- we didn't use that word.

Perhaps King James believed in a pre-Adamic race?

 

[[serious]]

Take it up with Google please.

I've wasted enough time with unanswered questions.

You're smart enough to stop just shy of exposing yourself.

I'm not hiding anything. If there is some component you think I'm implying but not stating, it is not my intent. If you'd like me to unambiguously state something I will, or I'll explicitly reject it if it is not what I'm saying.

EDIT: perhaps you are thinking of your questions to others regarding their view of people before Adam. You never asked me so I never thought to answer, but in the interest of clarity, I reject the idea that there was any such sharp bottleneck within the past 6000 years as inconsistent with what we can observe today. As such, Adam must be one of the following:
1. metaphorical
2. far earlier that 6000 years
3. one of many people alive at the time.

As for which of these is the case, I lean towards #1, but don't have any issue with the other two. I consider it a disputable matter and not theologically important.