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.
I do believe that Noah's flood is a shadow and a type of what took place in Pangea 225 million years ago.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 *
?I do believe that Noah's flood is a shadow and a type of what took place in Pangea 225 million years ago.
Why?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?
The only way "replenish" can be interpreted to mean "fill up again" in Genesis 1 is if you believe in a pre-Adamic race.Irrelevant -- why do you attempt to redefine King James' English?
"Replenish...." that's an interesting word,
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?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.
I explained my view on "replenish."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"?
You stated what your view was, but not why you reject the plain meaning.I explained my view on "replenish."
The "plain meaning," as you call it, contradicts Genesis 1.You stated what your view was, but not why you reject the plain meaning.
Um, "replenish the earth" is part of Gen 1.The "plain meaning," as you call it, contradicts Genesis 1.
Take it up with Google please.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.
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.
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?
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.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.
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?