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.
Does that mean they had enough respect for God back then not to call Him a deceiver?We all learn that in the 18th century the young earth and much of the Biblical Literal tradition was incapable of explaining the geology that was being investigated.
Does that mean they had enough respect for God back then not to call Him a deceiver?
Did someone find a trilobite way down underneath a human, and suddenly God became either an evolutionist or a deceiver?
Or nonexistent?
Luke 23:12 And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves.A LOT of people of faith (honest to goodness Christians) accept evolution AND still believe in God.
Does that mean they had enough respect for God back then not to call Him a deceiver?
What happened since then?
Did someone find a trilobite way down underneath a human, and suddenly God became either an evolutionist or a deceiver?
Or nonexistent?
Luke 23:12 And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves.
Sorry, that does not support your claim, unless you want to claim that Christianity opposed reality in the past.
Noah's flood wouldn't do that.
You might find that in a course on mythology or comparative religion.Did they teach "Noah's Flood 101"?
I think that he was implying that Christianity and science are on different sides of the debate.I'm still trying to figure out what AV's inferring here by this quote. Hmmmm.
Sorry, I shouldn't be too brutal. As I said it is clear that not everyone has taken even an intro geology course and it is irrational to assume everyone should know basic geology. But it's always kind of frustrating to see someone make all these claims about geology while seeming to know so little about it.
This is your faith. I am NOT questioning or denigrating your faith, I'm questioning your version of geology. Your faith claims are not informed by geology so I should cut you some slack. I just wish you weren't trying to leverage geology in service to your beliefs. It isn't a good fit.
Your faith is yours and that's great. Enjoy it! But do be aware that when you try to use other people's areas of knowledge to justify it you might run into issues.
Agreed, but we aren't talking soteriology here. We're talking Noah's Flood and you tried to use science to explain your hypotheses about that flood.
If I were to make sweeping (and incorrect) generalizations about religion I'm guessing you'd take me to task if I didn't understand religion. It seems to me that you are doing the reverse of that. You make sweeping generalizations about science (incorrect) and expect everyone to give you a pass on the science.
You tried to trot out some science but it was clear you were outgunned on the topic, so now you are trying to run away from science. It's pretty clear what the game is here. I just wish we didn't have to play it over and over and over with YEC and various other literalists who wish to leverage science incorrectly to support their beliefs.
Why can't you just be happy with a "miracle" and leave science out of it?
Actually yeah, they did. It's part and parcel of the history of the development of geology! Every geology student learns about the development of the science from it's origins and the debates. One of the most famous geologists of all time, Nicolas Steno was an interesting character who found his science running up against a literal biblical interpretation in the 17th century. Granted he stayed with the faith and moved on to become a Bishop in the Catholic Church but the discussion was afoot from his early work on geologic relationships.
We all learn that in the 18th century the young earth and much of the Biblical Literal tradition was incapable of explaining the geology that was being investigated.
(Now to be hyperpedantic it must be noted that Werner's "Neptunism" hypothesis and the development of all rocks from a primeval ocean was not necessarily the Noachian Flood, but the general idea was somewhat related mechanistically to what many Biblical literalists might ascribe to.)
You should be clear on what you think that Noah's flood would do. If you can't come up with a working model then you should not complain when others refute the various ones that are out there.
Ok, you're an OEC.
Give me the time period you think the Flood occurred.
I've explained my working model many times (although I do amend it from time to time). It falls on deaf ears.
"Common sense" is just the amateur's way of admitting that he is wrong.I have presented common sense ideas that may have a 'scientific' aspect if you stretch them far enough, but I haven't belabored the point. I have made simple observations that anyone could make. like water seeking it's own level, and, seeking the path of least resistance. If I'm not mistaken these are fundamental laws of hydrology. I think I can legitimately apply them to the flood.
I defer to the bible on that one.
2348 BCWhat date - to within the century - do you think the flood occurred?
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?