Question about the flood

[Queller]

So you believe the passage is lying or do you think Jesus literally was looking at all the kingdoms on top of a high mountain?

I believe it is allegory just as I believe that Genesis is allegory.

The problem comes when literalists take it as something other than literal but then insist that Genesis is literal. The two are written the same way; as a narrative describing actual events.

Seashells on top of mountains, fossilized trees going through various different rock layers that atheists falsely say are millions of years each, global flood legends in every culture, fossil graveyards that appeared to be from flooding all over the world, ancient cities under the ocean on the ocean floor.

I (and others) have posted rebuttals to each and every one of those. You ignored them.

Love your enemies. Bless and do not curse. Do good unto them.
I also believe the Bible uses both literal and metaphorical phrases. The Bible is not all literal and I doubt that all who you claim to be a Bible literalist would ignore the idea that the Bible uses metaphors.

And how do you determine which is which?

 

[Queller]

There had been animals on planet Earth for Millions of years BEFORE Noah arrived. The Smithsonian is full of their bones. Dinosaurs, for example, went extinct some 65 Million years BEFORE the Ark arrived. I know because I find the Agreement of Scripture science and history and they ALL agree IF you have the proper understanding. God Bless you

Answer the question please. Which animals, specifically, were on this earth and which did Noah bring with him? Don't just say dinosaurs, we have lots of other fossils. I'm looking for specifics. Were lions here but tigers came with Noah? What about marsupials? Did kangaroos come with Noah but possums lived here already?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I believe it is allegory just as I believe that Genesis is allegory.

The problem comes when literalists take it as something other than literal but then insist that Genesis is literal. The two are written the same way; as a narrative describing actual events.

I posted rebuttals to each and every one of those. You ignored them.

And how do you determine which is which?

Moving on from this thread.
May God bless you.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

God bless you!

Thank you so much.
May the Lord bless you and your family.

 

[Queller]

Moving on from this thread.
May God bless you.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It is written,

"So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you. But correct the wise, and they will love you." (Proverbs 9:8) (NLT).

 

[Astrophile]

Not looking to convince you. You are already without excuse that there is a God by His miraculous creation (Romans 1:20).

One can believe that God miraculously created the universe without having to believe in the Flood and Noah's Ark.

 

[Queller]

It is written,

"So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you. But correct the wise, and they will love you." (Proverbs 9:8) (NLT).

Keep in mind that I didn't mock you until you ran away in the midst of a discussion, leaving some very telling questions unanswered.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Either produce your "refute" (prove wrong) evidence/post of ANY of my views, either Scripturally, scientifically or historically, or everyone will be exposed to your deceit. Such exposure will ruin your credibility. Many will see you just like Trump. Amen?

Nope, I am not playing that game. I refuted you countless times. So have others. You need to support your claims with valid sources and the Bible is not a valid source for science claims.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I used to be an atheist. But God had other plans for me. Not interested in your disbelief in God's Word.
So I am not going to read anymore of what you say.

I always have doubts when theists claim this. They can never explain why they were atheists. And it is not that I have a "disbelief in God's Word", calling the Bible God's Word is highly blasphemous by the way, the probelm is that the Bible is demonstrably wrong.

May the Lord's love shine upon you.

Now this is really downright rude. It is too bad that the Christians on the site that do this can't see it. You of course would be highly insulted if I said "And I will be thinking for you". I know that would be violation of the rules if I said something like that. It should be against the rules of the forum for Christians to make statements like you just made. The simple fact is that I probably do understand the Bible better than you. A fact that you can't face and now are running away from the debate, confirming my claim.

 

[Aman777]

I think I took a wrong turn in the forums.
May the Lord's love be upon you.
I am moving on.

Apparently. Is your sudden exit because you have no Scripture which supports your view? Of course it is. God Bless you

 

[Aman777]

Nope, I am not playing that game. I refuted you countless times. So have others. You need to support your claims with valid sources and the Bible is not a valid source for science claims.

IOW, Use the circular reasoning of Evols who support their views with the support of other Evols? Sorry, but your "valid" sources are changeable half-truths which cannot stand when faced with God's Truth. Everyone can see that you have NO evidence of that which you claim....just like Trump. Are you Russian?

 

[Aman777]

The simple fact is that I probably do understand the Bible better than you. A fact that you can't face and now are running away from the debate, confirming my claim.

False. Prove it. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

Answer the question please. Which animals, specifically, were on this earth and which did Noah bring with him? Don't just say dinosaurs, we have lots of other fossils. I'm looking for specifics. Were lions here but tigers came with Noah? What about marsupials? Did kangaroos come with Noah but possums lived here already?

All the animals here when the Ark arrived, could produce children with the animals which Jesus made with His own Hands AND those which were created and brought forth by God the Trinity, from Water. His and Their "kinds" are identical physically and sexually compatible. Otherwise, you would have a bottleneck.

 

[Subduction Zone]

IOW, Use the circular reasoning of Evols who support their views with the support of other Evols? Sorry, but your "valid" sources are changeable half-truths which cannot stand when faced with God's Truth. Everyone can see that you have NO evidence of that which you claim....just like Trump. Are you Russian?

Wrong again. You do not even seem to know what "circular reasoning" is.

When you are ready to learn I am ready to help you. Since you don't know what is and what is not evidence why don't we start your lesson there? Or are you still afraid to learn?

 

[Subduction Zone]

False. Prove it. Amen?

I already have and have moved on to other topics.

When you are ready to learn I am ready to help you.

 

[Queller]

All the animals here when the Ark arrived, could produce children with the animals which Jesus made with His own Hands AND those which were created and brought forth by God the Trinity, from Water. His and Their "kinds" are identical physically and sexually compatible. Otherwise, you would have a bottleneck.

If the animals already here could produce children with those on the Ark, then what was the point of bringing any animals on the Ark? What purpose did it serve?

And since you ignored the content of my question, here it is again.

Which animals, specifically, were on this earth and which did Noah bring with him? Don't just say dinosaurs, we have lots of other fossils. I'm looking for specifics. Were lions here but tigers came with Noah? What about marsupials? Did kangaroos come with Noah but possums lived here already?

 

[SkyWriting]

What was the purpose of saving the animals?

The purpose was to allow God's chosen DNA to continue during the flood.
Only the animals that would not survive the flood were chosen by God
for the voyage. Even then it was a symbolic gesture becasue he could
have saved them all on a island if He chose. God likes symbolism.

 

[SkyWriting]

No, he was one. He was merely not the same sort of Christian that you are. There are thousands upon thousands of variations of what a "Christian" is. He merely abused his Christian beliefs far worse than the worst of creationists here.

He abused his evolutionary beliefs far worse than any evolutionist has before. His goal was to single out "Good" DNA from "Bad" DNA and create a master race. Using religion was a tool to reach his highest evolution goals. Clearly he missed the Christian message entirely.

Matthew 19:19 Honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.'
Luke 6:31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.
Galatians 5:14 The entire Law is fulfilled in a single decree: "Love your neighbor as yourself."

There are indeed thousands of ways to listen to the Holy Spirit and follow Gods law, as listed.
Galatians 5:14 The entire Law is fulfilled in a single decree: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
This is the narrow path and the narrow gate.

 

[Subduction Zone]

He abused his evolutionary beliefs far worse than any evolutionist has before. His goal was to single out "Good" DNA from "Bad" DNA and create a master race. Using religion was a tool to reach his highest evolution goals. Clearly he missed the Christian message entirely.

Matthew 19:19 Honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.'
Luke 6:31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.
Galatians 5:14 The entire Law is fulfilled in a single decree: "Love your neighbor as yourself."

There are indeed thousands of ways to listen to the Holy Spirit and follow Gods law, as listed.
Galatians 5:14 The entire Law is fulfilled in a single decree: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
This is the narrow path and the narrow gate.

He did not have "evolutionary beliefs". And he merely followed the Bible's example of a "chosen people". I know that Christians must feel some guilt about Hitler, after all he was elected by a largely Christian country. just as Donald Trump was elected in our country by evangelicals. And since the works of Darwin were banned by Hitler it is rather hard to call him an "evolutionionst" though if you will note, he did not ban the Bible.

I do agree that he missed the mark of most modern Christians, but he was not that far off the mark of many historical Christians.