Super-Continent Pangaea

[joshua 1 9]

Then why even claim that science supports the bible when it is speaking in allegory?

That is why God is so amazing. He can talk about real people and produce allegory from the story. Look at the book of Job. God says: "Have you considered my servant Job?" He wants us to study Job because there is a lesson to be learned from Job and the life that he lived. Even though Job is one of the few people in the Bible that does not show up in the Genealogies. They talk about the scarlet thread. AT one point this was an real thread that Rahab the harlot put on her window so they knew not to destroy her house when they attacked the city. This thread is also symbolic of the blood line of Jesus. Because Rahab the Harlot was a part of Jesus blood line. She was the mother of Boaz, who married Ruth. Boaz was a kinsman redeemer and a type of Jesus and Ruth was a type of the Church. These are real people in the Bible yet their story is very much an allegory. Look at the story of Solomon with his 700 wives and 300 concubines or the story of David and Goliath. These are all real people but the story we read about them is very much an allegory and there is a lesson to be learned. Moses had all of God's plan of redemption.

"which was the son of David, Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz," Luke3:32

 

[Loudmouth]

That is why God is so amazing.

I am talking about what YOU say. Are you God?

If it is allegory, then it isn't meant to be scientifically accurate.

 

[Herman Hedning]

Right now it is believed that Eden is under the Persian Gulf.

Don't you mean "Right now I believe that Eden is under the Persian Gulf"?

 

[joshua 1 9]

I am talking about what YOU say. Are you God?

As a Christian we believe that God created us. I realize that the skeptics and scoffers believe that man created God and in their case I do not question them on this at all. In fact I am sure the God they believe in is a product of their imagination.

"And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." Gen 6:5

 

[joshua 1 9]

Don't you mean "Right now I believe that Eden is under the Persian Gulf"?

I mean what I said. Right now based on Satellite photography the current theory is that the Garden of Eden is still underwater.

 

[Herman Hedning]

I mean what I said. Right now based on Satellite photography the current theory is that the Garden of Eden is still underwater.

Mhm. The current theory of one person, namely Ward Sanford. And yourself of course. The video you posted says that "he admits the case isn't rock solid, but it is plausible", and ends with "maybe it is best to leave Eden as it is [in the bible]". Does not sound like a very widely held belief to me.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Mhm. The current theory of one person, namely Ward Sanford.

Dr. Ward Sanford received a B.S. from Purdue University in Geology in 1983 and a PhD in Hydrogeology from Penn State University in 1987. That gives him some credibility for the theory that the Strait of Hormuz was a land damn at one time that got washed out causing the whole Persian Gulf to flood. Esp sense the persian gulf is only around 150 feet deep. All of this lines up with the story of Noah in the Bible. This is something we did not know until they launched the space satellites. Even Google Earth can give us a good photo of the Persian Gulf so we can see how all of this is possible. You can always argue both sides of an issue but the evidence for this is substantial. During the last ice age the Persian Gulf was dry land all the way to the Strait of Hormuz. The problem has always been why did this area not flood when the ice melted. The solution has always been some sort of a land damn that held the flood water back until the time of Noah's flood.

 

[bhsmte]

Dr. Ward Sanford received a B.S. from Purdue University in Geology in 1983 and a PhD in Hydrogeology from Penn State University in 1987. That gives him some credibility for the theory that the Strait of Hormuz was a land damn at one time that got washed out causing the whole Persian Gulf to flood. Esp sense the persian gulf is only around 150 feet deep. All of this lines up with the story of Noah in the Bible. This is something we did not know until they launched the space satellites. Even Google Earth can give us a good photo of the Persian Gulf so we can see how all of this is possible. You can always argue both sides of an issue but the evidence for this is substantial.

Theories are supported with evidence.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Theories are supported with evidence.

Correct and the evidence is substantiated from a man with a PhD in Hydrogeology. Who is your expert so you can provide an intelligent response to my claim rather than just empty unsubstantiated denial.

 

[bhsmte]

Correct and the evidence is substantiated from a man with a PhD in Hydrogeology. Who is your expert so you can provide an intelligent response to my claim rather than just empty unsubstantiated denial.

What evidence?

 

[Jimmy D]

Dr. Ward Sanford received a B.S. from Purdue University in Geology in 1983 and a PhD in Hydrogeology from Penn State University in 1987. That gives him some credibility for the theory that the Strait of Hormuz was a land damn at one time that got washed out causing the whole Persian Gulf to flood. Esp sense the persian gulf is only around 150 feet deep. All of this lines up with the story of Noah in the Bible. This is something we did not know until they launched the space satellites. Even Google Earth can give us a good photo of the Persian Gulf so we can see how all of this is possible. You can always argue both sides of an issue but the evidence for this is substantial. During the last ice age the Persian Gulf was dry land all the way to the Strait of Hormuz. The problem has always been why did this area not flood when the ice melted. The solution has always been some sort of a land damn that held the flood water back until the time of Noah's flood.

It seems peculiar to me when Christians are so keen to find naturalistic explanations for biblical events, what does it achieve? It might demonstrate that certain myths are based loosely on actual events but more importantly it goes to show that those myths are wildly exaggerated, twisted to fit a religious agenda and that a God isn't even needed for these events.

According to Sanford's ideas the flood myth is based on the breaking of a land dam, all that demonstrates is that the idea of 'God' has been inserted as an explanation for a natural event. Sanford also suggests that the 'Epic of Gilgamesh' is based on this event, does that mean that this 'evidence'* also demonstrates that the many mesopotamian gods existed?

* Sanford - Although there is no smoking gun evidence to support the catastrophic filling hypothesis, I believe the evidence to date does not preclude it, and is, in fact, consistent with it.

 

[DogmaHunter]

We know that science is not always correct. An interesting book to read is: "The Half-Life of Facts: Why Everything We Know Has an Expiration Date".

It's called progress

The Bible is 3500 years old and remains consistent and true.

Dogmatically clinging to a religious text from the bronze age, while "re-interpreting" it with every conflicting scientific discovery, doesn't really qualify as "remaining consistent and true".

In context of making progress in gathering knowledge about reality, not being subject to alterations and updates, is not a good thing.

If you go to your university book store the text books go through constant revision and updates.

Which is a good thing.

No one has to update or revise the Bible.

Which is a bad thing.

That's how you get people in the 21st century believing in a young earth, physically impossible floods, magical boats and other kinds of superstitious shenannigans.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Not at all. The skeptics and scoffers come on here taking huge amounts of time and they accomplish nothing.

Only in the sense that they / we will never be able to convince someone like, who's so wrapped up in his bubble of make-belief that you are completely out of touch with anything reasonable.

You constantly yap about "true" and "false" science, but what you really mean by that is "science that agrees with my a priori biblical beliefs" and "science that doesn't.

That is your "test" to see which science is "good" and which is "bad".... You merely ask the question "does it conflict with my bible?" and if the answer is "yes", you brand it as bad science.

It's beyond ridiculous.

The truth is very simple and very easy. In fact we can teach Bible truth to a one year old child.

Indeed, you can make a one year old believe just about anything.

 

[DogmaHunter]

This is the story. God got mad at Satan and threw Satan down to the earth. Satan got mad at God and decided that he would cause God's creation to destroy itself. That was when the dinosaurs began to develop teeth and they began to devour each other. That was when God destroyed the dinosaurs and the earth with water. He then froze the water and the earth went into an ice age. All of this is based on free will or freedom of choice. God gives us freedom to love Him but we can also choose NOT to love God. Those who choose not to walk in love and tolerance will destroy themselves.

YEC just covers the age or the area that we live in beginning around 12,900 years ago. At the end of the last ice age when the ice melted and the earth was flooded. There was a extinction followed by a radiation or population explosion. We are still a part of that era now today. Although you can be a strict literalness and say a day was a literal day. If you start with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden 6,000 years ago.

When I read things like this..... I'm absolutely baffled that people in the 21st century, living in a wester secular highly technological society, can still believe things so mega-warped and so mega at odds with testable reality.

If I didn't know any better, I'ld never believe that you are actually for real.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Actually this is the teaching of Kat Kerr. She talks a lot about heaven and she says that there is a Creation Museum in Heaven that teaches the story about the Dinosaurs. She has written two or three books and she has a lot of video on youtube.

So, you'll believe just about anything, will you....

Hey, by the way, interested in buying a bridge by any chance?

 

[DogmaHunter]

There are things you have to do to understand the Bible. You have to follow the rules they teach you in Bible College. First of all the word for "EARTH" Is Adam-ah and this means the Land of Adam. Not the entire world. Now lets go to science and the neolithic revolution. You will see that farming began in the Furtile Crescent, the Tigris Euphrates River Valley, what they call Ancient Mesopotamia. Interestingly enough farming spread from there to Europe. Lots of research has gone into a study of the beginning of civilization and the beginning of man being a food producer rather than a good gathers. I have spent 50 years to study all of this. So I know after 50 years of study that there is NO conflict and there is NO contradiction between the Bible and Science. Modern science has changed our understanding of the Bible but that is to be expected. The Bible is designed to be made new and fresh for each and every generation. WE can not trust our Grandparents to teach us what the meaning of the Bible was for them. WE need to discover the truth for ourselves and apply the truth of the Bible to our generation in our day and in our time.

So telling me what people believed 100 years ago is all rather absurd of you because science has made a LOT of progress in the last 100 years so we are able to understand the Bible a LOT better today then they did 100 years ago. I have no problem with Bishop Ussher and his book. That is all fine and good. But I think you do not even know as much as he did 600 years ago when he wrote his book. I think you need to demonstrate to me that you know more then just the dime store variety of pratts.

It is becoming increasingly clearer that the only reason you feel like science supports the bible, is because with every new scientific discovery, you ALTER your interpretation of the bible so that it isn't completely absurd in light of scientific evidence. And if all else fails, there still is the get-out-of-jail-free-card that simply says "it's poetry, not literal!!".

So, in light of that, here's a challenge.....
How could the bible be shown to be false?

 

[DogmaHunter]

If your going to try to defend Evolution, THEN you are going to have to come up with an explanation for all of this. Which you fail to do. So creationism wins out by default because evolution failed to show up and present their care. In fact there are getting to be fewer and fewer evolutionist ready, willing and able to present any sort of a defense for Darwin's theory.

Ow, are we back to denying evolution?
I thought you said that your beliefs concerning evolution match those of Collins?

If you wish to be reminded what Collins' stance on the theory is, read my sig.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I already explained that. The photos we have from the satellite can be used WITH the story we read in the Bible to make a determination as to where the Garden of Eden was. REMEMBER the word for Earth in the Bible was Adam-ah. This means that it was the Land of Adam that was flooded. This is not to difficult for you is it, because all of this is designed for a child to understand and sometimes the simplicity is difficult for people who are looking for complexities. That could be why you are having problems understanding the story. If you want to be great in the Kingdom then you must become as a child.

18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

So, you feel it is enough to just claim that that is where Eden is? And that counts as evidence for you?

Sounds a bit like the several dozen times people merely pointed to a seemingle random spot, claiming it held remains of the ark.

 

[Herman Hedning]

There are things you have to do to understand the Bible. You have to follow the rules they teach you in Bible College. First of all the word for "EARTH" Is Adam-ah and this means the Land of Adam.

Again you are putting the cart before the horse. Try thinking the other way around. Adam is named so because he is from Adamah - he is made from dust (earth), and also he is the one that cultivates the earth. The word for earth - Adamah - came first, and Adam was named after it.

 

[joshua 1 9]

The word for earth - Adamah - came first, and Adam was named after it.

Adam is not actually the name of a person. Adam represents mankind or humanity. The story of Eden reads like an allegory with talking snakes and Angels with flaming swords. Yet we read that Adam and Eve had children and those children founded cities and we have the genealogies all the way from Adam to Jesus. Generation after generation we read stores about the descendants of Adam. We read about Adam's sons and how one son killed another. Then we hear about Enoch and we are told that Enoch walked with God and Enoch is a type of the Church today. We find story after story after story about the descendants of Adam that we read in the generations or the genealogies of Adam. The Bible as History is confirmed by Historians like Josephus and Bishop Ussher and all of their many sources. We have many sources outside of the Bible that confirms what we read in the Bible. There are at least 60 people in our Bible that we find historic reference to outside of the Bible. We have archeological evidence for all the cities we read about in the Bible. We have an abundant overwhelming amount of evidence to substantiate and confirm the Bible is accurate and true. The skeptics and scoffers have produced nothing to back up their claims. Their opinions are not even based on logic or sound reasoning.