Take your pick and call a spade a spade

[AV1611VET]

but they couldn't back then?

No -- not until after the Fall.

 

[AV1611VET]

So wind and water magically couldn't erode rocks back then?

Wind and water can't magically erode rocks today, either.

Wow, that's a new one.

?

 

[florida2]

Wind and water can't magically erode rocks today, either.

Which is not what I said.

I said: So wind and water magically couldn't erode rocks back then?
Not: So wind and water couldn't magically erode rocks back then?

So you're claiming that wind and water were unable to erode rocks back then?

?

I hadn't come across the idea that wind and water were somehow affected so that they couldn't erode rocks. Were the rocks super strong?

 

[AV1611VET]

Which is not what I said.

I said: So wind and water magically couldn't erode rocks back then?
Not: So wind and water couldn't magically erode rocks back then?

I know what you said.

That's why I responded the way I did.

So you're claiming that wind and water were unable to erode rocks back then?

Yes.

I hadn't come across the idea that wind and water were somehow affected so that they couldn't erode rocks.

The technical term is: Different State Past.

Things were different back then.

Were the rocks super strong?

Not any stronger than they are now.

It's just that decay didn't function back then.

 

[HitchSlap]

No -- not until after the Fall.

Speaking of falling...*Ouch!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp0Nh1pNZ6k

 

[JacksBratt]

And in my opinion, if you want creationism taken out of schools for reasons you stated, then I think you should want abiogenesis taken out as well.

Absolutely....

 

[Delphiki]

I disagree.

"Abiogenesis" answers where life didn't come from: "not from life."

That's nice. You're wrong. And facts don't change depending on whether you agree with them or not.

Abiogenesis is a field of science trying to find an answer to a question. There is no answer yet. Where did life come from? At best, the compromise to your assertion would be "How did life come from non-life?"

Now obviously if life has to come from somewhere, it would have to be non-life... Otherwise it wouldn't have "come from". Life coming from non-life is a logical tautology. It's a given. Abiogenesis asks "how?"

 

[Delphiki]

The technical term is: Different State Past.

I'm sure dad will be excited to know he's earned his first cult follower!

 

[Paulos23]

I'm sure dad will be excited to know he's earned his first cult follower!

AV is agreeing with dad?

The end times must be niegh....

 

[florida2]

The technical term is: Different State Past.

Things were different back then.

At least dad's now got a friend.

Not any stronger than they are now.

It's just that decay didn't function back then.

Erosion isn't decay. It's just when the atoms in the water and the air bash against atoms in the surface of the rock, some of them are dislodged and carried away.

So before the Fall this couldn't happen?

 

[Queller]

Adam & Eve walked on pure soil.

Yes, soil which is made up of decomposed organic matter. How is this possible in an 6 day old universe in which organic matter had only been around for 2 days?

 

[Queller]

The leader of the nine muses (fallen angels), which includes Urania (?), the goddess of science.

What is your King James Biblical support for this claim?

 

[CabVet]

What is your King James Biblical support for this claim?

Don't worry, he will just use other translations if the KJV doesn't support his point. When it comes to science and scientists though, slandering them does not require support for AV.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No -- not until after the Fall.

That would mean that up until the fall, the rocks were indestructible... or do you not know what erosion is?

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't worry, he will just use other translations if the KJV doesn't support his point. When it comes to science and scientists though, slandering them does not require support for AV.

It was worth using the NIV to put and end to the Genesis 1 vs Genesis 2 argument.

Anf for the record, Jesus quotes from both chapters ...

Genesis 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Genesis 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

 

[CabVet]

It was worth using the NIV to put and end to the Genesis 1 vs Genesis 2 argument.

Of course it was, since the KJV doesn't agree with your interpretation of how it happened.

Anf for the record, Jesus quotes from both chapters ...

Genesis 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Genesis 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Sure he did, but I am sure he didn't quote from the KJV.

 

[AV1611VET]

That would mean that up until the fall, the rocks were indestructible... or do you not know what erosion is?

So Adam couldn't have done any rock-splitting to make a house, prior to the Fall?

 

[AV1611VET]

Sure he did, but I am sure he didn't quote from the KJV.

That's a matter of opinion.

 

[CabVet]

So Adam couldn't have done any rock-splitting to make a house, prior to the Fall?

Why would he need a house if there was no rain, no predators and the weather was so perfect that they didn't even need clothes?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why would he need a house if there was no rain, no predators and the weather was so perfect that they didn't even need clothes?

I knew someone would bring that up, LOL.

Fine, I'll just shorten the question:

So Adam couldn't have done any rock-splitting?