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.
No, that's not true. Tuff and aeolian sandstones are deposited by wind/gravity and often lithification happens without any more water than is present in those "dry" sands like desert sands. Rare rainfall seeping into the sand is more than enough over the ages to produce rock. Moreover, after the deposits containing the fossils are buried, groundwater often intrudes so, even though there was never any water involved in burying the organism, moisture can later fuse the grains further.
If we're just thinking about the deposition of the sediment, then we don't necessarily need water. Some counterexamples are:
No sedimentation without water?
- Aeolian sandstones, such as the Lower Permian Rotliegend sandstone of the North Sea. These are deposited by wind, not water.
- Some types of sedimentary breccia, which are chiefly deposited by gravity, not water.
- Tuff, which are deposited by gravity and wind, not water. They also undergo substantial compaction and lithification with or without water.
No flood required. In fact, this couldn't happen in a flood.
Most of those fossils are invertebrates, mostly forams and other small organisms with shells. Most land vertebrates are found in river deposits. Which is what we see happening today.
We still see such sedimentation forming rock today. So today's conditions are entirely sufficient to account for the same sort of sediment we find in the rocks. And its difficult to see how the Grand Canyon sediments were laid down in a flood, when you can find fossil deserts and forests in between the supposed "flood sediments." How do you think entire desert and forest ecostystems had time to develop and be buried in the short time you think the Flood happened?
There aren't just marine fossils on Mt. Everest. Mount Everest is made of marine fossils. It is continental shelf crust, pushed up when India moved north and pushed into Asia. The process is still going on, and the Himalaya mountains are still rising. So again, you see marine fossils only forming in oceans, not some supposed flood.
So we can conclude either that there was a single great flood, or that there have been a lot of floods in human history. The data supports a lot of floods, some of them big enough that people started legends about them. Sorry, that doesn't work for you, either.
There was a huge regional flood in the Middle East about the right time, when the Black sea was filled. It wasn't global of course, and the Bible doesn't say that Noah's flood was global either, so that might be it.
And the fact that seas have covered the parts of the earth at different places and times, doesn't support a global flood, either. There's neither historical, nor Biblical, nor physical evidence for a global flood.
No, that's not true. Tuff and aeolian sandstones are deposited by wind/gravity and often lithification happens without any more water than is present in those "dry" sands like desert sands. Rare rainfall seeping into the sand is more than enough over the ages to produce rock. Moreover, after the deposits containing the fossils are buried, groundwater often intrudes so, even though there was never any water involved in burying the organism, moisture can later fuse the grains further.
If we're just thinking about the deposition of the sediment, then we don't necessarily need water. Some counterexamples are:
No sedimentation without water?
- Aeolian sandstones, such as the Lower Permian Rotliegend sandstone of the North Sea. These are deposited by wind, not water.
- Some types of sedimentary breccia, which are chiefly deposited by gravity, not water.
- Tuff, which are deposited by gravity and wind, not water. They also undergo substantial compaction and lithification with or without water.
No flood required. In fact, this couldn't happen in a flood.
Most of those fossils are invertebrates, mostly forams and other small organisms with shells. Most land vertebrates are found in river deposits. Which is what we see happening today.
We still see such sedimentation forming rock today. So today's conditions are entirely sufficient to account for the same sort of sediment we find in the rocks. And its difficult to see how the Grand Canyon sediments were laid down in a flood, when you can find fossil deserts and forests in between the supposed "flood sediments." How do you think entire desert and forest ecostystems had time to develop and be buried in the short time you think the Flood happened?
There aren't just marine fossils on Mt. Everest. Mount Everest is made of marine fossils. It is continental shelf crust, pushed up when India moved north and pushed into Asia. The process is still going on, and the Himalaya mountains are still rising. So again, you see marine fossils only forming in oceans, not some supposed flood.
So we can conclude either that there was a single great flood, or that there have been a lot of floods in human history. The data supports a lot of floods, some of them big enough that people started legends about them. Sorry, that doesn't work for you, either.
There was a huge regional flood in the Middle East about the right time, when the Black sea was filled. It wasn't global of course, and the Bible doesn't say that Noah's flood was global either, so that might be it.
And the fact that seas have covered the parts of the earth at different places and times, doesn't support a global flood, either. There's neither historical, nor Biblical, nor physical evidence for a global flood.
Key word "lithified" meaning the sand turned into stone and you need water for that "Lithification is the process by which sediments combine to form sedimentary rocks. ... With compaction, sediment grains get squished together, reducing the size of the original pore space that divided them. Cementation is the process by which (dissolved minerals) crystallize and glue sediment grains together"
Fossils are primarily found, not in river deltas but, in worldwide sedimentary rock formation that cover 75% of the earth’s surface!
There is plenty historical and physical evidence that confirm a worldwide flood! Evidence such as in the sedimentary layer which are worldwide and cover about 75% of all the worlds land surface. These layers were laid down by water because of the preponderance of marine fossils in them! Marine fossils found on every continent to the highest mountain ranges like the Himalayas and Mt Everest! The layers are separated, by the action of water, into almost pure deposits of certain minerals!
Dr. James Perloff holds PhDs from Harvard, MIT and Oxford., awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics, researched historical accounts of the flood and wrote: “Legends have been reported from nations such as China, Babylon, Mexico, Egypt, Sudan, Syria, Persia, India, Norway, Wales, Ireland, Indonesia, Romania, etc.—composing a list that could go on for many pages”
“In 95 percent of the more than (two hundred flood legends), the flood was worldwide; in 88 percent, a certain family was favored; in 70 percent, survival was by means of a boat; in 67 percent, animals were also saved; in 66 percent, the flood was due to the wickedness of man; in 66 percent, the survivors had been forewarned; in 57 percent, they ended up on a mountain; in 35 percent, birds were sent out from the boat; and in 9 percent, exactly eight people were spared “
Not surprising! But not just Kansas...the whole world was once under water! Any cursory study of how the sedimentary layers, that cover 75% of earth's land mass, where formed will show that materials were transported, by water, then separated by density into layers making up their own almost pure deposits of certain minerals as observed in the worldwide geological strata!
Let's see.okay if we go by the Bible specifically down to the number the universe is not older than seven or eight thousand years old at most. Here's the problem geology has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the Earth is at least several billion years old, astronomy has proven the universe is close to 13 or 14 billion years old. How do you explain that. It's really simple in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earthi says absolutely nothing on how long it took God to create the heavens and the Earth. The next several verses deal with the creation of humanity. Now I love my Bible but I also know it's a book that has been translated hundreds of times different passages have different meanings you also have to take into account it's been edited there are books missing. You take in human error, the superstitions of the people who lived back then,I mean back then diseases were not caused by germs and viruses it was caused by evil spirits. All things you can take into account. The the core of what the Bible is is how to have a relationship with God. So enough with the arguing God created the heavens and the Earth and maybe he did it with a big bang
In order to allow for evolution to be a viable mindset, one has to reduce the Bible to a book full of errors and misconceptions.
No argument there.The "errors and misconceptions" only exist if you insist that the Bible cannot have figurative language anywhere.
okay if we go by the Bible specifically down to the number the universe is not older than seven or eight thousand years old at most.
Riiight.If the date of creation or the date of Adam's creation was important or even useful to us as Christians, God would have given us an unequivocal date for each of those.
If I offered to sell you a coin dated 4004 BC, would you buy it?
What do you mean by that?Depends on who dated it.
What do you mean by that?
Any coin with a BC date on it is fake.
BINGO!Coins from those times didn't have "BC" on them.
I can see it now:If the date of creation or the date of Adam's creation was important or even useful to us as Christians, God would have given us an unequivocal date for each of those.
BINGO!
Then Post 27 doesn't make sense.So your system won't work.
Then Post 27 doesn't make sense.
God wants us to know a lot of things that He's given us in a clear and unequivocal manner.I'm merely pointing out that if God wanted us to know the precise date of creation, he would have given it to us in a clear and unequivocal manner.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, in 4004 BC, God created the heaven and the earth.
Unbelievers ... and some believers alike ... academia ... would be all over that like ants on ice cream.
Like He did when Daniel said how long it would be until the Messiah came?If God had said how long it was from creation to Abraham, that would have been an unequivocal statement.
Earlier, in Post 27, you said ...The Barbarian said:God never told us how old creation is.
Now you're Arab phoning it to "how old creation is"?If the date of creation or the date of Adam's creation was important or even useful to us as Christians, God would have given us an unequivocal date for each of those.
What is it you're looking for now? the date of creation? or how old it is?
Barbarian, let's simplify this conversation.Your problem is you want dates to have an absolute value. And they don't. They are always relative to something that happened at some time. God could have established something like that, if it was important.
No, they aren't.The Barbarian said:What you don't get is that those are two ways of saying the same thing.
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?