Than your not wanting to look at what the Earth is actually showing us about the Global flood that did not happen.
Upvote
0
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.
Than your not wanting to look at what the Earth is actually showing us about the Global flood that did not happen.As I said, I am no geologist.
Any arguments against the geological evidence presented, you will need to take up with those presenting the evidence.
There is a way to do this, especially on www.academia.edu.
I've done that before.
Why do you say that?Than your not wanting to look at what the Earth is actually showing us about the Global flood that did not happen.
I'm saying that what we're observing in the Earth itself is direct evidence that there was no Global Noah type of flood. Geology of floods is well understood. The magnitude of the flood of a supposed global size and violence would leave clear direct physical geological evidence behind. It would be impossible to hide the geological signs after that floods passing. Especially one that was suppose to have happened a mere 4000 years ago.Why do you say that?
I'm saying to you that what the earth shows us, is not directly seen, but interpreted.
If you deny this, then you deny every paper, journal, and article that demonstrates this.
Here is one that seeks to show that, in fact, the geological sciences have their own philosophical structure.
So, are you denying that what we are observing is indirect evidence, and not direct evidence showing something specific?
Please provide the paper supporting your "direct evidence" assertion.I'm saying that what we're observing in the Earth itself is direct evidence that there was no Global Noah type of flood. Geology of floods is well understood. The magnitude of the flood of a supposed global size and violence would leave clear direct physical geological evidence behind. It would be impossible to hide the geological signs after that floods passing. Especially one that was suppose to have happened a mere 4000 years ago.
Here's a link to a website discussing God's omniscience. And I'll quote the 1st paragraph:That is a good question, which you will have to take up with those who believe that God "knows everything that has or will happen".
That is not the view of every person professing to believe the Bible.
I believe that while God has the ability to know everything, God exercises that ability according to his will. There are some things God has not chosen to know, and some things God chose to know.
This is supported by the fact that the Bible records things that God did not, and does not know.
So, what is your reason for saying the biblical account of the flood of Noah's day is illogical, to one who does not believe in God foreknowing everything?
God knew that Man would Fall and that He would eventually bring the Flood waters.Here's a link to a website discussing God's omniscience. And I'll quote the 1st paragraph:
Omniscience is defined as “the state of having total knowledge, the quality of knowing everything.” For God to be sovereign over His creation of all things, whether visible or invisible, He has to be all-knowing. His omniscience is not restricted to any one person in the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all by nature omniscient.
What does it mean that God is omniscient? | GotQuestions.org
It makes no sense that an omniscient God chooses to be oblivious to evil human behavior, and then is shocked by it. So shocked that he regrets ever creating mankind. Can you not see how illogical this is?
You will have to take it up with those who believe that, as I mentioned.Here's a link to a website discussing God's omniscience. And I'll quote the 1st paragraph:
Omniscience is defined as “the state of having total knowledge, the quality of knowing everything.” For God to be sovereign over His creation of all things, whether visible or invisible, He has to be all-knowing. His omniscience is not restricted to any one person in the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all by nature omniscient.
What does it mean that God is omniscient? | GotQuestions.org
What do you mean by "chooses to be oblivious to evil human behavior"It makes no sense that an omniscient God chooses to be oblivious to evil human behavior, and then is shocked by it. So shocked that he regrets ever creating mankind. Can you not see how illogical this is?
Chuck Missler had a theory that there was a near pass with Mars and the Earth's orbits and the gravitational pull caused the long day of JoshuaGod can do whatever He wants. Noah's flood did occur, according to Scripture. If science cannot agree with that, what does it make of the sun standing still for a day?
One forum member ( the rules prevent me from posting his user name) says there's no evidence of a global flood because God cleaned it all upI'm saying that what we're observing in the Earth itself is direct evidence that there was no Global Noah type of flood. Geology of floods is well understood. The magnitude of the flood of a supposed global size and violence would leave clear direct physical geological evidence behind. It would be impossible to hide the geological signs after that floods passing. Especially one that was suppose to have happened a mere 4000 years ago.
Instead of using deflecting arguments such as demanding posters produce evidence there was no global flood which has been done, and the typical false dichotomy fallacy that mainstream science makes assumptions, radiocarbon dating is inaccurate etc all of which validates the global flood, how about defending the veracity of your sources such as this?Please provide the paper supporting your "direct evidence" assertion.
That's not how orbital mechanics works. I am not surprised that this Velikovskian notion comes from Missler. A while back someone posted here a long video from Missler where he was presenting the similarly Velikovskian "Electric Universe" nonsense.Chuck Missler had a theory that there was a near pass with Mars and the Earth's orbits and the gravitational pull caused the long day of Joshua
I believe that those who claim that that there was no Flood for whatever reason have imagined for themselves a Flood-narrative that the Bible does not support.God can do whatever He wants. Noah's flood did occur, according to Scripture. If science cannot agree with that, what does it make of the sun standing still for a day?
For me, it's local floods that grew in stature through story telling over time as the narrative also became religionized.I believe that those who claim that that there was no Flood for whatever reason have imagined for themselves a Flood-narrative that the Bible does not support.
Most people don't* rely on the bible (or rather Genesis) for the geological history of the Earth. We use the rocks.I believe that those who claim that that there was no Flood for whatever reason have imagined for themselves a Flood-narrative that the Bible does not support.
I believe that the entire Earth was at one point under water - but it would be akin to a full immersion baptism - a person goes down and comes up.For me, it's local floods that grew in stature through story telling over time as the narrative also became religionized.
They are free to do so. Good luck to them. I am going to continue to look for atoms with my naked eye.Most people don't* rely on the bible (or rather Genesis) for the geological history of the Earth. We use the rocks.
(* or at least they shouldn't)
I believe that the entire Earth was at one point under water - but it would be akin to a full immersion baptism - a person goes down and comes up.
The Genesis account does not claim that the entire Earth was under water for the same period of time that Noah was in the Ark - only that it had been under water.
The Deluge | Koinonia House
There are many Christians who do not take the record of the Flood in Genesis seriously. They consign the account to a moral lesson without regarding the narrative as actual fact.www.khouse.org
What do the rocks claim?Missler writes (in 2004):
There is no question that tangible evidence indicates there was once a flood over the entire earth. Many competent books have chronicled the numerous fossils of sea animals found at extremely high altitudes all over the world, as well as fossils of land animals in arid areas below sea level.
Which was well known not to demonstrate the things he claims already by 2004 (and by 1984). It's just the same global flood "evidence" claim utterly contradicted by the rocks themselves.
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?