The Flood

[AV1611VET]

What kind of question is that???

It's THEY MIGHT BE GIANTS!

Sheesh!

Besides, I thought we were talking about Mesopotamia and Gilgamesh. Did I miss something?

Okay, Thaumaturgy --- someone wrote a book that Mesopotamians might be giants.

I know that there was a race of giant half-breeds somewhere on the earth, but the Bible doesn't say where.

 

[Paulos23]

Outside of the Documentation --- no.

If there is no evidence for them outside the Bible then, why assume they exsist?

 

[AV1611VET]

If there is no evidence for them outside the Bible then, why assume they exsist?

For the same reason I assume the Tabernacle in the Wilderness existed, Abraham existed, and Molid existed:

• The Bible says it - that settles it.

 

[Paulos23]

Even when the physical world disagrees with it, I know. You just have a hard case of faith.

You would rather accept the writings of some 2000+ old book that has been put together by a committee, written by goodness knows who and whatever their bias and personal agenda was.

 

[AV1611VET]

You would rather accept the writings of some 2000+ old book that has been put together by a committee, written by goodness knows who and whatever their bias and personal agenda was.

Their "bias and personal agenda" was not to create an authorized list of books; rather, it was to create a list of authorized books.

The books themselves already carried the authorization; it was just a matter of separating them.

Here's how I explain it:

Suppose you were put in a room with all different denominations and told to separate the legal tender from the non-legal tender.

Could you do it? Sure you could:

• One-dollar bill --- legal --- goes here.
• Two-dollar bill --- legal --- goes here.
• Three-dollar bill --- non-legal --- goes there.
• Eight-dollar bill --- non-legal --- goes there.
• Ten-dollar bill --- legal --- goes here.

 

[Vene]

Their "bias and personal agenda" was not to create an authorized list of books; rather, it was to create a list of authorized books.

The books themselves already carried the authorization; it was just a matter of separating them.

Here's how I explain it:

Suppose you were put in a room with all different denominations and told to separate the legal tender from the non-legal tender.

Could you do it? Sure you could:

• One-dollar bill --- legal --- goes here.
• Two-dollar bill --- legal --- goes here.
• Three-dollar bill --- non-legal --- goes there.
• Eight-dollar bill --- non-legal --- goes there.
• Ten-dollar bill --- legal --- goes here.

Money only carries value because we define it at being valuable. It's a social construction. In a few years the government could decide that it wants to phase out green bills and replace it all with red, white, and blue coins and it could do so. But I want to see somebody make an acidic compound out of helium and chlorine instead of hydrogen and chlorine. This is a physical reality, not a social reality. Big difference.

 

[AV1611VET]

Thaumaturgy, POST 15 please.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Thaumaturgy, POST 15 please.

Sorry I didn't see that earlier!

Let's see, I can think of a few!

For the mammalian biologist

[bible]Leviticus 11:6[/bible]


Avian biologists:

[bible]Leviticus 11:20[/bible]



And of course for the GEOLOGISTS in the hizz-ouse:

Since the Bible clearly indicates throughout that the earth is only 6000 years old and here we see millions of years data....

 

[thaumaturgy]

[bible]1 Chronicles 16:30[/bible]

[bible]Psalm 93:1[/bible]

[bible]1 Samuel 2:8[/bible]

 

[AV1611VET]

Let's see, I can think of a few!

So then, I'm supposed to look at these and see a clear contradiction in the Scriptures?

Or do I need to be "educated" first, before I see them as a living contradiction?

And the fact that you didn't post the verse(s) they contradict (and you didn't have to, either) --- I find interesting.

I contend that nature does not violate the Scriptures --- only the interpretation that "scientists" assign to them do.

(I should start a thread on this.)

 

[AV1611VET]

Since the Bible clearly indicates throughout that the earth is only 6000 years old and here we see millions of years data....

Now you're adding your interpretation to it, which I asked not to.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'll start a thread on this in GA, Thaumaturgy.

 

[thaumaturgy]

[bible]Genesis 7:24[/bible]

(Note: these are three unrelated pictures, but you get the idea of geologic history across parts of the globe)

 

[thaumaturgy]

Now you're adding your interpretation to it, which I asked not to.

I added NOTHING. I was merely unable to quote the entire bible in a single post.

 

[thaumaturgy]

So then, I'm supposed to look at these and see a clear contradiction in the Scriptures?

YOU specifically said you didn't want any descriptions. I am giving you what you asked for.

Or do I need to be "educated" first, before I see them as a living contradiction?

I know how education offends some folks.

And the fact that you didn't post the verse(s) they contradict (and you didn't have to, either) --- I find interesting.

Look again, I editted them to add the appropriate quotes in.

I contend that nature does not violate the Scriptures --- only the interpretation that "scientists" assign to them do.

I contend literal interpretation of Scripture violates common sense and the data plainly available to anyone and everyone who honestly wants to look at it.

(I should start a thread on this.)

Oh by all means. Just don't limit it to simple "pictures" only.

Expect that if you want to talk science you might have to do a little work on it too.

Remember, I apparently have to know the bible here and you seem to be able to get away without knowing any science germane to the topic.

[BIBLE]Luke 6:31[/BIBLE]

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh by all means. Just don't limit it to simple "pictures" only.

Thread initiated.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Okay, Thaumaturgy --- someone wrote a book that Mesopotamians might be giants.

I know that there was a race of giant half-breeds somewhere on the earth, but the Bible doesn't say where.

Half breeds between women and the sons of God right? Or wait, didn't you say these were Angels and not Literally the sons of God? Didn't you say that the breeding between the sons of God who weren't literally the sons of God and the daughters of men (who apparently were literally the daughters of men) led to great evil? How did your ominipotent, omniscient and supposedly benevolent God father such evil "sons" who weren't literally his sons but which the book you say he authored literally calls his sons? Wasn't the evil caused by the mating of these sons of God with mortal women what forced God to repent of his creation? Wasn't this what caused him to decide to destroy his botched first attempt at creation with the global flood you claim he first caused and then wiped out all evidence of? Why did he also create lots of evidence that it didn't happen?

 

[dukeofhazzard]

The gopher wood, again in my opinion, came from a plant "kind", much like the animals did.

Thus, just like we don't see Behemoth, Leviathan, or 4-legged grasshoppers anymore, we don't see the Gopher Tree.

It's extinct.

Oh for Pete's sake.

The word translated "gopher" was admitted BY THE BIBLE TRANSLATORS to be a Hebrew word they did not know the meaning of and thereby gave their best guess. Look it up.

 

[Split Rock]

Oh for Pete's sake.

The word translated "gopher" was admitted BY THE BIBLE TRANSLATORS to be a Hebrew word they did not know the meaning of and thereby gave their best guess. Look it up.

Hey but whatever it was, it was a member of one of the "plant kinds." Just don't ask what a "Kind" is or how many "Plant Kinds" there were, because there isn't a creationist on the planet that can provide an answer.

 

[AV1611VET]

Just don't ask what a "Kind" is or how many "Plant Kinds" there were, because there isn't a creationist on the planet that can provide an answer.

Either that, or it has already been provided here.