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.
Because they drowned before they had a chance to write about it? And the cultures that came afterward didn't know what happened, except what was written in the Scriptures, or told to them by someone?
Well, they do tend to include a lucky guy who was told by the god(s) to build some sort of a vessel... Just look at other Middle-Eastern flood myths on Wiki. It looks an awful lot like the Hebrews nicked Ziusudra, Utnapishtim or whatever he was called from some other culture and coloured the myth according to their own flavour.It also does not explain why these flood stories omit Noah (if Noah and his family were the only survivors, why leave them out?), and why some predate the Biblical account.
AV, I'm sure you are aware of the restrictions placed on scripture back then. Not just anyone could read them; certainly not people from other cultures.
It also does not explain why these flood stories omit Noah (if Noah and his family were the only survivors, why leave them out?), and why some predate the Biblical account.
I would not say that. A softer foundation will cause a stronger slab above to break and fracture as it is washed away. An earthquake could easily cause hard layers to break, providing easy access to the softer foundation stone....I'm pretty sure that thaumaturgy proved that the Grand Canyon has absolutely nothing to do with a flood, global or otherwise. Why don't you address him instead?
Where is the tectonic plate under the Grand Canyon? And since when does a flood cause earthquakes?I would not say that. A softer foundation will cause a stronger slab above to break and fracture as it is washed away. An earthquake could easily cause hard layers to break, providing easy access to the softer foundation stone....
I would not say that. A softer foundation will cause a stronger slab above to break and fracture as it is washed away. An earthquake could easily cause hard layers to break, providing easy access to the softer foundation stone....
What hard layers? What are you talking about? You do realize that the page that you pointed to as evidence of the flood claims that animals were running up sand dunes to escape a flood that was in the process of forming the sand dunes they were supposedly running up don't you? I would think that even you could see that this is nonsense, especially since those animals should have died long before when thousands of feet of sedimentary rocks were deposited below them.I would not say that. A softer foundation will cause a stronger slab above to break and fracture as it is washed away. An earthquake could easily cause hard layers to break, providing easy access to the softer foundation stone....
Genesis 7:11 In the six hundreth year of Noah's life, on the seventeeth day all the springs of the great deep burst forth.....Where is the tectonic plate under the Grand Canyon? And since when does a flood cause earthquakes?
Not on your life --- when your idle, unhelpful speculation
I'll know where to go if I have a legitimate question.
Joe's car belongs to Joe.
Bob's car belongs to _____ ?
I can, however, from the Scriptures give you some animals that are on it, that aren't on man's taxon.
Let's rephrase that, give me documented evidence, not a story in a book that isn't regarded as scientific fact. Or better yet, address the issues raised by thaumaturgy and Frumious Bandersnatch.Genesis 7:11 In the six hundreth year of Noah's life, on the seventeeth day all the springs of the great deep burst forth.....
Sure sounds like geologic activity to me.
What about this?
The voice of the LORD strikes with flashes of lightning. The voice of the LORD shakes the Desert of Kadesh. The voice of the LORD twists the oaks and strips the forests bare. And in HIS temple all cry, "Glory!" The LORD sat enthroned over the FLOOD; the LORD is enthroned as King forever. (Psalm 29:7-10)
Well, they do tend to include a lucky guy who was told by the god(s) to build some sort of a vessel... Just look at other Middle-Eastern flood myths on Wiki. It looks an awful lot like the Hebrews nicked Ziusudra, Utnapishtim or whatever he was called from some other culture and coloured the myth according to their own flavour.
Duke,
I'm afraid you are not following the rules of the game. You see, AV starts with the Bible being true, even when reality or data speak directly against it.
If reality conflicts with the Bible, reality is wrong.
So, the rules of the game are:
AV's JOB: Defend the Bible using on the Bible.
OUR JOB: Disprove the Bible only within the constraints that the Bible is never wrong.
See, it's "easy peasy" as our Brit friends say!
(This is also why the brits say things like "that isn't cricket" when something isn't done right, because like cricket this games just goes on and on and on and on and onandonandonandonandon....)
We do not know that the canyon area might not have been a sea prior to the FLOOD. So there might easily be a pre-FLOOD situation, a FLOOD situation, and a post FLOOD situation. Some have suggested that there was a land locked lake which spilled over and drained very quickly. I'm sure that there are other possiblities that simply do not fit Uniformitarianist's mold, so that they were discarded for the bennifit of evolution and millions/billions of years......But Nipper, the key is WHICH layers?
Remember the Grand Canyon alone shows at least 2 instances of the ocean over Arizona.
The key is that you have to come up with the details of your hypothesis. We've shown you a variety of choices you can pick from.
Pick. We'll go from there.
Don't just talk aroundthe issue. Don't just gin up some "harder slabs over softer slabs" stuff, explain in detail how you think this works.
We can work with that. We can't work with your ideas unless you make them clear.
If you are unable to clarify your ideas then I have to wonder why you would prefer them to those ideas presented by scientists who have actually studied and more clearly understand what is going on.
I'm not an expert in this. My area was organic geochemistry. But I do have a geology background and I can point you in the direction of resources. I've taught geology several places in the eastern half of the U.S. so hopefully I can help you understand what the scientist actually know versus what you just imagine.
So basically, and I mean this respectfully, you believe God performs millions of miracles to make the ark happen.
That's fine, but then don't try to argue the ark in naturalistic (i.e., no need for a god) terms.
There are just way too many holes in the story for it to have been done through completely natural terms...
The Grand Canyon is such a good "teaching base" for so many topics in sedimentology and stratigraphy that this is a great jumping off point.
Did you read the link posted?
So why can't creationists tell us which deposits are preflood, flood and post flood. Saying something "might easily have been" and actually explaining the details of what really happened are two very different things. All you are doing is useless handwaving that explains nothing.We do not know that the canyon area might not have been a sea prior to the FLOOD. So there might easily be a pre-FLOOD situation, a FLOOD situation, and a post FLOOD situation.
This sounds like Steve Austin's bogus model but there is no evidence for this lake and if the sediments had still been soft enough to be carved into a mile deep canyon it would look very different than the Grand Canyon we see today. It would not be an equilbrium drainage basin for one thing and the walls could not be as steep as those we see for another. Austin's model simply doesn't work to explain the actual Grand Canyon. It is not as totally stupid as his page on AiG on the Coconinos that you were kind enough to link for us, to highlight the absurdity of flood geology, but it still doesn't work.Some have suggested that there was a land locked lake which spilled over and drained very quickly.
Long before Darwin published on evolution scientists including creationists understood that the earth is a least many millions of years old as you well know. If you don't know it read History of the Collapse of Flood Geology and a Young Earth by evangelical Christian and former YEC Davis Young.I'm sure that there are other possiblities that simply do not fit Uniformitarianist's mold, so that they were discarded for the bennifit of evolution and millions/billions of years......
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?