The ice age and the flood

[Keachian]

Do you want to answer my question, or do you want to just sit and think the Hebrew writers were ignorant, fallible, Bronze Age, goat herders, who tried their best to write what they knew?

Your questions are basically boiling down to me accepting that the Bible came down from heaven in 1611 so no thanks

 

[AV1611VET]

Your questions are basically boiling down to me accepting that the Bible came down from heaven in 1611 so no thanks

Then your point with dad can take a hike.

 

[Keachian]

Then your point with dad can take a hike.

What about his tantamount blasphemy?

 

[cupid dave]

lol, I have met one actual theistic evolutionist who accepts day age theology on this site, doubtless there are others but to say that they are the majority is false.

What you cannot support is your idea that there was a significant change in how the universe operates either from the Bible or from Science.

My question to these Bible Believers is why, why do theyuse an medieval archaic and erroneous interpretation of Genesis when Science and the Bible agree when read properly.

The 24 hour day does not appear until God creates the Solar Clock to keep earth time.

So the first seven "days"can be understood as the seven Eras which are defined by the ]International Commission on Stratigraphy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_time_scale









[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']

7






7) Cenozoic Duration:

6) Mesozoic Duration:

5) Paleozoic Duration

4) Proterozoic Duration

3) Archean Duration

2) Hadean Duration

1) The Cosmological/Formative Era:
(Not on the Geological Time Chart)

 

[cupid dave]

The Bible, among other things, is a book.


I don't really understand your premise that the Bible needs to be believed in order to be studied. .

He means his interpretation does not make sense after younread the Bible, unless you believe his iterpretation before you check it out in the Bible.

This is what these YECS and others are selling.

First you believe their "book report," then you read the Bible and insist it says what it actually does not say.

 

[cupid dave]

People use the ability to believe in an impossible religion and are so selective with their belief they can believe one religion while dismissing all the other equally impossible religions as being untrue.

That is not exactly the case with the present church.

These people realize that they can not explain so much that follows Genesis that they dig in their heels from the get go.

What they are saying is that the church is right, and they will not let science ridicule Genesis as starters for the rest of what relions says about things like Gay marriage and abortion.

(Which issue they are correct in opposing, though they fail to explain why the Bible teaches this.)

 

[cupid dave]

Posted by dad

In the beginning was the word, and the word...was God. This is news?

Right and with that total misunderstanding of who Jesus is I'm out.

But Christians forget that scripture says Christ = Truth.

Truth IS the word which was in the beginning with the almighty.
Truth, including Scientific Truth, is the son-of-God.

Truth is actually God to us who image Truth in our mind because we can not directly esperience the Almighty except through thoughts that equate tio "Him."






John1:1
In the beginning was the Word, (i.e.; Truth: [John 14:6]), and the Word, (Truth, itself), was (synonymous) with God, (i,e.; Reality), and the Word, (Truth: [John 14:6]), was (indistinguishable from Reality), God (almigty for all men).

2 He, (Truth, the symbolic Word to come: [Jud 1:3]) was with God, (the ever unfolding Reality), in the beginning, (by definition).

 

[AV1611VET]

Science doesn't ridicule Genesis nor could it ridicule genesis, science has absolutely nothing to say about anything for which there is no evidence.

What constitutes 'no evidence'?

Take Leprechauns for example.

1. Is there no evidence for Leprechauns because there is no evidence for Leprechauns?
2. Or is there no evidence for Leprechauns because science doesn't have any evidence for Leprechauns?

If I said there was no evidence that I am Joey's father, does that mean that there's no evidence that exists, or that the evidence that exists hasn't been processed yet?

DNA would certainly show either way, wouldn't it?

 

[CabVet]

DNA would certainly show either way, wouldn't it?

Only if you accept evolution. If you don't, DNA tests are worthless.

 

[JustMeSee]

Yes, unbiblical. What want to hang your case on real real long days? ..or what? Ho hum. As I said, you cannot support your spouted dates. They are false.

Coming from the guy making up stuff and not able to support anything (different states).

 

[JustMeSee]

.

 

[dad]

Science doesn't ridicule Genesis nor could it ridicule genesis, science has absolutely nothing to say about anything for which there is no evidence.
Present evidence that Genesis is more than just a story and science will rule on it, even then it will not ridicule it it will simply reject or accept the evidence, that's all science ever has done or is ever capable of doing.

Christianity says that God made everything except gays, where they came from is anyones guess, there has always been and will always be gays (men and women) and if God is in charge of everything then God causes more abortions and miscarrages than anything else, but we won't talk about that.

Well, you could say there will always be cockroaches too. However that does not mean we need to purposely infest schools and just about everywhere we can release some does it? The place for vice and behavior that is unbiblical should be one of a shameful limited, unpublic role. It is one thing to be merciful and compassionate to those who engage in things that are unwholesome biblically, quite another to practice it and parade it on the rooftops. No?

 

[dad]

Coming from the guy making up stuff and not able to support anything (different states).

Since a tree doesn not grow in a few weeks under our laws, or light travel across the universe in days, and many other things, what alternative do you have to the conclusion that the nature had to be different? I mean really?

 

[dad]

My question to these Bible Believers is why, why do theyuse an medieval archaic and erroneous interpretation of Genesis when Science and the Bible agree when read properly.

The 24 hour day does not appear until God creates the Solar Clock to keep earth time.

So the first seven "days"can be understood as the seven Eras which are defined by the ]International Commission on Stratigraphy:
Geologic time scale - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No. Plants cannot live eras with no sun. They were made first.

 

[CabVet]

No. Plants cannot live eras with no sun. They were made first.

I find it interesting how animal fossils are always older than plant fossils though. I also find this passage interesting:

"So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals." Genesis 2:20.

Yet, we find wild animals and plants that nobody saw (or named) before all the time.

 

[AV1611VET]

The lack of evidence.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

We do whatever it takes.

So I notice.

 

[AV1611VET]

You have obviously gained the ability to delude yourself.

Paschal would disagree -- (or can he take a hike)?

 

[Davian]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Perhaps the phrase you are reaching for is 'Absence of evidence is not proof of absence'. Use that, if you are desperate.

Absence of evidence *is* evidence of absence. This applies to things such as aether, Bigfoot, worldwide floods, and even - despite your protestations - deities.

 

[dad]

I find it interesting how animal fossils are always older than plant fossils though. I also find this passage interesting:

"So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals." Genesis 2:20.

Yet, we find wild animals and plants that nobody saw (or named) before all the time.

Name one animal fossil older than plant fossils? Plants are older. I believe that.

As for Johnny come lately animals, remember that evolution was a created trait, and ability. So many of the first kinds, presumably would have adapted in a plethora of ways. Now you have a job, you can name some too! Adam, roll over.

 

[Keachian]

He means his interpretation does not make sense after younread the Bible, unless you believe his iterpretation before you check it out in the Bible.

This is what these YECS and others are selling.

First you believe their "book report," then you read the Bible and insist it says what it actually does not say.

For once I actually agree with you Cupid, now any similarities to what you are selling?