- Jun 10, 2010
- 7,562
- 55
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Married
Okay, but my question was directed to Seipai since he is a Lutheran.
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.
I use the scientific method.
[serious];65455697 said:The order of fossils does match what we would expect from evolution and geologic processes.
The sorting we see does not align with sorting we would expect to see from a flood event. For example, according to one flood sorting theory, animals that were more able to swim or escape rising water should be at the top, and those less able should be at the bottom. Under this type of sorting, ALL heavy, slow moving, non swimmers should be found predominantly at the bottom of the stack. We don't see this. Instead, when we look at heavy non swimmers like snails and clams they are scattered throughout the column sorted by similarity to modern forms (as expected if the sorting was due to evolution over a long time scale).
Getting back on topic here, Janx, the order of fossils is utterly inconsistent with a Noachian flood.
So if one wanted to look for evidence for a Flood, they would have to not just disregard fossils, but explain the apparent inconsistency. Many do this by assuming -- demanding, in fact -- supernatural interference.
Of course, once they demand supernatural interference into one aspect of reality, they instinctively demand it in all other aspects of reality as well... until reality itself becomes irrelevant... and can take a hike.
What criteria do you use to judge what is bible myth and what is not?
I see Loudmouth already answered this. My answer is the same.
The scientific method.
The scientific method disproves certain Old Testament myths.
Certain claimed events in the O.T. would leave physical evidence of their existence. If we don't see real world evidence that supports those events we can deduce that they did not happen.
So then it's real?The scientific method disproves certain Old Testament myths.
So then it's real?
Or are you saying the sat... er ... scientific method proves certain OT stories to be myths?
There's a lot more to your limited version of reality than meets the eye.As long as we limit ourselves to reality.
Now, go ahead, AV -- say it...
There's a lot more to your limited version of reality than meets the eye.
A ... lot ... more.
Two kingdoms:Such as?
Two kingdoms:
- the Kingdom of God
- the Kingdom of Heaven
When did the Biblical Flood happen and did it cover the entire planet?
There a few of problems with this idea.
One, boats move up and down in a tsunami as well. If they are far enough out they will still bob but won't be destroyed by it.
Two, the Bible states that the fountains of the deep "burst forth" the windows of heaven were opened, and it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. It is not reasonable to believe that this resulted in a gentle raising of the ocean level like the incoming tide raises boats at a dock.
Three/four, these are two related problems and I'll discuss both because I don't know where you stand on the geologic uplift question.
3: If you accept standard uniformitarian geology and plate tectonics, mountains were uplifted at a slow rate and therefore the flood had to cover the highest mountains by 22+ feet of water. To cover Everest by that amount of water would require several hundred million more cubic miles of water than is available. Even if we allow for the idea that all that water came from the fountains of the great deep and the windows of heaven, the only way to get all of that water onto the planet in less than 150 days, is for it to pour in at a rate of around six inches of water, over every square inch of the planet, per minute. That is certainly not going to be slowly rising and slowly falling water. Not to mention that after the Flood, all that water had to go somewhere and it doesn't appear to be anywhere here on earth.
4: If you do not accept the standard theories of geology and plate tectonics, then I'm guessing you think that mountain ranges such as the Himalayas, the Alps, the Rockies, and others were uplifted during the Flood. Unfortunately, that not only violates most of physics as we know it, it would also produce massive tidal waves as well as huge amounts of heat that would boil off a good bit of the water while also poaching Noah, his family, and all the animals like a salmon.
We also know exactly what flood plains that are inundated when rivers overflow their banks during rainy seasons look like (which seems to me to be the closet event we have to what you are proposing). Unfortunately, there is no evidence for that type of flood event either.
My model has a gentler, and purposeful, rain that only lasts for 40 days.
My model has the landmass sinking under the weight of the floodwater, much like the Amazon River basin sinks under the weight of seasonal floods, only on a continental scale. My flood water would come in slowly, only speeding up relatively when the land began to sink under the weight of it.
What features would a geologic formation need in order to falsify your model?
You're making my point about flood models.
My model has a gentler, and purposeful, rain that only lasts for 40 days. This would allow Noah to capture fresh water, and, would serve to swell the wooden ark to a watertight condition. That it took forty days for the main floodwater to reach and float the ark indicates slow moving water (based on the probable location of the ark site on the Mesopotamian Plain).
Mountains may not have been high, as the plate movements that caused uplift and mountain building may have been post flood.My model doesn't need Mt. Everest to be covered. 'Mountains' can be translated as 'high hills', meaning the Mts. of Ararat. Why flood a distant mountain that probably had no life on it whatsoever.
Nice try, but when the fountains of the deep and the portals in space are opened pouring water on the planet, that slow stuff is out the window. Jesus mentions that the folks were taken away with the flood. That does not lend itself well to some slow rain.My model has the landmass sinking under the weight of the floodwater, much like the Amazon River basin sinks under the weight of seasonal floods, only on a continental scale. My flood water would come in slowly, only speeding up relatively when the land began to sink under the weight of it. By that time most of the movement of water would be near the top of the water column, not scouring and eroding the earth. Same when the water receded, where it would break up into many 'local' floods leaving no evidence of a single large flood. Local floods leave local evidence, just as is found in the geological record.
The driving force for the actual flood of God was water from space and under the earth.The driving force for my flood is an uplifting (breaking up) of the ocean floors spilling the oceans onto the land; perhaps the last of a periodic series of such events stretching back for millions of years.
Completely false. The bible method disproves the science method.The scientific method disproves certain Old Testament myths.
My model doesn't need Mt. Everest to be covered. 'Mountains' can be translated as 'high hills', meaning the Mts. of Ararat. Why flood a distant mountain that probably had no life on it whatsoever.
Then I'm at a loss as to what the big deal is about this "fossil sorting" argument.
Fossils can take a hike.
Two kingdoms:
- the Kingdom of God
- the Kingdom of Heaven
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?