Whale Fossils Discovered High Up In Andes Mountains

[The Barbarian]

Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. …. they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water.
By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.

Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.​

Correct Biblical exegesis defines what "world" means … there are many Scriptures where "world" does not mean "everything in our area". I won't bother with all of them, these two will suffice:

John 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.​

So "world" can mean various things in scripture, including "just the Roman empire." O.K.

 

[PaulCyp1]

Whale move during an uplift??? Are you serious? The formation of a mountain by uplift can take hundreds to thousands of years. A whale died, washed ashore, was gradually buried in sand or other fine materials. Its soft parts decomposed, leaving its skeleton. Over a period of many centuries that section of earth was gradually uplifted by subterranean forces, perhaps a few inches a year. Result - whale bones in sedimentary deposits high up on a mountain. No mystery here. Such processes are well understood, and that information is readily available for anyone who actually wants to know the answers.

 

[twin.spin]

Peter and Paul aren't God, their words were sincere opinions about the world in an age of ignorance. They didn't know anything about evolution or the age of the earth etc.

Next I suppose you're going to argue that the Gospels … Genesis … Psalms … Jeremiah … and anywhere else Scripture speaks about creation are nothing more than sincere opinions.

Jesus quoted a passage from the book of Psalms. After he did, he remarked:

“The Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35).​

He was saying, “These words are God’s words.”.

The New Testament makes the same claim. One example is found in 1 Thessalonians:

“When you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God” (1 Thessalonians 2:13).​

God the Holy Spirit gave the Bible through human writers; who are merely the secretaries. The words that are written, finally, are God’s.

 

[twin.spin]

So "world" can mean various things in scripture, including "just the Roman empire." O.K.

So we know that when in 2 Peter 3 it reads: "By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed." was not a localized event since it's judgement is being compared to the same world wide judgment of Jesus' second return to judge.

 

[sfs]

It's good to know the truth personally and not have to go along with what the world tells us.

It's also good for that truth to have some connection to reality.

A personal relationship with God and presence of the Holy Spirit to lead us into truth is standing enough to make the statement he made IMO.

So Christian scientists, who have the same personal relationship with God and the presence of the same Holy Spirit, but who come to radically different conclusions (based on actually looking at the data, mind you) -- where to they fit into your scheme?

 

[Colter]

Next I suppose you're going to argue that the Gospels … Genesis … Psalms … Jeremiah … and anywhere else Scripture speaks about creation are nothing more than sincere opinions.

Jesus quoted a passage from the book of Psalms. After he did, he remarked:

“The Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35).​

He was saying, “These words are God’s words.”.

The New Testament makes the same claim. One example is found in 1 Thessalonians:

“When you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God” (1 Thessalonians 2:13).​

God the Holy Spirit gave the Bible through human writers; who are merely the secretaries. The words that are written, finally, are God’s.

Jesus was using their own claim that the scripture cannot be broken in rebuttal, he knew the scriptures were not written by God rather they were written by holy men.

 

[The Barbarian]

So we know that when in 2 Peter 3 it reads: "By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed."

That it could simply mean the general area. Yes. Since the flood story itself doesn't say that the flood was global, and since in the NT, "world" was applied to just the Roman Empire, it's quite obvious that the flood was not global.

 

[The Barbarian]

Evolutionists say it was an asteroid

Show us that. The Nazca plate works like all the others, by tectonic forces. Would you like to learn about that?

Since the eastern Andes are made of oceanic crust, we know that the numerous fossils of sea creatures were laid down in ocean sediments before the were uplifted by the movements of the plates in that area.

 

[Colter]

That it could simply mean the general area. Yes. Since the flood story itself doesn't say that the flood was global, and since in the NT, "world" was applied to just the Roman Empire, it's quite obvious that the flood was not global.

The creators of the flood story were very clear that the flood covered the entire earth and killed everyone and everything except Noah, his mixed race family and the millions of living things on the boat. Gen 17:15-24

 

[The Barbarian]

The creators of the flood story were very clear that the flood covered the entire earth and killed everyone and everything except Noah, his mixed race family and the millions of living things on the boat. Gen 17:15-24

That was never Christian orthodoxy. Generally Christians have divided on whether it was a regional flood or a parable. We don't know for sure, but it is true that a huge regional flood, larger than anything in recorded history, occurred in the Middle East at about the right time in the past.

 

[Colter]

That was never Christian orthodoxy. Generally Christians have divided on whether it was a regional flood or a parable. We don't know for sure, but it is true that a huge regional flood, larger than anything in recorded history, occurred in the Middle East at about the right time in the past.

Its what the story says. Then there is the claim that all the existing races came from Noahs kids, that God mixed up languages. The regional flood explanation is not what is claimed by the scripture authors.

 

[Chris V++]

The regional flood explanation is not what is claimed by the scripture authors.

Correct. The Genesis account is straight forward and doesn't support that interpretation.

'The waters prevailed above the mountains, covering them fifteen cubits deep. And all flesh died that moved on the earth, birds, livestock, beasts, all swarming creatures that swarm on the earth, and all mankind. Everything on the dry land bin whose nostrils was the breath of life died. He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens. They were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those who were with him in the ark. And the waters prevailed on the earth 150 days."


Everyone seems to be willing to accept a past MASS EXTINCTION EVENT - just not a global flood, despite the presence of marine fossils found on mountaintops. It's as if we are willing to believe anything over what Genesis plainly states. Most will agree that at one time or another in ancient history that every square inch of the planet was submerged, but that not all the land was submerged at the same time as recorded in Genesis.

 

[Colter]

Correct. The Genesis account is straight forward and doesn't support that interpretation.

'The waters prevailed above the mountains, covering them fifteen cubits deep. And all flesh died that moved on the earth, birds, livestock, beasts, all swarming creatures that swarm on the earth, and all mankind. Everything on the dry land bin whose nostrils was the breath of life died. He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens. They were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those who were with him in the ark. And the waters prevailed on the earth 150 days."


Everyone seems to be willing to accept a past MASS EXTINCTION EVENT - just not a global flood, despite the presence of marine fossils found on mountaintops. It's as if we are willing to believe anything over what Genesis plainly states. Most will agree that at one time or another in ancient history that every square inch of the planet was submerged, but that not all the land was submerged at the same time as recorded in Genesis.

The marine fossils were once on the sea floor, subduction pushes the mountains up.

The Archean period was the last time water covered the earth entirely.

Noahs flood was an attempt to connect blood lines to Adam. Unable to do so the Hebrew priest decided to drown the whole earth in its wickedness.

 

[Meowzltov]

Its interesting that not only have marine fossils been discovered at the peaks of all mountains in the world, but also how large whale fossils been discovered high up in the Andes mountains.

This subject is twofold because first there is the major problem of explaining fossilization without a cause if one wants to go with the poor uplift excuse. Then, perhaps, the other problem is explaining why a whale didn't move during an uplift and got stuck during the rising up of the uplift and then became a fossil?

So atheists, have at it.

I'm not understanding what the problem is, and I'm not even an atheist, I'm a Christian. The whale dies. It gets buried in the sediment. It fossilizes as sedimentary rock forms. The tectonic plates, as always, move, and the edge of the South American plate is thrust up, leaving the whale fossil high on the top of the Andes. Where exactly is your difficulty in that?

Although it does appear that you oddly got it out of sequence. How is it that you think the whale bones didn't fossilize until they were on top of the Andes????

 

[Meowzltov]

In that case the Flood is not up for debate. The Flood was agreed upon by all Nicene scholars as well as Ante-Nicene fathers and up to our present day modern scholars. Since Jesus Christ said the Flood happened then debating the Flood on this topic is a violation of this forum.

I speak of the flood all the time, just like Jesus did. I am a Christian. I talk about it because it is a teaching story. But historically it is a legend rather than history. There will be elements of it that are true and elements of it that are not factually accurate. It's not important. The people in Jesus' parable are not factual either -- they're not supposed to be. the events in legends are not supposed to be entirely factual. At any rate, what little facts we do have seem to support a local flood event. I'm sure it was Noah's "whole world" so to speak. It is not "un-Christian" are anti-Nicene to hold this view.

 

[Isaiah60]

Show us that. The Nazca plate works like all the others, by tectonic forces. Would you like to learn about that?

Since the eastern Andes are made of oceanic crust, we know that the numerous fossils of sea creatures were laid down in ocean sediments before the were uplifted by the movements of the plates in that area.

Sounds like philosophy to me and impossible to prove apart from fallacious conjectures which change with each passing wind.
I have seen how through the years these theories change. Yet, the Flood explains it the best. So to be very honest with you, I'm not interested in philosophy as the scientific analysis harmonizes well with ancient witnesses.

 

[Isaiah60]

I speak of the flood all the time, just like Jesus did. I am a Christian. I talk about it because it is a teaching story. But historically it is a legend rather than history. There will be elements of it that are true and elements of it that are not factually accurate. It's not important. The people in Jesus' parable are not factual either -- they're not supposed to be. the events in legends are not supposed to be entirely factual. At any rate, what little facts we do have seem to support a local flood event. I'm sure it was Noah's "whole world" so to speak. It is not "un-Christian" are anti-Nicene to hold this view.

Nothing about Matt.24 is a parable. It is prophecy. Jesus compared the people of the last days to those of the Flood. Jesus said the Flood was true history as did every other Prophet before Him and after.
It wasn't until the Darwinian synthesis that the Flood was rejected. This was done to do away with historical dating methods of history and to make up a new history of the world which accounted for longer ages as to fit the evolutionary scheme.

 

[Isaiah60]

Whale move during an uplift??? Are you serious? The formation of a mountain by uplift can take hundreds to thousands of years. A whale died, washed ashore, was gradually buried in sand or other fine materials. Its soft parts decomposed, leaving its skeleton. Over a period of many centuries that section of earth was gradually uplifted by subterranean forces, perhaps a few inches a year. Result - whale bones in sedimentary deposits high up on a mountain. No mystery here. Such processes are well understood, and that information is readily available for anyone who actually wants to know the answers.

Well that's an interesting theory you have and a desperate one at that. Very creative, though. However, we are faced with the reality that we no longer have any modern whale fossils. Decomposition does not automatically=fossil. And these slow and gradual uplifts actually hurt this theory as fossilization, as everyone knows, is a process which involves a quick and rapid burial of a creature in the sediments. It is here that we see the physical process of fossilization occur on land and sea. Fossilization is very rare and doesn't happen all the time. So the whales in the Andes were more than likely killed in the global Flood which has been an account preserved by all ancient antiquity which was an event not equaled in any other history.
But as usually, atheists will reject the Flood because with the Flood comes accountability of the soul. That is why the Flood is rejected. That is not science. Atheists come up with all these wild and super complex theories when the truth is so simple.

 

[Colter]

Sounds like philosophy to me and impossible to prove apart from fallacious conjectures which change with each passing wind.
I have seen how through the years these theories change. Yet, the Flood explains it the best. So to be very honest with you, I'm not interested in philosophy as the scientific analysis harmonizes well with ancient witnesses.

Plate tectonics isn't philosophy, its an established fact of science.

 

[Colter]

Well that's an interesting theory you have and a desperate one at that. Very creative, though. However, we are faced with the reality that we no longer have any modern whale fossils. Decomposition does not automatically=fossil. And these slow and gradual uplifts actually hurt this theory as fossilization, as everyone knows, is a process which involves a quick and rapid burial of a creature in the sediments. It is here that we see the physical process of fossilization occur on land and sea. Fossilization is very rare and doesn't happen all the time. So the whales in the Andes were more than likely killed in the global Flood which has been an account preserved by all ancient antiquity which was an event not equaled in any other history.
But as usually, atheists will reject the Flood because with the Flood comes accountability of the soul. That is why the Flood is rejected. That is not science. Atheists come up with all these wild and super complex theories when the truth is so simple.

The flood is rejected because its obviously illogical. God doesn't regret his previous actions, besides, the world didn't even change.

The uplift happened long after the fossils were incorporated into the layers that were lifted up and in some cases are still rising.