Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You can't assure anything just like I can't assure anything from thousands of years ago.
It's not a science issue for me... it's a faith issue. The Lord said specifically what He was going to do, and I believe it was done. Obviously you don't - which doesn't make sense to me being that you believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus.
The physical resurrection of Jesus and the flood are two different things. There were many eyewitnesses to Jesus' post resurrection appearances.
But regarding the flood, or regarding the age of the earth, we have verifiable scientific evidence that there was no global flood, and that the earth is billions of years old.
Geologists know that a global flood could not have produced the geological features that we see on the earth. There have been many local and regional floods that are much older than the alleged biblical flood and which have left their marks on the earth's surface. If the biblical flood had actually occurred and was global it would have wiped out the evidence for those much older floods that happened during the ice age 18,000 to 13,000 years ago and which caused for example the geologic features of the scablands in Washington state which were scoured out by many repeated massive floods.
We have good solid geological evidence for the floods which happened during the ice age which happened long before the alleged biblical flood. We have no evidence for the biblical flood which, again, had it occurred, would have destroyed the evidence that we do have for much older regional floods.
I don't know if the Bible teaches science or not, and really don't care. It's purpose is matters spiritual and philosophical (and religious, unfortunately).
You could just as well expect a diet book to cover auto maintenance, but that's not reasonable.
The physical resurrection of Jesus and the flood are two different things. There were many eyewitnesses to Jesus' post resurrection appearances.
But regarding the flood, or regarding the age of the earth, we have verifiable scientific evidence that there was no global flood, and that the earth is billions of years old.
Geologists know that a global flood could not have produced the geological features that we see on the earth. There have been many local and regional floods that are much older than the alleged biblical flood and which have left their marks on the earth's surface. If the biblical flood had actually occurred and was global it would have wiped out the evidence for those much older floods that happened during the ice age 18,000 to 13,000 years ago and which caused for example the geologic features of the scablands in Washington state which were scoured out by many repeated massive floods.
We have good solid geological evidence for the floods which happened during the ice age which happened long before the alleged biblical flood. We have no evidence for the biblical flood which, again, had it occurred, would have destroyed the evidence that we do have for much older regional floods.
"many eyewitnesses"... The whole world was an eyewitness to the flood - either those before they perished, or those on the boat.
You keep giving me geologists and the opinions of others. Have you noticed that I haven't responded specifically to that? What is the Lord telling you about this?
At the time of the Genesis flood, the earth was one land mass. How do we know? Genesis 10 mentions the division of the earth.
Genesis 10:25 - Two sons were born to Eber; the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.
So at the time of the flood, the inhabitable earth was one land mass. Now it makes it more realistic that the water covered the entire land mass of the earth. It makes sense that they thought the world was flat because the land would have a definite east & west boundary.
The Lord spells it out clearly.
Genesis 6:17 - Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish.
Genesis 7:4 - For after seven more days, I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights; and I will blot out from the face of the land every living thing that I have made.”
Genesis 7:19-23 - The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. 20 The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. 21 All flesh that moved on the earth perished, birds and cattle and beasts and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; 22 of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died. 23 Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the earth; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark.
That seems pretty clear to me... NOT a local flood - if you choose to believe what's written.
Obviously, it is referencing the land and the people in the region, not the entire planet.
"many eyewitnesses"... The whole world was an eyewitness to the flood - either those before they perished, or those on the boat.
You keep giving me geologists and the opinions of others. Have you noticed that I haven't responded specifically to that? What is the Lord telling you about this?
No, the whole world was not an eyewitness to the flood. It's only a story which is based on some much more ancient local or regional flood but which extreme fundamentalists for some reason feel must be taken literally.
I keep giving you what geologists say because they are not stupid people. Science, regardless of your opinion of it gives us a reliable window into earth's past.
What is the Lord telling me about this? Through scientific evidence he is telling me that the creation and flood stories are just that ---stories which are not to be taken literally, and that the earth is many billions of years old.
No, the whole world was not an eyewitness to the flood. It's only a story which is based on some much more ancient local or regional flood but which extreme fundamentalists for some reason feel must be taken literally.
I keep giving you what geologists say because they are not stupid people. Science, regardless of your opinion of it gives us a reliable window into earth's past.
What is the Lord telling me about this? Through scientific evidence he is telling me that the creation and flood stories are just that ---stories which are not to be taken literally, and that the earth is many billions of years old.
Obviously I disagree, but I won't push this any further.
I am curious. So what else don't you believe in which scientists would take issue...
Obviously, it is referencing the land and the people in the region, not the entire planet.
The fact that you can trace Noah's flood story from just about every nation, just about every religion and every continent traces all people right back to the same people, same place.
Noah's has So MANY, MANY Names where the same story is told all over the world, and even though the story varies. It is always the same story of a lone survivor wth his sons and maybe wives.
The fact that Noah's story doesnt mean it flooded everywhere, it in fact traces all people back to the same region, and that's a fact, and only way that story could have been told everywhere in the ancient world, it is the oldest story.
Obviously I disagree, but I won't push this any further.
I am curious. So what else don't you believe in which scientists would take issue...
Rea Sea event
You're referring to the Exodus from Egypt? Yes, I believe that the Israelites were in Egypt and that there was an exodus. While there is no direct or primary evidence, there is indirect or secondary evidence which makes the captivity of the Israelites in Egypt quite plausible even though the Bible may embellish the details. Also, the Red Sea was too far away for the Israelites to have reached it in the time period given. It is far more likely that they crossed one of the reed lakes which were further North and which no longer exist.
Quote:
Jonah being swallowed by a whale
It's possible that it was literal. But for Jonah being in the big fish for three days to be a 'direct' analogy to Jesus' rising on the third day Jonah would have to have died and been brought back to life on the third day.
Quote:
Virgin birth of Jesus
Absolutely yes regarding the virgin birth of Jesus.
Just because I disagree with the creation and flood accounts being literal doesn't mean that I throw out the basic teachings of the Christian faith.
I believe that God is triune, that Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, that he became incarnate and is both eternal and infinite God and true humanity in one person, that he died for our sins, and was raised on the third day and appeared over a forty day period to his disciples as well as to certain people who were unbelievers at the time - Paul, Jesus' brother James who did not believe that Jesus was the Messiah until after Jesus was resurrected, and that Jesus ascended bodily into heaven where he now sits at the right hand of the Father, and that he will return at the end of the Tribulation and set up his kingdom on the earth.
''Ancient people held several ideas that seem silly in light of modern scientific research. The human authors God inspired to write the Bible were no different from any other ancient people. As a result, antiquated ideas about the natural world show up in their writings. . .the Bible's authors believed the earth was flat. They also thought the liver, kidneys or intestines, and not the brain were the seat of human intellect and emotion. St. Paul may even have thought that a woman's hair helped women to become pregnant. . . How can we trust the Bible if some of the information it records is not actually true?''
Old Testament scholar Michael Heiser answers that question in the short 7 minute video below.
Michael Heiser — Does The Bible Teach Science? How the Bible’s Own Context Answers the Question
The Bible wasn't meant to answer the question of how things work. It answers the question how God works with us.
Intelligent men of faith from centuries ago understood this
"The Bible shows the way to go to heaven not the way the heavens go."-Galileo
Christians can differ as to who goes to heaven but lets understand that the Bible and science aren't competitors. Rather, they answer two different questions!
To think that the Bible writers were trying to teach science by their use of organs is missing the point. The Bible is full of anthropomorphic ideas (assigning human qualities to objects). It's also full of metaphors, hyperbole, figurative terms, parables.
Down to this day we use organs in figurative terms to make a point
"My heart is torn in two." Really, when faced with a conflict are we really having our heart torn in two?
"Lets get to the heart of the matter." Do issues really have a heart?
Remember the Bible has a dual purpose. Speaking to the target audience of that era with information they could understand for their time. Yet, ensuring that the timeless message makes it to future generations like our own.
The Bible wasn't meant to answer the question of how things work. It answers the question how God works with us.
Intelligent men of faith from centuries ago understood this
"The Bible shows the way to go to heaven not the way the heavens go."-Galileo
Christians can differ as to who goes to heaven but lets understand that the Bible and science aren't competitors. Rather, they answer two different questions!
To think that the Bible writers were trying to teach science by their use of organs is missing the point. The Bible is full of anthropomorphic ideas (assigning human qualities to objects). It's also full of metaphors, hyperbole, figurative terms, parables.
Down to this day we use organs in figurative terms to make a point
"My heart is torn in two." Really, when faced with a conflict are we really having our heart torn in two?
"Lets get to the heart of the matter." Do issues really have a heart?
Remember the Bible has a dual purpose. Speaking to the target audience of that era with information they could understand for their time. Yet, ensuring that the timeless message makes it to future generations like our own.
Yep!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
