Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
Because the biblical flood is biblically supposed to have taken place only a couple of thousand years after the creation of the world based on the genealogies.
Attempts to date the biblical creation of the world have yielded a range of results, but generally between about 5500 BC and about 4000 BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_creation
Noah's Flood then was obviously sometime after those dates. And again, ancient civilizations were thriving all during that time. There was no Noah's Flood as the existence of those civilizations prove.
. |
You are using the YEC point of view that the flood occurred a few thousand years after creation, yet when scripture is taken as a whole that view does not add up. They believe in a literal 24hr six days of creation where on the 6th day God made man in his image and likeness. A day in scripture is used both for a 24hr period but it is also used for a longer period of time.
As I have explained to you a few time now we are living in the 6th day of creation. Thus the 6th day has spanned from the time of the first man until now and will continue until we humankind is made in the image and likeness of God.
Here is a look at what the scriptures declare.
Gen.1:26-27
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
1 cor.15:45-49
And so it is written, The
first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47
The first man is of the earth, earthy:
the second man is the Lord from heaven. 48As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 49
And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
In gen we are told God created man in his image and likeness, yet Paul tells us the first man Adam is of the earth earthy an we as of right now bare that same image.
So what the heck is going on? is Paul wrong and in disagreement with Gen. 1:26-27.
Can they both be right? Yes if we look to the whole counsel of God.
So how are they reconciled? very easily
Is.46:9-10
Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
10
Declaring the end from the beginning, and
from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying,
My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure
Thus Gen.1:26-27 is God declaring the end from the beginning, the end coming when as Paul said we SHALL bare the image of the heavenly.
Now as we are living in the 6th day of creation and have yet to bare the image of God as Paul said is it not obvious that the days of creation do not have to be a 24hr. period.
Now if YEC are wrong about the days of creation having to be a 24 hr period would that not give them an error in dating things? I would think so.
Quote:
|
Obviously. But plate tectonics have been active for billions of years. Not as a result of a non-existent flood.
|
every dating method scientist use is in question. You trust their dating methods I do not as they are all over the place. One example is they have dated rocks from mount saint Helens between 350,000 years to well over 2 million years, yet we all know when the rocks were formed is no more then 40+ years ago.
Now if they cannot accurately date the known age of rocks how can we trust they are accurately dating the age of unknown rocks?
and that is only one example of many I could give you.
Quote:
|
Oh, good grief. The land mass was once under water. As the mountains rose they carried the fossils with them.
|
Have you ever looked up what type of sea life has been found on this so called 40 to 50 million years old mountain range? one type is the modern whale which obviously should not be there as according to evolution the modern whale only came on the scene 34 million years ago. oops.
Quote:
|
Once an animal has died it isn't going anywhere except where the rising land takes it. Over time, if conditions allow it, it becomes fossilized.
|
Then you need to explain how a modern whale is found on top of a 40 to 50 million year old range? it obviously could not have died and been buried before it even appeared on the scene.
Quote:
|
Because floods happen around the world and primitive people create stories to explain them.
|
or because it actually happened and people have been explaining it.
Quote:
|
Just call me Mr. Scoffer. Again, I go with the science, not with a story based on other ancient Near East stories.
|
you go with science so called and that is your choice, but as scripture points out you have been swayed to believe in false teaching from the so called science.
no there has not what? been 15 other finds besides Schweitzer find.
a quick search would show you that Cells and soft tissues have been preserved in fossil bones include osteocytes, chondrocytes, blood vessels, nerve fibers, nerves, and the sheets of collagen in bone matrix.
none of which should be in bones 65 million years ago.
Quote:
|
And again, the dating of the biblical flood depends on the genealogies covering from Adam through Noah. So the flood according to the Bible took place just a couple or so thousand years after the biblical creation of the world
|
I agree in part but as I showed the creation days are not to be taken as a 24hr period as we are not yet created in the image and likeness of God. they are two separate issues.
and as I said if they started with a wrong date they would get a wrong date.
So what is a generation? How are they measuring it? when was Adam created? do we know the date of his creation? we only know he lived 930 years.
Now as we do not know the date Adam was created on we obviously cannot start our count from him and move forward in time as we do not know what date to start from. thus we have to go from a known date in history and move backwards.
Matthew states
So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.
Now most believe Jesus lived around 2000 years ago so from our day 2000 years has already pasted.
So what is a generation? how many years equals a generation? are the years between each generation the same or do they differ?
In the old testament a generation in Abraham's day was equal to 100 years. This is seen in that Abraham was 100 years old when he had Issac. it is also seen in that when God told Abram that his seed would be in bondage for 400 years but in the 4th generation they would come out of that bondage. Gen.15:12-16
thus equating 400 years with 4 generations.
are we to use this reckoning of a generation? if so then we have 3 sets of 14 generations and if 100 years is used for each of those 14 generations then we have from Abraham to Christ 4200 years. Now we are 2000 years removed from Christ which would mean Abraham lived 6200 years ago. Then we would have to calculate backward from 6200 years ago to the time of Adam.
Now I am not saying every generation is equal to 100 years but as the Generation started at Abraham and moved forward it cannot be excluded.
However if the generations do equal 100 years the flood would have occurred before 6200 years ago.
Do you know of any civilization that was older then 6200 years?
Quote:
|
No, that is your conclusion based on YOUR worldview which apparently has shifted from an old world creation to a young earth creation. Mary Schweitzer is a scientist. You are not and in fact you have a very low regard for science as you have shown in this very thread.
|
I am neither an old earth creationist nor a YEC Micheal, i think both parties are missing the boat. OEC rely on the age of rocks which cannot be trust as I pointed out and YEC rely on a day being only a 24 hrs. period.
and other scientist come to a different conclusion then Schweitzer, which is to say they are following the evidence were it is pointing to, which is if collagen survive more then 900,000 years then that points to dinosaurs being around a heck of a lot longer then 65 million years ago.
Quote:
|
There is quite a bit of evidence against Noah's Flood which is why by the end of the 19th century even most theologians realized that Noah's Flood never happened.
|
Ya believing in the myth of evolution has become a pandemic.
Quote:
|
No, but belief that the creation and flood stories are literal and historical is in error.
|
according to your worldview. Not according to the scriptures or a scriptural worldview.
Quote:
You are being ridiculous.
You aren't taking the scriptures seriously when you refuse to acknowledge the different literary genres which include mythic stories such as the creation and flood stories.
|
you call history a myth, scripture calls the creation and the flood history. guess what I believe the scriptures. Go figure a Christian actually believes in the scriptures.
Quote:
|
God's judgment on sin by causing a world-wide flood that destroy all life except what and who was on the ark is simply part of the story.
|
oh good grief.
my views are scriptural and those who believe in what the scripture say are not an embarrassment to Christianity they/scriptures are the essence of Christianity.
It is actually your view that is an embarrassment to Christianity and to the scriptures.
God does not judge sin with a myth.
and again I did not address you, I was encouraging Danny and other who hold to the scriptures, it was you who addressed me, so I have no problem if you do not want to keep speaking with me.[/quote]
Quote:
|
No, but I addressed you. And don't ever again deny being a fundamentalist because you have shown that you are. The belief that Noah's Flood was historical is very embarrassing to Christianity.
|
yes you addressed me and then complain that I addressed you back. and you can call me whatever you like but what I have said in this thread is not even close to the fundamentalist view of the scriptures the only thing we actually agree on is Noah's flood being historical so if that makes me a fundamentalist in your eyes so be it.
Quote:
|
Now stop embarrassing yourself. Besides, this is off topic for this thread as even the OP noted
|
well it is and it is not off topic. the first video I gave was directly associated with the topic, you on the other hand cannot separate the creation account from the long years or the flood as we keep witnessing in your posts. But I get it you want the mods to shut me up again by deleting my posts or locking the thread for defending the scriptures on the Christian form.
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.
