• CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • CFN welcomes new contributing members!

    Please welcome Roberto and Julia to our family

    Blessings in Christ, and hope you stay awhile!

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

[_ Old Earth _] Old Earth Vs. Literal Reading of the Bible.

Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Opps, the rest of my post did not make it.

Their beliefs on the matter are irrelevant. By teachings do you mean The Bible?

As for Loch ness and such, well i suggest watching Dr. Hovinds seminar entitled "dinosaurs ion the Bible " its a 3 hour commute, but he addresses all the matter in great detail.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

johnmuise said:
Opps, the rest of my post did not make it.

Their beliefs on the matter are irrelevant. By teachings do you mean The Bible?

As for Loch ness and such, well i suggest watching Dr. Hovinds seminar entitled "dinosaurs ion the Bible " its a 3 hour commute, but he addresses all the matter in great detail.

Are you really saying that Judaic beliefs on the Old Testament do not matter and your view is more relevant?

And for Hovind do you know his credentials?

1. First of all, as for "Dr." Hovind, the use of the title tips anyone who knows about doctorates degrees off that he may be a fake My dad has a doctorates in chem, written peer reviewed, given seminars, etc. he never uses that title with his name.

2. Hovind's thesis was a joke. I think originally it was 50 pages or something. I've written papers that length for regular classes. He also claims that he continually added to his thesis, and got it to 250 eventually. Um, sorry, epic fail. No one continually adds to their thesis. They may continue to work in the area that their thesis dealt with, but a thesis is required for graduation. Its not an ongoing thing.

3. His thesis was and has not been released for public viewing. Pretty much unheard of for doctoral thesis.

4. His college was a diploma mill.

5. I think he got his doctorates in like 3 years.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Are you really saying that Judaic beliefs on the Old Testament do not matter and your view is more relevant?

I am saying that all we have is the Bible, if it was not inspired from God then its worthless, so as per the core of my belief, the Bible was written by men inspired from God.

Any speculation outside of that is not worth poo. IMHO. Its okay to speculate on topics but its bad to go about teaching them rather then teaching what the Bible actually says. Besides the Jews reject Jesus...

And for Hovind do you know his credintials?

1. First of all, as for "Dr." Hovind, the use of the title tips anyone who knows about doctorates degrees off that he may be a charlotene. My dad has a doctorates in chem, written peer reviewed, given seminars, etc. he never uses that title with his name.

2. Hovind's thesis was a joke. I think originally it was 50 pages or something. I've written papers that length for regular classes.

3. His thesis was and has not been released for public viewing. Pretty much unheard of for doctoral thesis.

4. His college was a diploma mill.

5. I think he got his doctorates in like 3 years

This just goes to prove that when you tackle a false premise you need a lot of training, where as to see truth. all you need to do is see past the lies. The truth will set you free. Jesus said he is the Truth..and he set me free. wow another conformation of the Bibles authentic nature. :wink:
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

I am saying that all we have is the Bible, if it was not inspired from God then its worthless, so as per the core of my belief, the Bible was written by men inspired from God.

Any speculation outside of that is not worth poo. IMHO. Its okay to speculate on topics but its bad to go about teaching them rather then teaching what the Bible actually says. Besides the Jews reject Jesus...

If we were speaking on Jesus than their rejection of him versus the christian acceptance would be relevant. We aren't, so its not.

Also, we are discussing what the Bible is meaning. It doesn't say “There were dinosaurs.â€Â, therefore it is up to interpretation. I am explaining that the Judaic tradition, which predates Christianity, and is the one responsible for the content, DOES NOT interpret this to be a dinosaur, much less a real animal at that time.

You are speculating what this animal is, and that speculation lines up with what you believe, rather that what has been established for thousands of years in traditional Judaic teachings, or real science.

This just goes to prove that when you tackle a false premise you need a lot of training, where as to see truth. all you need to do is see past the lies. The truth will set you free. Jesus said he is the Truth..and he set me free. wow another conformation of the Bibles authentic nature.

Actually it goes to show that he is a phony, and profited off of misleading people, and the IRS. Though he reaped what he sowed in the end.

BTW, he's just an hours drive from me in the state pen. Maybe I'll go see him during visiting hours to see if I can talk him into releasing that thesis. Maybe he refers to himself as Dr. Inmate 1167 now.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Right, its under interpretation, i say it was a dino, because to say otherwise this leads way for evolution to squeeze in and dilute God.

What was that Bible story when the guy went to jail and found favor and ened up running the place or something like that. Last time i checked Hovind got his fellow inmates all saved :wink:
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

johnmuise said:
Right, its under interpretation, i say it was a dino, because to say otherwise this leads way for evolution to squeeze in and dilute God.

What was that Bible story when the guy went to jail and found favor and ened up running the place or something like that. Last time i checked Hovind got his fellow inmates all saved :wink:

Therefore you are saying you are going against all conventional interpretation because of your personal belief that somehow evolution "dilutes" God. Are you admitting you are allowing personal bias determine how you interpret scripture?

IMO young earth belief dillutes God. Anyone with a grasp on any of the high school sciences realize that the earth is not 6k years old.

And if all of science was wrong, the planes should be falling from the sky, the cars shouldn't run, I wouldn't be talking to you over the internet, I would be sweating right now, your gun wouldn't fire during training, my TV wouldnt work, the radio im listening to would be silent, etc. etc.

But, thats not the case.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Therefore you are saying you are going against all conventional interpretation because of your personal belief that somehow evolution "dilutes" God. Are you admitting you are allowing personal bias determine how you interpret scripture?

There are many interpretations, i side with the one that is more in line with the rest of the Bible.
IMO young earth belief dillutes God. Anyone with a grasp on any of the high school sciences realize that the earth is not 6k years old.

YE belief is what the Bible says, i've already shown why.


And if all of science was wrong, the planes should be falling from the sky, the cars shouldn't run, I wouldn't be talking to you over the internet, I would be sweating right now, your gun wouldn't fire during training, my TV wouldnt work, the radio im listening to would be silent, etc. etc.

I never said science was wrong, science is great i love it, but i don't like lies and mislead people preaching the wrong stuff.

Believe all the Bible or none of it, nuff said.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Belief all the Bible or none of it, nuff said.

Christians who do accept science and realize the earth isnt 6k yrs old do believe all of the Bible. Just not your view. Don't set yourself up as the standard.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

VaultZero4Me said:
Belief all the Bible or none of it, nuff said.

Christians who do accept science and realize the earth isnt 6k yrs old do believe all of the Bible. Just not your view. Don't set yourself up as the standard.

Dude. I am done with you on this topic, i already posted many things which prove my point, the Bible says in 6 days God made the heavens and the earth and everything in it, i don't think he could have been any clearer.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

johnmuise said:
VaultZero4Me said:
Belief all the Bible or none of it, nuff said.

Christians who do accept science and realize the earth isnt 6k yrs old do believe all of the Bible. Just not your view. Don't set yourself up as the standard.

Dude. I am done with you on this topic, i already posted many things which prove my point, the Bible says in 6 days God made the heavens and the earth and everything in it, i don't think he could have been any clearer.

I don't disagree that the Bible says that. It's just not to be taken literally or you are forced to believe something that is wrong (6k earth) and looks silly to anyone who graduated from a non-YEC high school

Same with the verse in I believe Daniel, in which he could see a tree from the for corners of the earth in a dream. That's impossible we know, therefore we take it metaphorically. Also, in Luke, where satan takes Jesus up to the mountain to see ALL of the kingdoms of the earth. That is impossible, we now know. Therefore its a metaphor.

Also, when the sun stood still during the battle. We know now that for the sun to stand still, the earth would have to stop rotating (rather than the ancient belief that the sun orbits the earth), which would cause quite a few nasty little problems. Something else had to happen.

A 6k year old earth is impossible, therefore it is a metaphor.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Okay maybe i am not done ( i can't help myself)
I don't disagree that the Bible says that. It's just not to be taken literally or you are forced to believe something that is wrong (6k earth) and looks silly to anyone who graduated from a non-YEC high school

I graduate tomorrow, me and about 70 other YE's so your wrong.

Same with the verse in I believe Daniel, in which he could see a tree from the for corners of the earth in a dream. That's impossible we know, therefore we take it metaphorically. Also, in Luke, where satan takes Jesus up to the mountain to see ALL of the kingdoms of the earth. That is impossible, we now know. Therefore its a metaphor.

The four corners of the earth thing has been debunked already.
http://johnmuise.deviantart.com/art/The ... e-83178548

Also, when the sun stood still during the battle. We know now that for the sun to stand still, the earth would have to stop rotating (rather than the ancient belief that the sun orbits the earth), which would cause quite a few nasty little problems. Something else had to happen.

Yes you see how interpreting the scriptures wrong can lead to poo. Flat earth for one good example.


A 6k year old earth is impossible, therefore it is a metaphor.

On contrary friend. Its quite true.

So if Genesis is supposed to not be taken literary, whats your take on the great flood? did it happen (remember if it did then it was global for to say anything else is contradicting scripture)
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

johnmuise said:
Okay maybe i am not done ( i can't help myself)
I don't disagree that the Bible says that. It's just not to be taken literally or you are forced to believe something that is wrong (6k earth) and looks silly to anyone who graduated from a non-YEC high school

I graduate tomorrow, me and about 70 other YE's so your wrong.

[quote:d864a]
Same with the verse in I believe Daniel, in which he could see a tree from the for corners of the earth in a dream. That's impossible we know, therefore we take it metaphorically. Also, in Luke, where satan takes Jesus up to the mountain to see ALL of the kingdoms of the earth. That is impossible, we now know. Therefore its a metaphor.

The four corners of the earth thing has been debunked already.
http://johnmuise.deviantart.com/art/The ... e-83178548

Also, when the sun stood still during the battle. We know now that for the sun to stand still, the earth would have to stop rotating (rather than the ancient belief that the sun orbits the earth), which would cause quite a few nasty little problems. Something else had to happen.

Yes you see how interpreting the scriptures wrong can lead to poo. Flat earth for one good example.


A 6k year old earth is impossible, therefore it is a metaphor.

On contrary friend. Its quite true.

So if Genesis is supposed to not be taken literary, whats your take on the great flood? did it happen (remember if it did then it was global for to say anything else is contradicting scripture)[/quote:d864a]

1. I didn't say you wouldn't graduate. Just your belief looks odd to anyone who has had science classes on a highschool level.

2. As for the link, remember, a circle is 2d therefore flat. A sphere is 3d. Literally speaking, that verse says the world is flat. Circles are flat.

Tents cover the bottom of the ground, which is 2d. We dont float in the center of the tent. In fact, I would guess that the majority of tents in that time would be some type of animal skin or fabric, held up over the naked ground. Visually comparing the heavens lke a "tent" would fit the flat view much better than what we know is the truth.

3. You failed to address the verse about the sun standing still.

4. No global flood. No evidence, physically breaks too many laws. Localized flood appearing global (since all the world they knew was in their immediate surroundings.) No literal global flood.

(some of this was sourced from http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noa ... plications)

In fact, explain to me how Noah could build a boat that size without it sinking? I doubt we could do that today without using some iron in it. No pure wooden ships of that size to date have been made that are ocean viable (to my knowledge).

Next explain how all of the animals from every continent got there. Did they all swim really fast?

How did he feed all of the special diets of some of the more exotic animals.

How did he fit all of the millions of species.

Why didn't they all die from heat exhaustion from all of the body heat from the millions of species in that tiny space?

Why didn't the currents from the rapid water speeding across the earth not destroy that boat?

Where did the water go (please dont say ice caps)?

In fact, where did all the water come from? There isn't enough water on the earth to cover it entirely. (again don't say ice caps).

From the rapid pressure build up in the atmosphere (water rising squeezing the air in the atmosphere)

How did the different fish with salt level requirements not die? (ever try to own a salt water fish in an aquarium?)

I could keep going but thats enough for now.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Reconcile this verse:

Gen 6:3
And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

with this person

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people

How can that verse be literal if we have at least one documented case of someone living longer than 120 years?

Not to mention that soon, with modern medicine, 120+ years won't be that unique.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

There is no doubt that the Anti-deluvians had a primitive cosmology. However, saying that they got it wrong (or simply looked at throught primitive eyes) is one thing. Saying that an old earth proves evolution is another.

Notice in Genesis before creation started that it says 'The earth was without form and void'. There was something concrete there to work with first. Who KNOWS how long this was there before life as we know it began? God is not bound by time.

Evolution and the God of the Scriptures are not compatible. Plain and simple. You can call yourself a theist and believe in evolution. You cannot call yourself a Christian of the bible and believe in evolution.

Let me explain why...

1) Sin, the fall of man, the great controversy between good and evil and Satanic temptation are all made moot points. Man cannot be saved from something he didn't actually do (bring sin into the world). Christ could not come to restore the image of God in man that he fell from if man evolved.

2) God's people were told and reinforced throughout history by God Himself of His creative power and how He did it. Look at the Sabbath commandment:

Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. ...For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy...Exodus 20:8,11

Notice Revelation 14:7
He said in a loud voice, "Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come. Worship him who made the heavens, the earth, the sea and the springs of water."

This links to Exodus which in turn links to the creative account in Genesis. God's people all throughout the earth believed in a literal creation, not an evolutionary process. This was revealed to them by GOD HIMSELF.

3) Paul makes direct reference to Adam and Eve and the fall of man. If this was merely a myth, we cannot trust Paul for Paul fully believed that this was so.

We cannot believe the God of the scriptures and believe in evolution and deny a literal creation. To do so is to completely go against the bible as it was written and as the people therein believed.

If you choose to believe in evolution, you are not following the bible. If you are not following the Bible, what can you truly base your 'Christianity' foundation on?? The scriptures are the Word of God, not some extra source to use at a whim.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

VaultZero4Me said:
Reconcile this verse:

Gen 6:3
And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

with this person

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people

How can that verse be literal if we have at least one documented case of someone living longer than 120 years?
It doesn't mean that men will live 120 years. It means that there would be a period of 120 years until the flood.

VaultZero4Me said:
Not to mention that soon, with modern medicine, 120+ years won't be that unique.
The average life expectancy is only increasing because of infant mortality rates are falling (the USA mortality rate went up recently) and not because people are living longer. Medicine has made major leaps in detection, not so much in cures, of disease (unless you're a lab rat).
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

1. I didn't say you wouldn't graduate. Just your belief looks odd to anyone who has had science classes on a highschool level.

I have geology and biology and physics. Do they count?

2. As for the link, remember, a circle is 2d therefore flat. A sphere is 3d. Literally speaking, that verse says the world is flat. Circles are flat.

Maybe it is a metaphor of sorts the Bible does contain many.


3. You failed to address the verse about the sun standing still.

Why can't that be literal?

4. No global flood. No evidence, physically breaks too many laws. Localized flood appearing global (since all the world they knew was in their immediate surroundings.) No literal global flood.

State some of these "Laws" The Bible clearly says the waters covered the whole earth. Again you are guilty of bending the word to squeeze in long dates and evolution.

Yuck, talk origins, more like talk Phooey.
In fact, explain to me how Noah could build a boat that size without it sinking? I doubt we could do that today without using some iron in it. No pure wooden ships of that size to date have been made that are ocean viable (to my knowledge).

The Chinese had many 300ft+ long ships.

Next explain how all of the animals from every continent got there. Did they all swim really fast?

The would be the miracle part God used to save the animals.
How did he feed all of the special diets of some of the more exotic animals.

Your assuming once more that what we see today is what it was like back then, sure the diets are exotic now but hey your the one who believes rocks can bring forth life.

How did he fit all of the millions of species.

Just each generic kind.

Why didn't they all die from heat exhaustion from all of the body heat from the millions of species in that tiny space?

There was not millions so the rest is easy.


Why didn't the currents from the rapid water speeding across the earth not destroy that boat?

When my backyard floods i don't see/feel any currents :o

Where did the water go (please dont say ice caps)?

Its still here, watch Dr. Walt Browns Video.


In fact, where did all the water come from? There isn't enough water on the earth to cover it entirely. (again don't say ice caps).

No at the earths present state, but if the world was all at the same level the water would cover it all with like 8,000 feet.


How did the different fish with salt level requirements not die? (ever try to own a salt water fish in an aquarium?)

This has been debunked, Dr. Hovind did it i believe.

I could keep going but thats enough for now.
Too easy. i want more. :wink:
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

DavidLee said:
VaultZero4Me said:
Reconcile this verse:

Gen 6:3
And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

with this person

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_people

How can that verse be literal if we have at least one documented case of someone living longer than 120 years?
It doesn't mean that men will live 120 years. It means that there would be a period of 120 years until the flood.

VaultZero4Me said:
Not to mention that soon, with modern medicine, 120+ years won't be that unique.
The average life expectancy is only increasing because of infant mortality rates are falling (the USA mortality rate went up recently) and not because people are living longer. Medicine has made major leaps in detection, not so much in cures, of disease (unless you're a lab rat).

Didn't realize that was the context. I'll look into it deeper. Thanks
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

I have geology and biology and physics. Do they count?

Ok, did you learn the speed of light in a vacuum in physics? Do you realize that we see stars that are billions of light years away?

You had geology. Did that geology class teach you that the layers were formed in a big global flood or over a really long time span?

We won't get into biology here since I dont want to derail into ToE

Maybe it is a metaphor of sorts the Bible does contain many.

Yet 6 days isn't? What standard are you using to decide that it isn't?

Why can't that be literal?

As you are aware the sun doesn't orbit the earth, rather it is an illusion from the rotation of the earth. If the sun stood still in the sky, the rotation has to stop. Google “earth ceasing rotation†and see the nasty little problems that happen.

The Chinese had many 300ft+ long ships.

When we speak of size of a ship, you need more than length dimensions. We need volume. I can have a 300 foot boat, sure, but what is its height and width?

The size of the ark would caused it to be leaky if it was not supported by steel bracers. Remember, a ship can be called wooden, yet have steel supports to prevent the size of the ship from causing gaps between planks, thus sinking.

The would be the miracle part God used to save the animals.

Why wasn't what God did listed here? It just states that they came to him, but no indication how the animals made it across the oceans, nor survived the climate change, diet change. What about all of the bacteria? Did he bring all of it into the ark as well? How did all of the species survive if not?

Unless you believe in evolution, and evolution in high gear after the flood, Noah had millions of animals in the Ark.

Your assuming once more that what we see today is what it was like back then, sure the diets are exotic now but hey your the one who believes rocks can bring forth life.

No answer for that one then except, “It just did.�

There was not millions so the rest is easy.

So you believe that evolution happened after the flood to re-speciate?

When my backyard floods i don't see/feel any currents

I refer you to a physics book on this one. There would have been massive waves and currents. You ever heard the advice “If during a flood you see a small section of water, dont drive through it, you might get swept away in the rapid current?â€Â

Watch rescue videos of people hanging onto trees during a flood, or getting swept away in the currents in local flooding. What do you think this would be like on a flood that covered the entire world in 40 days? Massive.

No at the earths present state, but if the world was all at the same level the water would cover it all with like 8,000 feet.

8,000 feet. Nearly two miles. Over a sphere with a circumference of 25,000 miles. I dont need to do the math on that one to realize just how much water that is in excess of what we see right now.

Too easy. i want more.

If it's that easy to reconcile, than YEC's would have some peer reviewed papers. Link me some.
It can't be, thus there are none.
 
Re: Old Earth and literal reading of the Bible.

Ok, did you learn the speed of light in a vacuum in physics? Do you realize that we see stars that are billions of light years away?

Yeah LOL i was told in class that we can see 130+/- light years of the universe yet the universe is only supposed to be 19 billion years old. :lol:

You had geology. Did that geology class teach you that the layers were formed in a big global flood or over a really long time span?
Long time span, but i won most of the class over when i did my presentations, i even brought a fish tank in with different grit and color sand and replicated the flood. :wink: It settled into different layers quite fine, Hmm almost like what we see all over the world :wink:

We won't get into biology here since I don't want to derail into ToE

Yeah we've got a whole other forum for that. even though this thread seems to be headed in that direction.

Yet 6 days isn't? What standard are you using to decide that it isn't?

I use my head.



As you are aware the sun doesn't orbit the earth, rather it is an illusion from the rotation of the earth. If the sun stood still in the sky, the rotation has to stop. Google “earth ceasing rotation†and see the nasty little problems that happen.

Dude if God made the sun stay still by stopping the rotation of the earth i am pretty sure he would not let all those problems happen. After all he made the thing (and everything else) i am pretty sure he can control it.
When we speak of size of a ship, you need more than length dimensions. We need volume. I can have a 300 foot boat, sure, but what is its height and width?

Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger, because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.
The size of the ark would caused it to be leaky if it was not supported by steel bracers. Remember, a ship can be called wooden, yet have steel supports to prevent the size of the ship from causing gaps between planks, thus sinking.

Not necessarily, beside the ark was built to float not sail.



Why wasn't what God did listed here? It just states that they came to him, but no indication how the animals made it across the oceans, nor survived the climate change, diet change. What about all of the bacteria? Did he bring all of it into the ark as well? How did all of the species survive if not?

Well we have animals today so obviously whatever God did it worked.

As for bacteria..they could easily thrive in animal waste or on the animals themselves then mutate (evolve) into over strains of whatever, remember i said i believe in evolution but i also stated it had its limits, bacteria no matter what mutation is still a bacteria.
Unless you believe in evolution, and evolution in high gear after the flood, Noah had millions of animals in the Ark.

Its not hard to have all the different varieties that we have today in 4400+/- years



No answer for that one then except, “It just did.�

You believe animals can adapt, but you don't believe their diets could have been different then and changed over 4400+/- years?



So you believe that evolution happened after the flood to re-speciate?

To a point yes. it even happened before to a point. and its even happening now.



I refer you to a physics book on this one. There would have been massive waves and currents. You ever heard the advice “If during a flood you see a small section of water, dont drive through it, you might get swept away in the rapid current?â€Â

Watch rescue videos of people hanging onto trees during a flood, or getting swept away in the currents in local flooding. What do you think this would be like on a flood that covered the entire world in 40 days? Massive.

Yes when a river over flows, or a wave runs throw a town there are currents, as long as there is a path for the water to go it will take it. now picture the whole world under water, there is no path, there is no super currents.



8,000 feet. Nearly two miles. Over a sphere with a circumference of 25,000 miles. I dont need to do the math on that one to realize just how much water that is in excess of what we see right now.
Maybe my figure was wrong but there is way more water then land ( surface land) on the earth, take all the water from the ice caps melt it add it to the oceans and flatten out the land to a uniform depth and its completely covered with water. again Dr. Walt Brown shown us.

If it's that easy to reconcile, than YEC's would have some peer reviewed papers. Link me some.
It can't be, thus there are none
Yes peer reviewed..by whom people who already strike down YE theories, yes sure. listen guy, we don't need to play by your rules.
 
And for anyone else who is following this thread read up :)

ptpatf.jpg


2 Pet. 3:3-8 tells us that people who scoff at the Bible are "willingly ignorant" of the Creation and the Flood. In order to understand science and the Bible, we must not be ignorant of those two great events in Earth�s history. See Creation Seminar tape 2 for more information.

1. Over 250 Flood legends from all parts of the world have been found. Most have similarities to the Genesis story.
2. Noah�s ark was built only to float, not to sail anywhere. Many ark scholars believe that the ark was a "barge" shape, not a pointed "boat" shape. This would greatly increase the cargo capacity. Scoffers have pointed out that the largest sailing ships were less than 300 feet because of the problem of twisting and flexing the boat. These ships had giant masts, and sails to catch the wind. Noah's ark needed neither of those and therefore had far less torsion related stress.
3. Even using the small 18-inch cubit (my height is 6-ft. 1-in. and I have a 21-in. cubit) the ark was large enough to hold all the required animals, people, and food with room to spare.
4. The length-to-width ratio of 6 to 1 is what shipbuilders today often use. This is the best ratio for stability in stormy weather. (God thinks of everything!)
5. The ark may have had a "moon-pool" in the center. The larger ships would have a hole in the center of the bottom of the boat with walls extending up into the ship. There are several reasons for this feature:
* It allowed water to go up into the hole as the ship crested waves. This would be needed to relieve strain on longer ships.
* The rising and lowering water acted as a piston to pump fresh air in and out of the ship. This would prevent the buildup of dangerous gasses from all the animals on board.
* The hole was a great place to dump garbage into the ocean without going outside.
6. The ark may have had large drogue (anchor) stones suspended over the sides to keep it more stable in rough weather. Many of these stones have been found in the region where the ark landed.
7. Noah lived 950 years! Many Bible scholars believe the pre-Flood people were much larger than modern man. Skeletons over 11 feet tall have been found! If Noah were taller, his cubit (elbow to fingertip) would have been much larger also. This would make the ark larger by the same ratio. See Seminar tape #2 for more info on this.
8. God told Noah to bring two of each kind (seven of some), not of each species or variety. Noah had only two of the dog kind, which would include the wolves, coyotes, foxes, mutts, etc. The "kind" grouping is probably closer to our modern family division in taxonomy, and would greatly reduce the number of animals on the ark. Animals have diversified into many varieties in the last 4400 years since the Flood. This diversification is not anything similar to great claims that the evolutionists teach. (They teach, "Kelp can turn into Kent," given enough time!)
9. Noah did not have to get the animals. God brought them to him (Gen. 6:20, "shall come to thee").
10. Only land-dwelling, air-breathing animals had to be included on the ark (Gen. 7:15, "in which is the breath of life," 7:22). Noah did not need to bring all the thousands of insects varieties.
11. Many animals sleep, hibernate, or become very inactive during bad weather.
12. All animals (and people) were vegetarians before and during the Flood according to Gen. 1:20-30 with Gen. 9:3.
13. The pre-Flood people were probably much smarter and more advanced than people today. The longer life spans, Adam�s direct contact with God, and the fact that they could glean the wisdom of many generations that were still alive would greatly expand their knowledge base.
14. The Bible says that the highest mountains were covered by 15 cubits of water. This is half the height of the ark. The ark was safe from scraping bottom at all times.
15. The large mountains, as we have them today, did not exist until after the Flood when "the mountains arose and the valleys sank down" (Ps. 104:5-9, Gen. 8:3-8).
16. There is enough water in the oceans right now to cover the earth 8,000 feet deep if the surface of the earth were smooth.
17. Many claim to have seen the ark in recent times in the area in which the Bible says it landed. There are two primary schools of thought about the actual site of the ark (see my Creation Seminar Part 3 video for more on this). Much energy and time has been expended to prove both views. Some believe the ark is on Mt. Ararat, covered by snow (CBS showed a one-hour special in 1993 about this site). The other group believes the ark is seventeen miles south of Mt. Ararat in a valley called "the valley of eight" (8 souls on the ark). The Bible says the ark landed in the "mountains" of Ararat, not necessarily on the mountain itself.
18. The continents were not separated until 100-300 years after the Flood (Gen. 10:25). The people and animals had time to migrate anywhere on earth by then. See Seminar Part 6 for more information.
19. The top 3,000 feet of Mt. Everest (from 26,000-29,000 feet) is made up of sedimentary rock packed with seashells and other ocean-dwelling animals.
20. Sedimentary rock is found all over the world. Sedimentary rock is formed in water.
21. Petrified clams in the closed position (found all over the world) testify to their rapid burial while they were still alive, even on top of Mount Everest.
22. Bent rock layers, fossil graveyards, and poly-strata fossils are best explained by a Flood.
23. People choose to not believe in the Flood because it speaks of the judgment of God on sin (2 Pet. 3:3-8).

Source: http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=77
 
Back
Top