Questions about Noahs Flood (is it logical or just magic you have to believe)

[Tzephanyahu]

Shalom brother,

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. It was well written and very reasonable.

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

1. Young earth/global flood

A relatively recent flood occurred. Some marine organisms were able to float or swim through 20,000 feet or more to reach high mountain peaks, only to be buried by sediment not at their typical low elevation.

Interesting. But then, if you think about it, if such evidence is found on many high elevations, even of whales in the Himalayas or deep inland of the United States, what's more likely?  Several localised floods in which marine life swims and dies in the shallowest heights to be fossilised rapidly? Or perhaps one worldwide catastrophic flood?  The latter would prove to be a reasonable hypothesis when also explaining the fossilisation of land life, which is a process that has to happen with a rapid burial.

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

2. Ancient earth/ancient life model

Marine organisms were buried in sediment at roughly the same elevation at which they lived. Long after the fossils were originally formed, plate tectonics caused massive shifts in the topography of the planet, including the rise of tall mountains over very long periods of time.

 

Yes, a good hypothesis.  However, such tectonic plate shifts that would cause catastrophic changes to the world's landscape, could have also been caused within the Hydroplate Theory.  This a theory to explain the logistics of a global flood, in which "the fountains of the deep" were opened up, as the Bible describes (it wasn't just rain). You'll get to this theory in the later pages which discusses the practical side.

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

It is my opinion that God’s Word is completely true AND God’s revelation about the natural world through scientific discovery is also true. If the two seem to be in conflict, it is because we fallible humans have interpreted one or the other incorrectly.

Amen brother. You and I are on the same page, truly. 

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

Since the preponderance if evidence favors an ancient earth and ancient life, the common interpretation of the Bible suggesting that all of God’s creation occurred in a 144-hour period roughly 6,000 years ago is incorrect.

Consider this. You may be feeling like you're stuck between a rock and a hard place.  The rock being the Word of God, and the hard place being the evidence for an ancient earth.  However, the assumption you're making that the evidence of an ancient earth IS a "hard place".  The "evidence for an ancient earth" is evidence interpreted with methods based upon assumptive principles.  Now, to view the evidence with assumptive principals is to refuse the cold hard facts, and instead provide an interpretation of the facts.  It's no longer a hard place, like the Word of God which we know always proves to be true - literally, factually, historically and, for the saints, spiritually.  Anyway, this "hard place" will be discussed later in the next evidence page on that site, which explains the error of dating rock layers.

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

As a side note to anyone following this conversation - my belief does not prevent me from understanding God’s omnipotence, my sinfulness, His incredible sacrifice in the person of His Son, His glorious resurrection, and my life now as a joint heir with Christ. My acceptance of scientific evidence does not demean the God I love in any way. The more I understand about what He created, the more I appreciate His transcendent mind and power.

Amen! Yes, I hope no one judges you unrighteously in this matter.  

I can see your heart is full of love for our Father and has a hunger for digging for truth, and that instantly makes me respect you as a brother.  Thank you for your intelligent response and feel free to continue the discussion, as you read through the rest of the evidence pages or have any other questions.

Love & Shalom

[one.opinion]

2 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

I can see your heart is full of love for our Father and has a hunger for digging for truth, and that instantly makes me respect you as a brother.

Thank you so much for choosing to recognize this despite our differences in viewing the evidence. Personally, my priority is Jesus Christ. My views on life origins take a distant seat to that. I am entirely comfortable with my view, and I trust you are, too. I don’t see the benefit in hashing over our differences of opinion, so let us simply enjoy our shared love for our loving, powerful, and amazing God.

Grace and peace

[Tzephanyahu]

6 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Thank you so much for choosing to recognize this despite our differences in viewing the evidence.

Shalom brother, 

Of course! I have all the time in the world for people with different views but who speak respectfully and reasonably. Iron sharpens iron. 

If you ever wish to discuss this matter again, my door is open brother. 

May our Father bless you richly for your correct priorities and love for Him. 

Love & Shalom 

[Still Alive]

On 4/29/2019 at 3:32 PM, enoob57 said:

One of the most important aspects of being Christian is knowing the Bible and when the Bible says 15 cubits over the highest mtns. a cubit being 18" to 22" then God says 22.6 ft. to 27.6 ft. over all....
 

Gen 7:19-20

19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
KJV
 

Yep. I've found a lot of scripture to support my personal belief that the entire earth was, in fact covered. But I've also read the arguments from the other side and they do hold water as well. (Pun intended:)) So I see their point. It's just that I disagree with them. It seems to be Heiser's point as well. It's not a hill to die on. Salvation IS a hill to die on, though.

[one.opinion]

7 minutes ago, Still Alive said:

But I've also read the arguments from the other side and they do hold water as well.

Nice one! 

[enoob57]

2 hours ago, Still Alive said:

Yep. I've found a lot of scripture to support my personal belief that the entire earth was, in fact covered. But I've also read the arguments from the other side and they do hold water as well. (Pun intended:)) So I see their point. It's just that I disagree with them. It seems to be Heiser's point as well. It's not a hill to die on. Salvation IS a hill to die on, though.

my understanding of proper hermeneutics is where Scripture clearly states something grammatically then it is a done deal all else must allow the truth statement to remain as written...

[Still Alive]

1 hour ago, enoob57 said:

my understanding of proper hermeneutics is where Scripture clearly states something grammatically then it is a done deal all else must allow the truth statement to remain as written...

One challenge is hinted at in my tag line. Another good example would be John 3:16. You would not believe how weird the arguments get regarding the meaning of the word "perish".

I've heard people say, "but that's not how the bible defines the word."

Except the bible does not define words. The bible USES words. Dictionaries define words. 

[thomas t]

On 4/28/2019 at 4:03 PM, Leyla said:

is it logical or just magic you have to believe

         

Hi Leyla (Guten Tag!),

great question to ask.

In contrast to at least one writer from the evolutionist side... I believe the Bible text as it is written .

However, it might be useful to stay silent in this thread, in my opinion, .

For your reply would be placed beside this one...

On 5/1/2019 at 2:10 AM, Joulre2abba said:

[The water] splashed so high as to reach the moon and left water spots on it

Now, if you're an creationist writer and post your reply in this thread, the others might think that you approve of statements like the quote above.

So it might be helpful to send a hidden answer to God on this in a silent prayer. God will see it.

Hi Joul,

in case you want to reply to my post, please be assured I won't answer you as I prefer to not discuss your quoted statement.

Regards,

Thomas

[Joulre2abba]

On 5/5/2019 at 7:38 AM, thomas t said:

However, it might be useful to stay silent in this thread, in my opinion,

It seems to always be,   that those who advise others.. also give their own opinion on the topic while they tell someone else to stay silent. And also when using someone else's statements.. also tell that person that they want them to stay out of it too.

Regarding your opinions and use of my post in an attempt to make some point. You speak as if you thought that your opinions had scientific bases.. but from what..? Yours is merely a lack of common knowledge. However what I gave (though said in my own words) has scientific basis from two sources, Faukner and Brown, that anyone can find on the internet if they do the research.

[Who me]

On 01 May 2019 at 3:58 PM, Joulre2abba said:

I was using the article from the answers in Genesis website. The article was written by Dr. Danny R. Faulkner called "The Biblically Based Cratering Theory". His bio in part states that he holds an MS in Physics from Clemson University and an MA and PhD in Astronomy.

Perhaps it would seem less like a child's story if you go and read the article yourself.

The article can be found@

https://creation.com/a-biblically-based-cratering-theory

 

Unfortunetly for Joulre2abba, it does not mention water from the firament splashing up and marking the moon. That is pure make believe/childs story.