|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What the KJV Bible says about the Noah Flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
There are 6 bodies of water called seas that are land locked that means there is no outlet to the oceans. Those are 6 individual places that water is and is not connected to any other ocean or sea. Okay, so lets imagine that there are no lakes or inland seas or rivers, just the oceans surrounding the continents, the oceans being contiguous and the continents having no inland bodies of water at all. Would that still qualify as "in one place?"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10038 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
There are 6 bodies of water called seas that are land locked that means there is no outlet to the oceans. Those are 6 individual places that water is and is not connected to any other ocean or sea. Can you show that Pangea did not have any of these types of seas?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
ICANT writes: Those are 6 individual places that water is and is not connected to any other ocean or sea. Not sure what you're trying to say here, but that's okay. Your most fundamental problem is that gathering the waters together into one place has more than one interpretation. "One place" could mean that the water filling the entire region beneath the firmament was placed on the earth, or it could mean this water was placed in a single continuous region on the earth. Obviously the former makes more sense. But let's say we accept your interpretation that "one place" means all water was gathered together into a single ocean. A single continuous body of water surrounding a single continent such as you imagine is consistent with this interpretation, but so is a single continuous body of water surrounding two continents, or three continents, or four continents, or even seven continents like we have today. It's also consistent with a single continuous body of water with thousands of tiny islands. You're not really just accepting what the text says. What you're really doing is combining what you'd like the text to say with our scientific evidence for a single continent 250 million years ago that we refer to as Pangaea. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Actually, he is asserting far more than just that.
He is taking one verse from Genesis 1 and one verse from Genesis 10 and asserting that those two verses show that from the beginning there was just one land mass. Of course that is simply quote mining and if you look at the two unrelated tales in context it is obvious that Genesis 1 and Genesis 10 are totally separate, unrelated tales and that Genesis 10 is not talking about a continent splitting apart but rather the origin of the various peoples and tribes in the Fertile Crescent.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
But one island would be called land, two islands would be called lands. That's retarded. You should know this: your posts read as if they lack any sincerity at all.
Then why are you saying I put the flood between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2? I thought that's where you put it... that the Flood is how the earth go to the state that it was in during Gen 1:2. But if not, then I was wrong. Its not as if your story makes any sense, or is easy to follow. It jumps all over the place.
Catholic Scientist writes: Humans have been around for a couple hundred thousand years. I think you are off by a few trillion years or more. Humans are the apes that evolved here on Earth over the last coupla hundred thousand years. Pfft, trillions of years...
Why would there be a bottleneck? In Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." God created mankind male and female created He them. It don't say how many he created just that he created mankind male and female. There may have been a thousand. Yeah, or they're may have been two seperately created Earths. You're just inserting your pre-conceived notions into the text. Its the same old game you always play: obfuscate the facts into meaninglessness so you can claim 'see, you can't prove me wrong'. You're strategy here, to avoid having your personal Flood theory refuted, is to hide it away in an untouchable place so that you cannot be presented any evidence against it. That's pathetic. But as anyone can see, you're whole story has already been refuted by the geneology of the characters being contradictory when placed in the order you place them in. So you're already wrong from the get go.
No the picture you have is after you have moved the animation bar to start the animation. Before you moved the animation bar to start the breakup there was no water, as anyone can see. Yeah, its inconsistant. All the shapes of the lanlocked water are there, but they're just colored yellow instead of blue, once you start the animation, though, they are blue.
The third one does have one body of land locked water Yeah, well, you know what: Its showing Lake Victoria, and that didn't form until about 400,000 years ago, so there's no way that it could have been on pangea... My point is that cartoons of pangea cannot be used to show that there was no landlocked water in it. This is ridiculous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Percy,
PercyYou're not really just accepting what the text says. Then show me the verses say something other than I say they say.
Percy writes: What you're really doing is combining what you'd like the text to say with our scientific evidence for a single continent 250 million years ago that we refer to as Pangaea. No I am saying the Bible says the same thing about the Earth that Scientist have said. The land was in one place. PangeaThe water was in one place Pangea. 1 super ocean. quote: Water gathered together in one place.Dry land called earth protruding out of the water. Another verse supporting one land mass.
quote: The same Hebrew word ארץ is translated Earth in Genesis 1:10 and 11:8. So the dry land in 1:10 is the same piece of dry land the people were scattered abroad over the face of all the earth. The people were scattered all over the Earth. If all the land mass was not connected they would need boats to go to any other island. How would they know the island was there? Why would any of those folks build a boat and set out in the ocean looking for another piece of dry land just because they could not understand what a lot of the people were saying. There was plenty of land to go around. So they just moved to a different location. Just like the animals did after the flood. But I reckon we could insert a little magic and God could have picked them up and put them on all the different land masses everyone here is telling me existed. The problem is the text does not say that. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
Then show me the verses say something other than I say they say. The verses you quoted have already been shown to have multiple possible meanings. Why do you believe that your interpretation is more likely to accurately reflect the original author's intent than other interpretations?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Of course Genesis 11 is directly refuted by Genesis 10 and is another of the many contradictions found when you try to stitch the Bible together as though it was one continuing story.
Genesis 10 says:
quote: so there we see that there is not one language and that the term lands does not mean one continent or land mass but rather "lands controlled by one tribe or people" and that the languages. "tongue" varied by location. The Genesis 11 says:
quote: That should be a clue that we are dealing with totally separate stories from totally different traditions and that there is no way to even pretend they are one story or related to the Biblical Flood Myths.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3727 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
Al it says is that God gathered the water dry land appeared and that he called said dry land Earth. It doesn't say he did anything with the land at all. It also says that God scattered them (the people). It makes no mention of the people scattering themselves.
I thought the point of this thread was to examine what the texts actually say, not what they might mean.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi CS,
Catholic Scientist writes: But one island would be called land, two islands would be called lands. That's retarded. I lived in the Cayman Islands for 15 years I did not live in the Cayman Island. I lived on Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands. To get to Little Cayman I had to fly, go by boat or swim the 75 miles. From Little Cayman to Cayman Brac was a little easier they were only a little over 3 miles apart with the water over 2000 feet deep between them. They are all part of the Cayman ridge. But they are 3 separate pieces of dry land and any one is refered to as Island but all 3 are refered to as the Cayman Islands. Plural more than one.
Catholic Scientist writes: I thought that's where you put it... that the Flood is how the earth go to the state that it was in during Gen 1:2. But if not, then I was wrong. Its not as if your story makes any sense, or is easy to follow. It jumps all over the place. If you had bothered to read Message 98 which you responded to by in Message 102 saying:
quote: You then left that and ask an unrelated question about Genesis 4:25. Here is what you asked for and apparantly did not read but thanked me for producing it.
quote:1. In the Beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth. Genesis 1:1. 2. The history of Genesis 1:1 is given in Genesis 2:4 through Genesis 4:25. 3. The seven days of Moses is recorded in Genesis 1:2 throuth Genesis 2:3. 4. About 1700 years pass and man is wicked and God decides to remove them from among the living, but Noah found grace in the eyes of God. Genesis 6:8 5. At this time all the water is still gathered into one place as it was in Genesis 1:9, 10 with the dry land protruding out of the water. 6. The people as they move eastward decide to build a tower to heaven so they will not be scattered abroad over the face of the Earth. Genesis 11:4. 7. At this time the people all spoke one language. Genesis 11:6. 8. God scattered the people over the face of the Earth (dry land of Genesis 1:9). Genesis 11:8. 9. Peleg was born about 100 years after the flood and lived for 239 years, during which time the Earth was divided. Genesis 10:25. Pay close attention to #4, whiich follows # 3.
Catholic Scientist writes: Yeah, its inconsistant. All the shapes of the lanlocked water are there, but they're just colored yellow instead of blue, once you start the animation, though, they are blue. But when the animation starts the land has divided the moment you move the bar.
Catholic Scientist writes: Yeah, well, you know what: Its showing Lake Victoria, and that didn't form until about 400,000 years ago, so there's no way that it could have been on pangea... My point is that cartoons of pangea cannot be used to show that there was no landlocked water in it. This is ridiculous. Why not use a cartoon of pangea all the rest are the imagination of some man as nobody was there to record it. Just as there was no one there in Genesis 1:9, 10. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
I lived in the Cayman Islands for 15 years I did not live in the Cayman Island. I lived on Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands. And yet, curiously, you've always lived on land.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Apparently this single four letter word is not being given its due by a small percentage of the participants of this thread. Let me cite a few definitions. Note that the word land may have other definitions, but these preferred definitions are the ones most people are correctly referring to in this thread.
From Dictionary.com
quote: Oxford online dictionary
quote: Cambridge online American English dictionary
quote: Merriam-Webster
quote: American Heritage Dictionary
quote: Just for grins, here is an American Heritage Dictionary definition for the word earth.
quote: My personal impression is that none of the participants in this thread are unaware of the use of the word land to collectively refer to all of the earth's non-wet surface in exactly the way illustrated above. Further, all participants are likely aware that words like island are not so used. If your argument depends on any of the above definitions being either wrong or disfavored, then you should not be surprised when your argument is not found to be either logically inevitable or convincing. You probably shouldn't be surprised if continuing in this vein causes you to be thought foolish if not dishonest. That's certainly the impression that's being made on me. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Trixie,
Trixie writes: Al it says is that God gathered the water dry land appeared and that he called said dry land Earth Did He say the water was to gather to one place?
quote: Does the underlined/bold say waters gathered together unto one place? Yes/No Does the underlined/bold say let the dry land appear? Yes/No Does that mean the water gathered to one place causing dry land to appear which God called Earth?
quote: Does that say God confounded their language? Yes/No
quote: You already said God scattered them. But does the verse say upon the face of all the Earth? Yes/No If no, how many faces did it have? Does the verse say THEY LEFT OFF TO BUILD THE CITY? Yes/No If God had taken them by magic and place them in different places on the face of the Earth, How did they leave of the building of the city?
Trixie writes: I thought the point of this thread was to examine what the texts actually say, not what they might mean. If you answer no to any of the questions above you are in disagreement with me. Present what the text says. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Wow! Unbelievable. No further comment.
You've wasted the first half of the thread arguing about Genesis 1 and have only about half the thread left to tell us what the KJV Bible says about Noah's flood, better get to it. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4039 Joined: Member Rating: 8.2 |
1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. Your claim is that this passage specifically means that all dry land must have also been in one place, and that no other meaning is possible. Yet the passage does not specify that the dry land was all in one place. Your claim requires the Bible to be more specific than the text actually is. The text very plainly leaves open multiple geological possibilities, simply because it doesn't specify anything about dry land other than that it existed. If I say "33% of the Earth is covered in dry land," I've used similar terminology to the Biblical passage...and yet the wording equally well describes Pangaea or the seven continents we see today or any number of other possible configurations. Your claim simply isn't supported in the text, ICANT.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024