Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,255 Year: 5,512/9,624 Month: 537/323 Week: 34/143 Day: 7/17 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noahs Flood
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


(1)
Message 60 of 100 (562504)
05-29-2010 10:38 AM


This thread has taken a few twists and turns in it's lifespan. I guess I'd like to address those here who appear to "believe" that the flood did occur, but that it was not global.
I suppose that would be all of two people I think....greentwiga and Iblis. If you are an atheist and don't believe the bible at all, then my post will have little relevance other then then "please provide proof or evidence that the bible is true". I'm not going to discuss that right now.
I would like to address the issue for those Christians here who do not believe it was a global flood. Why? A clear reading of Genesis and the NT apostle Paul all indicate that this was a global flood.
Just one small point I'll make and I'll address your other evidences to this as you post them: If, as Genesis states, God gave Noah 120 years to prepare a monstrous "boat" for this event, did Noah waste is time doing so??? Wouldn't the average man of any sort of intelligence just gathered his belongings and walked away, like to Asia or somewhere, instead of building a boat to float around on during a localized flood????
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Percy, posted 05-29-2010 11:06 AM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 94 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-01-2010 12:45 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 63 of 100 (562512)
05-29-2010 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Percy
05-29-2010 11:06 AM


Very good points Percy which I was going to bring up later...lol.
I have a hard time understanding TEs. Honestly, I can understand where an atheist is coming from better then I can OEC or theistic evolutionists. Their reasoning makes zero sense. They pick and chose what they wish to believe out of the bible. The atheist doesn't believe it....period. The OEC for some reason feels the need to completely rewrite the book of Genesis to conform to modern day (literally just the last 200 years) standards.
Here's another point to make in the literal global flood argument. God promised to never wipe out the earth again with water....so if the flood was only local, is he lying when thousands die every year in local floods????

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Percy, posted 05-29-2010 11:06 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by PaulK, posted 05-29-2010 1:22 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 65 by Huntard, posted 05-29-2010 1:29 PM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 66 by Granny Magda, posted 05-29-2010 1:36 PM Flyer75 has replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 67 of 100 (562516)
05-29-2010 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Huntard
05-29-2010 1:29 PM


Well.... So do you really. Or are you going to tell me you follow every rule that's in there?
Can you give me an example Huntard? I assume you mean something to the effect of one killing their children when they disobey?
As you probably know, we as Christians, no longer live under Israelite OT law.
So, yes, I violate those laws all the time, such as a tatoo and the fact that I shave my beard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Huntard, posted 05-29-2010 1:29 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Huntard, posted 05-29-2010 1:59 PM Flyer75 has replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 68 of 100 (562517)
05-29-2010 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Granny Magda
05-29-2010 1:36 PM


Re: Believing the Bible
Having said that, there are some Bible stories that really defy belief and stand contrary to the evidence. We know for certain that there was no worldwide flood. The evidence against it is simply too great. This is why OECs take the position they do; they know that there was no flood, but they simply cannot abide the idea that the Bible could be wrong about something.
But here's the difference between you and OEC. You probably, in fact I know you don't, accept Christ's resurrection. I can live with that. But why would someone pick and choose what is real in the Bible if one wants to follow Christ? I have actually heard TE say that the miracles, such as the casting out of demons in the NT, were nothing but natural sicknesses that people had. Now, if an atheist says that, so be it, they have a reason to say that. What reason does a supposed Christian have to say about that? If Christ was incapable of casting out demons or turning water into wine, then he surely was not capable of raising himself from the dead, was he? I'm not arguing this to PROVE anything to an atheist. I'm arguing it against TE or OEC.
Paul himself in the NT, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, addressed the global destruction of Noah's flood.
Percy, who I assume is not a follower of the Christian religion, hit the nail on the head really. Anybody who just picks up the bible will see that it was a global flood that is talked about in the OT and in the NT. The point is, a TE claims Scripture, but then doesn't believe what's in it.
The OEC or TE have the NT has a serious problem for their argument.
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Granny Magda, posted 05-29-2010 1:36 PM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Granny Magda, posted 05-29-2010 2:01 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 71 by PaulK, posted 05-29-2010 3:07 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 79 by glowby, posted 05-31-2010 11:05 PM Flyer75 has replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 72 of 100 (562523)
05-29-2010 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Huntard
05-29-2010 1:59 PM


Ok, then you don't have to follow the ten commandments either. They're part of the old law as well. Yet strangely, I always get hit up with them when discussing morality with a Christian. Since you don't think you should follow the OT law, cast out the ten commandments as well.
One, some of the ten commandments are actual laws that society has inacted itself for us to follow, so yes, I still follow those.
Thou shalt not steal, murder, ect.
Two, the others not addressed in our actual laws are addressed by Christ himself in his teachings in the NT and are still to be followed by Christians today. Thou shall not covet, commit adultery, ect...
I'm not sure what this proves though....we've gotten off the beaten path quickly here. There is a difference (and theologians of all stripes will agree here) in the Law and historical facts laid out by Paul himself in the NT. I fail to see the correlation between OT Israelite covenant law, completely wiped out by the death and resurrection of Christ, and historical events that are attested to in the NT by Christ and Paul more then once (such as a global flood).
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.
Edited by Flyer75, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Huntard, posted 05-29-2010 1:59 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Asking, posted 05-29-2010 4:49 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 75 by Huntard, posted 05-30-2010 4:49 AM Flyer75 has replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 76 of 100 (562691)
05-31-2010 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Huntard
05-30-2010 4:49 AM


Ok, that's two, where are the other eight? Can we chuck them out safely? Thou shalt not bear false witness? Isn't in the law.
Well, I guess I can go through the whole list and justify each one through a current law or NT reference, AND/OR give a new covenant rendering of how the old law works into the new law (Christ's death and resurrection). Until one understands the correlation between the two, we'll continue to argue the wordage of OT law and not the meaning.
Anyway, it is a crime to bear false witness. Perjury, false police reports against someone are both punishable by law in America. Thou shall not covet is listed in Romans 7:7
I John 3:4 states, "For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments..." To which commandments was John referring? Undoubtedly, to the commandments of God which, when transgressed, result in sin (1John 3:4). The apostle Paul tells us plainly which commandments these are. He writes that he would not have known what sin was except the law told him, "You shall not covet" (Romans 7:7). This directly references one of God's Ten Commandments! Unquestionably, James was referring to the Ten Commandments when he wrote about the perfect law of liberty.
It is abundantly clear that the Ten Commandments are not confined to the old covenant. Specific examples from the Bible make it evident that the Commandments were in effect from the very start of the human race. They formed the core of the old covenant not because they pertained only to the nation of Israel, but because they form the core of all peaceful, happy human existence. As such, they also form the core of the new covenant. In Matthew 19, a young man asked Jesus what he should do in order to have eternal life (verse 16). In verse 17, Christ answered him by telling him to keep the Commandments. In the next two verses, Christ told the man which Commandments He was referring to by giving five specific examples from the Ten Commandments as recorded in Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5.
As Isaiah prophesied in Isaiah 42:21, Christ did not come to earth to nullify or make obsolete the Ten Commandments. Rather, He magnified them and made them honorable by illustrating in His daily life how to perfectly keep them to their full spiritual intent.
And in 1John 2:4, he explains that if anyone says he knows Christ, but doesn't "keep His commandments, [he] is a liar, and the truth is not in him."
Could anything be more clear? Though many attempt to deny it, the Bible plainly shows that God's Ten Commandments are not unique to the old covenant. Rather, they comprise the eternal, immutable laws set in place from the very beginning which reveal to mankind how God expects him to live.
A few of these quotes I got from here: The Ten Commandments
As far as your Jesus quote goes, any commentary will show the context of what and who Jesus was speaking to in these verses...the Pharisees, the very thing that Jesus loathed here on earth. Most commentaries state that Christ was talking about a Christian's role in the church. Notice that Christ does NOT say that one will be cast into hell and one taken into heaven. It's a statement on the role of a Christian in the church and Christian living. Christ also says in the context of that passage that he did not come to destroy, or change, the OT law, but to fulfill it.
they pick and choose what suits their fancy, and run with that, meanwhile telling everybody else how they are sinners because they don't follow "god's laws" (not saying you are like this, there are people like this though, care to join me in stopping them? )
You are right, people do pick and choose what they wish to believe in Scripture, or to "fit their fancy". I'm certainly, as a sinner, guilty of that also, but it doesn't make it right even if "everyone is doing it". I also hope you don't think I'm calling OEC "sinners". I don't understand their thinking at all or their reasoning but in no way have I ever stated that one's view of origins is a salvation issue.
BTW, in your very last line, and you may or may not know this, you are referring to legalism. For example, the little old church mom explaining, "oh my, you can't have a beer with that food!" Many Christians mix up rules with salvation and spiritual liberty. I just read a tremendous Spurgeon sermon yesterday on this exact topic of spiritual liberty.
Edited by Flyer75, : Did "off-topic" banner 1st edit, which was credited to Flyer. Tried 2nd edit which overwrote 1st edit attribute with new message still credited to Flyer. 3rd edit is this message.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Huntard, posted 05-30-2010 4:49 AM Huntard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Iblis, posted 05-31-2010 10:20 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


(1)
Message 80 of 100 (562704)
05-31-2010 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by glowby
05-31-2010 11:05 PM


Re: Picking and choosing
These sciences all prove an old earth. Many good-hearted people who are untrained in these sciences - Christian and otherwise - understand and appreciate the knowledge and technologies they bring to us.
This is just not a factually true statement. IF the sciences all proved that the earth was millions of years old, there probably would not be the amount of discourse and discussion going on that we have right now. There are ways to interpret the evidence that can fit into both sides. You invoked astronomy, probably which is the least known of the sciences still at this point. Watch any science show on the planets or solar systems and you'll hear terminology such as "might have", "could have", "possibly", ect...certainly not the "these sciences all prove an old earth" statement that you made.....care to address the life span of a comet, with evidence that is, and not a mysterious Oort cloud. I'm not saying an Oort cloud does not exist....lack of evidence to the proof does not necessarily mean that it does not exist but at this point is all a hypothesis.
But anyway....if you had read my previous post from about an hour ago, I clearly said that just because one believes in OEC or TE does not make them a "sinner".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by glowby, posted 05-31-2010 11:05 PM glowby has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Coyote, posted 05-31-2010 11:44 PM Flyer75 has replied
 Message 97 by glowby, posted 06-01-2010 9:57 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


Message 82 of 100 (562706)
05-31-2010 11:38 PM


Iblis and Huntard,
Maybe we can start a thread on OT/NT law and ethics or something. I had no intention of delving into that when I first posted in this thread....
I'm hoping to keep this as a debate to a literal global flood or a localized flood discussion.

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


(1)
(1)
Message 84 of 100 (562708)
05-31-2010 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Coyote
05-31-2010 11:38 PM


Re: Picking and choosing
Coyote,
I respect your scientific post and how you think but there again lies the difference in presuppositional worldviews that you, and most here take, compared to the one that I, and a certain percentage of Christians take. Scripture, not science, is my standard...I can admit it.
My problem is not with you and what you believe science tells you about a global flood. For a second I'll digress; haven't many scientists begin to take a position (s) that yes indeed, catastrophic events did take place, more so then what was originally thought years ago, and that is what can explain many geological structures/strata that we see today. Whether one believes a Genesis Noah flood is not the issue in this, just the fact that something big did occur??
But anyway, again, when I brought this up the other day, my intention was to debate the TEs here on the literal interpretation of Genesis. Maybe there aren't as many here as I thought.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Coyote, posted 05-31-2010 11:38 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Coyote, posted 05-31-2010 11:50 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 87 by hooah212002, posted 06-01-2010 12:04 AM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 89 by PaulK, posted 06-01-2010 2:16 AM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 92 by Percy, posted 06-01-2010 6:26 AM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Flyer75
Member (Idle past 2540 days)
Posts: 242
From: Dayton, OH
Joined: 02-15-2010


(1)
Message 88 of 100 (562722)
06-01-2010 2:13 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Coyote
05-31-2010 11:44 PM


Re: Picking and choosing
The data lead to one interpretation, and that is an old earth.
To make the data fit into a young earth interpretation you have to ignore the overwhelming majority of it, and then twist and misrepresent the rest.
This "we have our own interpretation" stuff that creationists come up with is nonsense. They are lying to themselves to try to prop up their religious beliefs.
So are you saying, it's a shut and locked case coyote? In every case? There aren't problems with millions of years still, such as comets? At the very least, there is still debate on these issues.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Coyote, posted 05-31-2010 11:44 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Rahvin, posted 06-01-2010 2:36 AM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 91 by PaulK, posted 06-01-2010 2:56 AM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 93 by Coyote, posted 06-01-2010 11:02 AM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 95 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-01-2010 4:51 PM Flyer75 has not replied
 Message 96 by Coragyps, posted 06-01-2010 8:44 PM Flyer75 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024