News:

Our Hosting and Server Costs Are Expensive! Please Subscribe To Help With Monthly Donations.

Main Menu
+-+-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 80078
Latest: Lollyclose
New This Month: 4
New This Week: 2
New Today: 1
Stats
Total Posts: 890874
Total Topics: 89536
Most Online Today: 508
Most Online Ever: 2999
(Fri Jan 13, 2023 - 21:20:46)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 442
Total: 442
Google

Creation scientists

Started by Amo, Sat Aug 10, 2019 - 12:47:21

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 06:59:55What is the source of your supposed wisdom, if not holy scripture? Is it not the wisdom of this world, which the Lord laughs at to scorn?
No, first of all wisdom is not the issue here at all.  It is knowledge.  If you do not understand the difference, then you reveal even further weakness in your understanding of God's word.

Second, God does not laugh, denigrate or otherwise besmirch knowledge gained through observation and study of His natural functioning of the universe. In fact, He says just the opposite in His condemnation of ungodliness and unrighteousness of men in Romans 1:18-20.

My complaint against so much of the scientific community is the refusal of some to accept the possibility even of God's existence, which is what Paul was speaking of in Romans 1:19-32.

Amo

#2136
https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/ants-and-the-catholic-reception-of-evolution/

Quoted article below from link above. Emphasis is mine. My comments or input in blue.

QuoteAnts, a Priest-Scientist, and the Catholic Reception of Evolution

Double Vocation: Priest and Scientist


Erich Wasmann, a Jesuit priest and accomplished scientist, was one of the leading voices in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century championing the compatibility of the theory of evolution with the Christian faith. There can be little doubt that his influence helped obtain for the theory of evolution the acceptance in the Catholic world that it has now enjoyed for many decades.

He was born in Tyrol, Austria, in 1859, the very year Charles Darwin published his Origin of Species. Erich's father, the painter Friedrich Wasmann, encouraged his son's interest in living things at an early age. Already, when he was a student at the Jesuit College (a secondary school in Feldkirch, Austria), his classmates gave him the nickname "Carabus," meaning "ground beetle." It was while at that school that he made the decision to join the Jesuit order. The Jesuits, however, had been expelled from Germany in 1872 as part of the Kulturkampf. Wasmann thus began his novitiate in the Netherlands, in 1875. Unfortunately, he contracted a bad cold a few years later that resulted in severe lung hemorrhaging, which weakened him. Therefore, he could not continue his theological studies in England, as planned, but pursued them in private and was ordained a priest in 1888...........

Wasmann's compatibilist views on the theory of evolution and the Christian faith remained known only to his fellow entomologists and to a readership of educated Catholic lay people. This would dramatically change in 1904, however, when his book Die moderne Biologie und die Entwicklungstheorie came to the attention of the well-known biologist Ernst Haeckel.


Note at the following link, an article concerning the major scientific fraud committed by Ernst Haeckel -

https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/lying_evolutionary_art_haeckels_chart.html


QuoteReception of Darwin's Theory in German-Speaking Countries

The core of Darwin's theory of evolution is that the environment shapes evolutionary pathways through the process of natural selection was in strong contrast to the earlier theory of Lamarck, who suggested that evolution occurs through individual creatures passing on to their descendants characteristics that they acquire during their lifetime. When it came to the human species, Darwin always advocated that it had a single origin (monophyletism), not many. Although he was personally either an atheist or an agnostic, Darwin did not argue for a definite metaphysical viewpoint and considered that theism and the theory of evolution might be compatible.

Darwin's view contrasts with the reception of his theory and his work in the German-speaking countries. Two figures in particular stand out, both of whom took a strongly atheistic view of evolution. The first (although often forgotten) was Emil Heinrich du Bois-Reymond, who was known for his research on electrical activity in nerve and muscle fibers. In 1859, he read Darwin's Origin of Species and recognized that the principle of natural selection allowed him to understand biology while discarding any form of design, purpose, or final causation in nature. 

The second was the influential Ernst Haeckel. In 1864, Haeckel read Darwin's Origin of Species and soon was an outspoken advocate. He immediately ventured into metaphysical realms, declaring that evolution does away with any dualism (Creator and creation, matter and spirit, etc.) and brings everything together into what he called a "monism". During his lifetime he went from materialism to pantheism, from one monistic position to another. This may be puzzling to some people, but Wasmann explained it: "If we subtract everything we call 'the world' from what monism calls 'God,' the result is zero." Haeckel placed greater emphasis on the common origin of all living things than on the mechanism on natural selection and sometimes even took a Lamarckian view.

In Origin of Species, Darwin discussed the "Laws of Embryology," which had been proposed in 1828 by Karl Ernst von Baer. Baer had shown that animal embryos started from one, or a few, shared basic forms and then developed in a branching pattern into increasingly different-looking organisms. Much to von Baer's chagrin, Haeckel used this insight and proposed the biogenetic law "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny," which states that the embryological development (= ontogenesis) of an individual represents a shortened form of the evolutionary history (=phylogenesis) that leads from earlier and simpler kinds of organisms to later more complicated ones. In the twenty-first century, Haeckel's proposition is no longer considered a law, but rather a rule with limited application.

Haeckel was a gifted artist, and his 1904 book Kunstformen der Natur ("Art forms of nature") still today evokes a sense of awe and wonder. But for illustrating his "biogenetic law", he used drawings of embryos of different species that could not be replicated by other scientists and that bordered on fraud. In today's terms, this would require retraction of the publication; but the latter half of the nineteenth century was more liberal about such things, although this question led to a major discussion with leading experts, a discussion in which Wasmann also was involved in later years.

As the other article at the provided link addresses, Haeckel's drawings did not border upon fraud, they were fraud.

QuoteHaeckel, like Thomas Huxley in England, was not only an advocate for evolution, but also a science popularizer. His books The History of Creation (1876; 1868 German original) and The Riddle of the Universe (1901; 1899 German original) reached a wide circle in society. As a young man, Ernst Haeckel harbored a conventional set of Lutheran beliefs, mostly structured by the theology of Schleiermacher. His take on Darwin and the sudden death of his young wife shifted his ideas towards those of Goethe and Spinoza. His battles with proponents of Christian belief became more intense after 1880, and in 1905 he gave three lectures that directly attacked Erich Wasmann, seeing in his person and work a direct attack on his own monistic ideas about the theory of evolution.

Erich Wasmann and "Theistic Evolution"

In lectures that he delivered in 1907 in Berlin,  Wasmann was the first to use the term "theistic evolution." In German, he used the term "theistische Entwicklungslehre," which was translated in the 1910 English version as "theistic doctrine of evolution," but, "theistic evolution," is a more accurate translation.

In his lectures, Wasmann set forth a set of "postulates" that defined theistic evolution.
The first three postulates described God as Creator, as personal God who is the fullness of being and who is intrinsically "participating in the actions of all creatures, through His interior presence." The universe, created "out of nothing," is finite and bound to time. Once matter was created, the cosmic evolution and the evolution in the inorganic world could take place over millions of years, governed by laws. Wasmann emphasized that "a God who could create a living world capable of evolution is immeasurably greater and higher in His wisdom and power than a God who could only set all living creatures in the world as fixed, unalterable automata."

The fourth postulate was about the origin of the first organisms: Wasmann saw this as an aspect of natural philosophy, not theology. He assumed a creative act of God, but also stated that,

Should science [ever] be in a position to prove that spontaneous generation was actually possible, and that living beings could proceed spontaneously from inorganic matter, theism would at once give up this fourth postulate, for it is merely conditional and not essential to the Christian theory of the universe.

We should see Wasmann's words also in a historical context: "Spontaneous generation" had been the accepted thesis through ages in science, philosophy and theology and was only finally rejected due to the experiments of Louis Pasteur as late as 1859, only about 50 years prior to Wasmann's lecture.

https://creation.com/louis-pasteur

QuoteIn his fifth postulate, he said that the earliest laws of evolution were laid down for the organic world at the production of the first organisms. Importantly, those laws comply with the laws of physics and chemistry, but living beings, unlike non-living things, have a purpose from within.

With our "modern evolutionary synthesis," which combines the theories of genetics and evolution, we see genetic modifications in the germ cells as the random factor providing diversity, with natural selection being the directing force. We also acknowledge the importance of population genetics, genetic drift, and isolation. Recently, a broader framework, termed the extended evolutionary synthesis (EES), has been developed, maintaining that important drivers of evolution cannot be reduced to genes, but must be woven into the very fabric of evolutionary theory.

Wasmann considered natural selection to be one of the driving factors in evolution, but not the only one, since he regarded natural selection as an exclusively negative force that needed to be supplemented by positive directing forces, which he saw in processes inherent to individual development. In this assumption, he was not alone, but followed important biologists of his time, and he referred specifically to three: August Weissman, Oskar Hertwig, and Theodor Boveri.

August Weismann proposed what he called "germinal selection," showing that genetic variability had to be located in the germ cells, not in other cells of the body (called somatic cells) and opposed the Lamarckian view that acquired traits could be transmitted to the progeny. Oskar Hertwig took a critical stance towards both Weismann and Darwin, putting forward the thought that there is "continuity in the process of development, and the principle of progression, that is to say, that development" (both ontogenetic and phylogenetic) "progresses steadily in a definite direction." Seen from today's perspective, we may not agree with Hertwig's view of evolution, but his contribution to developmental biology was important and long-lasting: he was the first to study sexual reproduction under the microscope, and the first to recognize "nuclein" (what we call now nucleic acids) as the substance responsible not only for fertilization but also for the transmission of hereditary characteristics. The third scientist to whom Wasmann referred approvingly was Theodor Boveri, who described chromosomes as distinctive units of inheritance.

Finally, in his sixth postulate, Wasmann discussed human origins and emphasized that, although man is dust and will return to dust, he also has a "divine spark," an immortal, spiritual soul.

Wasmann on Human Origins

Wasmann returned to the question of the descent of man later in his lectures. "Investigating the descent and origin of man, the chief question is: 'Whence comes his higher part?' not: 'Whence comes his lower part?'" Therefore, also theology and psychology have a say in the discussion about humanity: "In short, the question that we have to discuss . . . is not a purely zoological one, and we must do our best, as far as possible, to do justice to all the various aspects of it, and not to confuse them with one another."

Wasmann saw experimental animal psychology on his side in affirming a gap, a divide between the faculties of animals and the spiritual dimension in humans. Only humans have the ability to go beyond the sensible. "What characterizes human thought is the fact that man possesses the power to form concepts, and to deduce from them general conclusions, and to raise himself by the aid of his reason above all particular phenomena." Wasmann emphasized the essential difference between animal and human in a mental and spiritual area that cannot be bridged by mere evolution.

With regard to the corporeal dimension of human origins, Wasmann's main point was that neither paleontology, nor morphology, nor embryonal development provided evidence of the origin of mankind from animal precursors. His main emphasis was on paleontology. At the time, there were only two fossils known that could be part of human ancestry: Pithecanthropus and the Neanderthals. Pithecanthropus, found in Java in 1895, was considered by eminent scientists like Virchow not to belong to human ancestry, but to ape ancestry.

Only later findings in China led to the reclassification of "Java Man" in 1950 to the species Homo erectus, placing them directly in the human evolutionary lineage. Whether the Neanderthals belonged to a separate species or were part of an older human race was a disputed question among experts at the time. Wasmann claimed that the Neanderthals belonged to the species Homo sapiens, heavily relying on the concept of "natural species," referring to the Austrian paleontologist Melchior Neumayr who used the term "paleontological species."

Java Man -
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/hominids/who-was-java-man/


QuoteAs Wasmann noted, Haeckel built a tree of human ancestry based mainly on "imagination", inventing missing links that simply did not exist; in addition, Haeckel described human races (what we would also call ethnicities) as branching out from different parts of this tree, thus implying that not all humans today have a common human ancestry. Haeckel's view was thus in strong contrast to the concept of monophyletic ancestry of all human beings alive today, as affirmed both by Darwin and by today's science. While our present picture of human origins may present itself as a tangled tree, scientists are convinced that all human beings share common human ancestors. Wasmann accepted the monophyletic origin of humans, but remained skeptical of human descent from non-humans, waiting for additional data. In his words:

Every atom in the human body had its primary origin in a creative act of God at the first formation of matter, although millions of years of cosmic development were to elapse before it became a living part of a human body; and, in just the same way, we might imagine a hypothetical history of humanity, governed by the laws of natural development, which God impressed upon the first cells at the moment when life originated. In accordance with this purely speculative supposition, man would have become man completely only when the organized matter had so far developed through natural causes, as to be capable of being animated with a human soul.

He concludes:

The creation of the first human soul marks the real creation of the human race, although we might assume that a natural development lasting millions of years had preceded it . . . If ever science is able to demonstrate to us the natural development of man from an ancestry resembling beasts, the divine origin and the divine end of humanity will nevertheless remain unassailed and firmly established as before.

Wasmanm's Silence and His Legacy

In 1910, Father Wasmann gave another series on lectures on evolution and the Catholic faith in Innsbruck, and said in an even more forceful way:

Evolutionary theory does not stand in hostile opposition to the Christian doctrine of creation, but it complements it in the most beautiful way. A God who was able to create a living world capable of development is immeasurably greater and more sublime in his power and wisdom than a God who could only put all creatures into the world as rigid, unchangeable automatons. This has already been presciently expressed by great minds of the Christian Middle Ages and antiquity, such as Thomas Aquinas and Augustine. We may therefore remain calm and firm in our sublime Christian words of creation: In the beginning, God created heaven and earth.

In later years, he would return to the danger he saw in Haeckel's monism, and he continued his entomological research. He became silent on the topic of evolution, however. In 1908, he had received a letter from the Jesuit Superior General, Fr. Franz Xaver Wrenz, asking him to refrain from the question of human evolution. Wrenz, being involved in two cases brought before Congregation of the Index, knew of negative views on this question by several cardinals and reviewers at that time. In 1909, the Pontifical Biblical Commission on Genesis published a decree on the first three chapters of Genesis. Wasmann's personal notes to this decree reveal that his silence was a self-imposed silence, out of filial obedience to the teaching authority of the Church.

Nonetheless, Wasmann's influence was already going beyond the borders of the German-speaking world: he carefully supervised the Italian translation of his 1904 book, a translation initiated and promoted by the scientist and Franciscan priest Giovanni Agostini. In 1906, the Belgian zoologist, psychologist, and Jesuit priest Robert Sinety provided a thorough examination of Wasmann's work. In Spain, the Jesuit Jaime Pujiula Dilmé, an expert in embryology and histology who had studied in Germany and Austria, took a similar stance, although he excluded the possibility of an origin of life without divine intervention.

A lot of Jesuit involvement, no agenda among Jesuits of course. Nothing to see here, move along.

QuoteWasmann was invited to write an article for the Catholic Encyclopedia, bringing his work to attention in the English-speaking world. The Question Box, a book widely read by American lay people, cites Wasmann in several places. In his article in the Catholic Encyclopedia, which appeared in 1909, Wasmann first described the basics of biological evolution and then said, "This is the gist of the theory of evolution as a scientific hypothesis. It is in perfect agreement with the Christian conception of the universe."

Wasmann was appreciated as a scientist, and as a friend and teacher. He died peacefully in 1931. Franz Heikertinger, an agnostic and fellow entomologist, summarized his life in these words:

With Father Wasmann one of the most famous representatives of the entomological world—and not only of the entomological one—has passed away. A man who found in investigating the relations of ants to their guests the main task of his life, who turned the results of his work into attempts to solve the most extensive biological problems, who undertook to interest wide circles, who tried to build a scientific bridge between the Bible and Darwin, a man who did not shy away from the fight, and even sometimes promoted it. That was Wasmann.

Conclusions

In the first explicit statement of the Church about evolution, Pope Pius XII said in his 1950 encyclical Humani Generis,
The Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God.

And in 2004, the document Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God produced by the Vatican's International Theological Commission confirmed:
 
Acting indirectly through causal chains [i.e. of cosmic evolution and biological evolution] operating from the beginning of cosmic history, God prepared the way for what Pope John Paul II has called "an ontological leap . . . the moment of transition to the spiritual." While science can study these causal chains, it falls to theology to locate this account of the special creation of the human soul within the overarching plan of the triune God to share the communion of trinitarian life with human persons who are created out of nothing in the image and likeness of God, and who, in his name and according to his plan, exercise a creative stewardship and sovereignty over the physical universe.

Pope Francis addresses our uniqueness as humans being in his encyclical Laudato Sí in these words:

Human beings, even if we postulate a process of evolution, also possess a uniqueness which cannot be fully explained by the evolution of other open systems. Each of us has his or her own personal identity and is capable of entering into dialogue with others and with God himself. Our capacity to reason, to develop arguments, to be inventive, to interpret reality and to create art, along with other not yet discovered capacities, are signs of a uniqueness which transcends the spheres of physics and biology.

He continues:

The sheer novelty involved in the emergence of a personal being within a material universe presupposes a direct action of God and a particular call to life and to relationship on the part of a "Thou" who addresses himself to another "thou". The biblical accounts of creation invite us to see each human being as a subject who can never be reduced to the status of an object.

Wasmann carefully accepted the theory of evolution within certain boundaries, specifically in the context of human origins: the human body may be the subject of evolution, but the soul, as "divine spark," created directly by God, is constitutive to our nature. Seen from the perspective of today, we can see a unifying thread from Wasmann, to Pope Pius XII, right up to Pope Francis.

Without question, the Catholic Church and the Jesuits, were instrumental in supporting, helping develop, and proliferating the theory of evolution the world over. This is not that surprising, as the Catholic Church has done so concerning many an extra biblical teaching or tradition. Professed Protestants doing so though, is another matter altogether.

Sola Scriptura -

https://au.thegospelcoalition.org/article/the-real-meaning-of-sola-scriptura/

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 08:23:04No, first of all wisdom is not the issue here at all.  It is knowledge.  If you do not understand the difference, then you reveal even further weakness in your understanding of God's word.

Second, God does not laugh, denigrate or otherwise besmirch knowledge gained through observation and study of His natural functioning of the universe. In fact, He says just the opposite in His condemnation of ungodliness and unrighteousness of men in Romans 1:18-20.

My complaint against so much of the scientific community is the refusal of some to accept the possibility even of God's existence, which is what Paul was speaking of in Romans 1:19-32.

Wisdom entails knowledge, though knowledge does not necessarily entail wisdom.

Psa 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? 2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, 3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. 4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

Knowledge, speculation and theory, are not. Demanding others acknowledge one's unobservable deep time speculative theories as established facts, is pride. Pride cometh before a fall.

Pro 16:18 Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. 19 Better it is to be of an humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud.

Romans 1:19-32 is not just about atheism. It is preceded by the following words -

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

It includes those who worship the idols of their own creation, in the place of God. Who place their own words and understanding above those of God.

Exo 20:1 And God spake all these words, saying,...............
Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.



Amo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8_UlocSPjE

Another video regarding discoveries by JWST which are problematic for deep time cosmological narratives of the last hundred years. Galaxies to old, to large, and to complex to fit into the 13.8 or so billion year Big Bang scenario. Same old same old. To much complexity to far back in time, requiring adjustments allowing for more time, and or totally new speculative theories that can account for such. Disregarding altogether of course, special creation by God with complexity from the beginning, nullifying the need for deep time scenarios. On and on it goes in virtually every branch of deep time evolutionary speculative theorizing. As I have been pointing out in article after article on this thread for years now.

Of course according to some, this is because I am a know nothing. Cause the consistent articles of deep time evolutionists themselves, repeating the same mantra of complexity further and further back in time requiring adjustments of deeper and deeper time, obviously admits of or means nothing. Not to those of the deep timers faith in any case. Deep, deep timers faith, is as deep faith, deep timers do, I suppose.

4WD

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 15:36:52https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8_UlocSPjE

Another video regarding discoveries by JWST which are problematic for deep time cosmological narratives of the last hundred years. Galaxies to old, to large, and to complex to fit into the 13.8 or so billion year Big Bang scenario. Same old same old. To much complexity to far back in time, requiring adjustments allowing for more time, and or totally new speculative theories that can account for such. Disregarding altogether of course, special creation by God with complexity from the beginning, nullifying the need for deep time scenarios. On and on it goes in virtually every branch of deep time evolutionary speculative theorizing. As I have been pointing out in article after article on this thread for years now.

Of course according to some, this is because I am a know nothing. Cause the consistent articles of deep time evolutionists themselves, repeating the same mantra of complexity further and further back in time requiring adjustments of deeper and deeper time, obviously admits of or means nothing. Not to those of the deep timers faith in any case. Deep, deep timers faith, is as deep faith, deep timers do, I suppose.
Did you actually hear what was said in the video?  If anything, not only did he not disavow deep time, he suggested that deep time may be even deeper than previously thought. He certainly did not lend any credibility to your interpretation of the Genesis Account of creation.  He further suggested that the current perceived discrepancies may be due to our lack of knowledge of the specific properties and characteristics of both dark energy and dark matter.  Of course the acceptance and confirmation of that lack of knowledge is not new at all, but has been in place for almost three decades now.

But once again, in being seriously scientifically challenged, you don't understand that is the way scientific discovery actually works.  It is how, for example, scientists discovered heliocentricity of our solar system and all such systems. It is how scientists discovered a universe beyond the Milky Way. It is how scientists discovered the nonexistence of an ever present ether rather than "empty" space.  It is how Einstein discovered the relativity of time. It is how scientists discovered nuclear fusion as the energy of the sun.  On and on and on. 

4WD

#2140
Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 09:36:12Wisdom entails knowledge, though knowledge does not necessarily entail wisdom.
Wisdom entails some knowledge but certainly not all knowledge.  Knowledge does not necessarily entail wisdom, but neither does knowledge preclude wisdom.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 09:36:12Knowledge, speculation and theory, are not. Demanding others acknowledge one's unobservable deep time speculative theories as established facts, is pride. Pride cometh before a fall.
Unobservable deep time speculative theories?  You just posted a video presenting observation of deep time.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 09:36:12Romans 1:19-32 is not just about atheism.
Actually it is not about atheism.  It is about knowing God yet failing to Honor Him (v.20-21).

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 16:44:17Did you actually hear what was said in the video?  If anything, not only did he not disavow deep time, he suggested that deep time may be even deeper than previously thought. He certainly did not lend any credibility to your interpretation of the Genesis Account of creation.  He further suggested that the current perceived discrepancies may be due to our lack of knowledge of the specific properties and characteristics of both dark energy and dark matter.  Of course the acceptance and confirmation of that lack of knowledge is not new at all, but has been in place for almost three decades now.

But once again, in being seriously scientifically challenged, you don't understand that is the way scientific discovery actually works.  It is how, for example, scientists discovered heliocentricity of our solar system and all such systems. It is how scientists discovered a universe beyond the Milky Way. It is how scientists discovered the nonexistence of an ever present ether rather than "empty" space.  It is how Einstein discovered the relativity of time. It is how scientists discovered nuclear fusion as the energy of the sun.  On and on and on.

Did you even read what I actually said. I know the video does not support YEC's. It does however confirm what I have been saying on these boards for years now. That the constant trend of finding more complexity further back in time, is suggestive of complexity from the beginning, which will not be considered by those of the deep timers faith.

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 25, 2024 - 16:55:32Wisdom entails some knowledge but certainly not all knowledge.  Knowledge does not necessarily entail wisdom, but neither does knowledge preclude wisdom.
Unobservable deep time speculative theories?  You just posted a video presenting observation of deep time.
Actually it is not about atheism.  It is about knowing God yet failing to Honor Him (v.20-21).

Yes, I just posted a video about deep time speculative theories. Which are having to readjust and or reevaluate once again, because newer data isn't supporting present standard speculative narratives.

4WD

#2143
Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 18:01:11Did you even read what I actually said. I know the video does not support YEC's. It does however confirm what I have been saying on these boards for years now. That the constant trend of finding more complexity further back in time, is suggestive of complexity from the beginning, which will not be considered by those of the deep timers faith.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 25, 2024 - 18:04:06Yes, I just posted a video about deep time speculative theories. Which are having to readjust and or reevaluate once again, because newer data isn't supporting present standard speculative narratives.
One of these days, maybe, just maybe, you will realize that what you see as the sin and shame of having to readjust and/or reevaluate is what is known as the Scientific Method.  It is how science works.  But I won't hold my breath. 

Rella

Quote from: 4WD on Sun May 26, 2024 - 05:51:26It is how science works.  But I won't hold my breath.

IOW... guesswork.

4WD

Quote from: Rella on Sun May 26, 2024 - 18:45:20IOW... guesswork.
No, not guesswork.  It is called the scientific method.  It is well documented and universally accepted as the way good science works.

https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-method

This is probably as good a place as any to read a description of the scientific method.

Rella

Quote from: 4WD on Mon May 27, 2024 - 05:12:52No, not guesswork.  It is called the scientific method.  It is well documented and universally accepted as the way good science works.

https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-method

This is probably as good a place as any to read a description of the scientific method.

There may be a scientific method built all things science are presented to the public as this is what science says, or this is scientific fact

WHEN

They should be saying "this is the current hypothesis"

And we would all know that by educated guessing and testing it seems reasonable.

You, as I recall, .... correct me if I am wrong... are a large proponent of all things science, and things going way way back.  It is to bad we can't do time travel in a way back machine.

But , again correct me if I am wrong... are NOT a proponent of a total world wide flood?

You have a lot of company... right here on GC as well as
what science will say.

Grab yourself another cup of coffee or an iced tea and have a read.
Lots of opinions.... as well as some totally laughable ideas.

For certain... they do not know what they cannot prove... it is only guesswork, at best.

Well, lets start with the Smithsonian scientists....(You know... the ones who did something with those giant  bones....)

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/evidence-for-a-flood-102813115/

QuoteThe scientific version of Noah's flood actually starts long before that, back during the last great glaciation some 20,000 years ago.

https://www.livescience.com/human-behavior/religion/did-noahs-flood-really-happen

QuoteNoah's flood is one of the most recognized Bible stories. According to the Old Testament, "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened" (Genesis 7:11, English Standard Version).
As the text recounts, God saw wickedness within humans and sent a global inundation. Because Noah was righteous, God instructed him to build an ark for his family and save two of every beast, bird and creeping thing. But did Noah's flood really happen?

"The one thing we know for sure from geology is that a global flood never happened," said David Montgomery, a professor of geomorphology at the University of Washington in Seattle and author of "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood" (W. W. Norton & Company, 2012). "If you look at it as literally a global flood that covered the world's highest mountains, I'm sorry, there's just not enough water on Earth to do that," he told Live Science.
If the "heavens" opened and all of the water in the atmosphere came down at once as rain, the planet would be submerged — but only to a depth of about 1 inch (2.5 centimeters), according to the U.S. Geological Survey.  That's not enough water to justify a canoe, let alone a massive ark.

https://ncse.ngo/yes-noahs-flood-may-have-happened-not-over-whole-earth

QuoteConclusions
If the 3.4-meter–thick layer of flood deposits in southeastern Mesopotamia (MacDonald 1988) represents a huge flood of ancient times, and if it is the remnants of the one described in the early Babylonian epics, then the authors of these epics were likely survivors who lived in a village on natural levees on the lower parts of either the Euphrates or Tigris Rivers where the flood waters covered their village, natural levees, and adjacent flood plains for distances of 160 to 320 kilometers so that no land could be seen, and their "whole world" would have been under water.

https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/evidence-suggests-biblical-great-flood-noahs-time-happened/story?id=17884533

(There is a video here)
QuoteDec. 10, 2012— -- The story of [color=var(--hyperlink-resting-color)]Noah's Ark[/color] and the Great Flood is one of the most famous from the Bible, and now an acclaimed underwater archaeologist thinks he has found proof that the biblical flood was actually based on real events.
In an interview with Christiane Amanpour for ABC News, Robert Ballard, one of the world's best-known underwater archaeologists, talked about his findings. His team is probing the depths of the Black Sea off the coast of Turkey in search of traces of an ancient civilization hidden underwater since the time of Noah.
[color=var(--hyperlink-resting-color)]See photos from her journey HERE[/url][/b][/font][/size][/color]
Ballard's track record for finding the impossible is well known. In 1985, using a robotic submersible equipped with remote-controlled cameras, Ballard and his crew hunted down the world's most famous shipwreck, the Titanic.
Now Ballard is using even more advanced robotic technology to travel farther back in time. He is on a marine archeological mission that might support the story of Noah. He said some 12,000 years ago, much of the world was covered in ice.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/comet-new-years-eve-newton-flood-bible-gravity-science

QuoteIn his book New Theory of the Earth, Whiston emphasized that the Bible was never meant to be an allegory or a scientific text. Instead, it was an historical account, "a true representation of the formation of our single Earth out of a confused Chaos, and of the successive and visible changes each day, till it became the habitation of Mankind."
As such, Whiston argued, it was incumbent upon modern thinkers to find the scientific explanation for the literal descriptions of miraculous events in the Bible.
"For if those things contained in Scripture be true, and really derived from the Author of Nature, we shall find them, in proper cases, confirmed by the System of the World," he wrote. "The knowledge of causes is deduced from their effects."
Whiston, relying on the principles of gravity published by Newton, believed that he had found the answer for the Biblical Flood in a comet.

https://www.science.org/content/article/questions-about-noahs-flood-theory

QuoteMany scientists accept the idea that the biblical story of Noah's flood was inspired by a sudden inundation of the Black Sea by the Mediterranean 7500 years ago. But new research suggests no such flood occurred.
Geologists Bill Ryan and Walter Pitman of Columbia University crafted the "Noah's Flood Hypothesis" in 1997 to explain the sudden appearance of saltwater mollusks in 7500-year-old Black Sea sediments. They proposed that during the last Ice Age, some 18,000 years ago, sea levels dropped enough to isolate the Black Sea from the Mediterranean Sea. Rain and rivers then turned the Black Sea basin into a brackish lake. As the climate warmed, melting glaciers slowly refilled the Mediterranean. When it burst through the Bosporus Strait, the Black Sea was suddenly flooded with saltwater.

There is more... but I shall stop here as you may not even have read this far. ::tippinghat::




4WD

Quote from: Rella on Mon May 27, 2024 - 07:36:22There may be a scientific method built all things science are presented to the public as this is what science says, or this is scientific fact

WHEN

They should be saying "this is the current hypothesis"
The hypothesis is not just guesswork.  Even in its most basic formulation it is, or should be, basic upon some existing observations.  Even the earlier "hypothesis" of a geocentric solar system was based upon actual observations.  It took additional and refined observations to finally come to the view of a heliocentric solar system.

I would admit that there have been many hypotheses that may have been, or even now are, based upon nothing but pure guesswork.  Those do not usually go very far before being proven wrong.

Quote from: Rella on Mon May 27, 2024 - 07:36:22There is more... but I shall stop here as you may not even have read this far. ::tippinghat::
I read this far.

Amo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nP3qBZ1qxc

More suggested possibilities relating to the problems created concerning present narratives, and the new observations provided by the James Webb Telescope. As already addressed, either deep time needs to be deeper, or the universe might be infinite as the video suggests. No beginning. Still, just speculations concerning that which cannot be observed.

It may just possibly be, that nothing we are presently even able to observe, actually fits into the box of our own very limited understanding. The harder we try to make it fit, the more problems and questions we create.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Eph 3:9  And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:


Rev 22:12  And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. 13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Amo

Quote"The one thing we know for sure from geology is that a global flood never happened," said David Montgomery, a professor of geomorphology at the University of Washington in Seattle and author of "The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood" (W. W. Norton & Company, 2012). "If you look at it as literally a global flood that covered the world's highest mountains, I'm sorry, there's just not enough water on Earth to do that," he told Live Science.
If the "heavens" opened and all of the water in the atmosphere came down at once as rain, the planet would be submerged — but only to a depth of about 1 inch (2.5 centimeters), according to the U.S. Geological Survey.  That's not enough water to justify a canoe, let alone a massive ark.

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184564-scientists-discover-an-ocean-400-miles-beneath-our-feet-that-could-fill-our-oceans-three-times-over

Quoted article below from link above.

QuoteScientists discover an ocean 400 miles beneath our feet that could fill our oceans three times over

After decades of theorizing and searching, scientists are reporting that they've finally found a massive reservoir of water in the Earth's mantle -- a reservoir so vast that could fill the Earth's oceans three times over. As always, the more we understand about how the Earth formed, and how its multitude of interior layers continue to function, the more accurately we can predict the future. Weather, sea levels, climate change -- these are all closely linked to the tectonic activity that endlessly churns away beneath our feet.

After decades of theorizing and searching, scientists are reporting that they've finally found a massive reservoir of water in the Earth's mantle -- a reservoir so vast that could fill the Earth's oceans three times over. This discovery suggests that Earth's surface water actually came from within, as part of a "whole-Earth water cycle," rather than the prevailing theory of icy comets striking Earth billions of years ago. As always, the more we understand about how the Earth formed, and how its multitude of interior layers continue to function, the more accurately we can predict the future. Weather, sea levels, climate change -- these are all closely linked to the tectonic activity that endlessly churns away beneath our feet.

This new study, authored by a range of geophysicists and scientists from across the US, leverages data from the USArray -- an array of hundreds of seismographs located throughout the US that are constantly listening to movements in the Earth's mantle and core. After listening for a few years, and carrying out lots of complex calculations, the researchers believe that they've found a huge reserve of water that's located in the transition zone between the upper and lower mantle -- a region that occupies between 400 and 660 kilometers (250-410 miles) below our feet. [DOI: 10.1126/science.1253358(Opens in a new window) - "Dehydration melting at the top of the lower mantle"]

As you can imagine, things are a little complex that far down. We're not talking about some kind of water reserve that can be reached in the same way as an oil well. The deepest a human borehole has ever gone is just 12km -- about half way through the Earth's crust -- and we had to stop because geothermal energy was melting the drill bit. 660 kilometers is a long, long way down, and weird stuff happens down there.

Basically, the new theory is that the Earth's mantle is full of a mineral called ringwoodite. We know from experiments here on the surface that, under extreme pressure, ringwoodite can trap water. Measurements made by the USArray indicate that as convection pushes ringwoodite deeper into the mantle, the increase in pressure forces the trapped water out (a process known as dehydration melting). That seems to be the extent of the study's findings. Now they need to try and link together deep-Earth geology with what actually happens on the surface. The Earth is an immensely complex machine that generally moves at a very, very slow pace. It takes years of measurements to get anything even approaching useful data. [Read: Is earthquake prediction finally a reality?]

Earth's underground ringwoodite ocean With all that said, there could be massive repercussions if this study's findings are accurate. Even if the ringwoodite only contains around 2.6% water, the volume of the transition zone means this underground reservoir could contain enough water to re-fill our oceans three times over. I'm not saying that this gives us the perfect excuse to continue our abuse of Earth's fresh water reserves, but it's definitely something to mull over. This would also seem to discount the prevailing theory that our surface water arrived on Earth via a bunch of icy comets.
 
 Finally, here's a fun thought that should remind us that Earth's perfect composition and climate is, if you look very closely, rather miraculous. One of the researchers, talking to New Scientist, said that if the water wasn't stored underground, "it would be on the surface of the Earth, and mountaintops would be the only land poking out." Maybe if the formation of Earth had be a little different, or if we were marginally closer to the Sun, or if a random asteroid didn't land here billions of years ago... you probably wouldn't be sitting here surfing the web.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

A while back I suggested there might be more to the dividing of the waters spoken of in Genesis, as scientists discovered or realized that there is a whole lot of water in space. Now of course the same may be applied to the large amount of water discovered within the earth.

Apart from this of course, is the topic of the flood. Far more water than once thought, translates of course into more water concerning a global flood. Apart from this, who is to say that we have found all the water under our feet yet. I doubt we have. This is not to mention other different conditions of the pre-flood world contributing to the same as well. Concerning a completely different water delivery system in the pre-flood world, and or the fountains of the deep mentioned breaking open, in connection with the global flood.

We keep learning more things which support the accounts of the creation and flood in scripture. Though many of different faiths have, do, and will no doubt continue to deny these new observations as such. Some just will not consider such as a suggestion of that which they do in fact make more likely.




Rella

Quote from: Amo on Mon May 27, 2024 - 13:58:30https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184564-scientists-discover-an-ocean-400-miles-beneath-our-feet-that-could-fill-our-oceans-three-times-over

Quoted article below from link above.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

A while back I suggested there might be more to the dividing of the waters spoken of in Genesis, as scientists discovered or realized that there is a whole lot of water in space. Now of course the same may be applied to the large amount of water discovered within the earth.

Apart from this of course, is the topic of the flood. Far more water than once thought, translates of course into more water concerning a global flood. Apart from this, who is to say that we have found all the water under our feet yet. I doubt we have. This is not to mention other different conditions of the pre-flood world contributing to the same as well. Concerning a completely different water delivery system in the pre-flood world, and or the fountains of the deep mentioned breaking open, in connection with the global flood.

We keep learning more things which support the accounts of the creation and flood in scripture. Though many of different faiths have, do, and will no doubt continue to deny these new observations as such. Some just will not consider such as a suggestion of that which they do in fact make more likely.





A GREAT find AMO... Thank you.

It is a link I will try not to loose.

But a couple of things.

As I said above, regarding all things science it is guesswork.

The unfortunate fact is one sentence among the many of the article is this...

"Basically, the new theory is that the Earth's mantle is full of a mineral called ringwoodite."

To me a theory IS guesswork as it is not yet proven and may never be....

But it certainly as far as I am concerned is a great explanation of the description  of waters that are in Genesis 1: 1-7, that you provided.

Now, we should add to that what is said in Genesis 7 starting with the 11th verse

Noting that during the Flood, the waters are described as coming from both above and below:

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

Noting also that  in other words, the water was freed from the constraints put on it by creation: the waters above are no longer held back by the firmament (expanse), and the waters below are no longer confined to where God gathered them. At the end of the Flood, this description is reversed:

Genesis 8:2
The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;

Your link has a great, understanable, explanation of the waters within the earth... which to me are biblical confirmation....

But please Amo, before jumping all over me I would like you to consider the following.

Look at this image from your link.

A pretty complex set up by all appearances, would you not agree.



I know you are a YEC guy... And I am YEC to the extent that we can prove that Adam did not go back any further then the genealogies we know of extended.

But in Genesis 1 when it says ... 5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

Then 6 Then God said, "Let there be [e]an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." 7 God made the [f]expanse, and separated the waters which were below the [g]expanse from the waters which were above the [h]expanse; and it was so. 8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.

9 Then God said, "Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear"; and it was so. 10 God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. 11 Then God said, "Let the earth sprout [j]vegetation, [k]plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after [l]their kind [m]with seed in them"; and it was so. 12 The earth brought forth [n]vegetation,
  • plants yielding seed after [p]their kind, and trees bearing fruit [q]with seed in them, after [r]their kind; and God saw that it was good. 13 There was evening and there was morning, a third day.

    ASK yourself this question....

    If God on day 2 and day 3 made this ball of dirt we are walking on ( never mind all the vegetation)

    WHY IN THE WORLD DID IT TAKE HIM.... AFTER NOAH BUILT THE ARK AND HAD ALL THE ANIMALS AND PEOPLE ON BOARD...

    Why did it take Him 40 days to flood the earth when it was done from below as well as above?

    Just think about it ....

    Anyway, thanks again for the link....


4WD

Amo, Your attempt to use that information as support for a global flood is hilarious, but not surprising.

You reject any scientific data concerning "deep time" as "science so-called".  Yet you accept some data suggesting water contained in a mineral 400 miles below the surface is a source of the water of Noah's flood. What do you suggest?  You think that the water was "squeezed" out of the mineral 400 miles below the surface to form the global flood, and then was "reabsorbed" back within that mineral a year later?  I don't think the article you quoted could even come close to supporting that.  I seriously doubt the authors of that article would agree with you.

Talk about science so-called. rofl  rofl

Rella

Quote from: 4WD on Tue May 28, 2024 - 08:00:25Amo, Your attempt to use that information as support for a global flood is hilarious, but not surprising.

You reject any scientific data concerning "deep time" as "science so-called".  Yet you accept some data suggesting water contained in a mineral 400 miles below the surface is a source of the water of Noah's flood. What do you suggest?  You think that the water was "squeezed" out of the mineral 400 miles below the surface to form the global flood, and then was "reabsorbed" back within that mineral a year later?  I don't think the article you quoted could even come close to supporting that.  I seriously doubt the authors of that article would agree with you.

Talk about science so-called. rofl  rofl

I notice you definitely did  not call out what was written in Genesis.

It is biblical that Gen 7: 11In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

Where the expletive was this great deep that God inspired Moses... or whoever... to write?

Jimmy's men say it like this

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

Peshitta

11In the six hundredth year of the years of the life of Noah, in the second month, in the seventeenth in the month, in it in this day, all springs of the great depths exploded, and the floodgates of Heaven were opened




4WD

Quote from: Rella on Tue May 28, 2024 - 08:38:42I notice you definitely did  not call out what was written in Genesis.

It is biblical that Gen 7: 11In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

Where the expletive was this great deep that God inspired Moses... or whoever... to write?

Jimmy's men say it like this

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

Peshitta

11In the six hundredth year of the years of the life of Noah, in the second month, in the seventeenth in the month, in it in this day, all springs of the great depths exploded, and the floodgates of Heaven were opened
Rella, if you are looking for a natural or existing source for enough flood water to cover the all the mountains of the entire global, I don't think you will find it. If God indeed dumped that much water onto the earth, He did it purely by unnatural providential means. He wouldn't have needed any natural source to keep it raining or whatever long enough and hard enough to produce whatever results He wanted.

Even if there is all that water contained in the mineral ringwoodite 400 miles beneath the surface of the earth, there is absolutely no data to suggest that enough of that water ever rose to the surface in the quantity required to fully cover the earth and then receded back down 400 miles to where it once was.

The article talks about an ocean down there, but it is not an ocean of free water like the oceans we have.  If it is there, it is captured and fully contained in the mineral.  What conditions it would take to release it would also prohibit its recapture.

Wycliffes_Shillelagh

Quote from: Rella on Tue May 28, 2024 - 08:38:42It is biblical that Gen 7: 11In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened.

Where the expletive was this great deep that God inspired Moses... or whoever... to write?
Science fails to explain it.  You need literature...

In Genesis 1, God forms the world out of the waters of primordial chaos.  The waters are called in Hebrew Tohu and Bohu, which words are translated 'without form' and 'void' in verse 2, respectively.  This will be important later.

In Job, we have another accounting of creation in which God establishes the pillars of the earth and the firmament.  Beside these stands a story of God subduing two monsters, the Behemoth and the Leviathan.  The Behemoth is a land-monster that drinks up whole rivers, while the Leviathan is a sea-monster with hard scales and sharp teeth that also breathes fire.  The word Behemoth in Hebrew is... Behemoth... and it turns out to be a variation of same word Bohu from Genesis 1.

In the creation story of Babylon (the Enuma Elish), God... well... the god Ea... but Ea appears to be their name for the real God... In that story, Ea subdues Tiamat, a beast of primordial chaos whose body is waters and whose domain is the oceans.  He then he takes its watery body and forms the earth from it.  He also slays Tiamat's lover, Absu (whose body is made of fresh water) and transforms it into a subterranean realm of water that he uses for His home.  This is called the Abyss, taking its name from the slain Absu.

The most ancient and revered Greek writer, Hesiod, likewise recounts a great battle between Zeus and the titan Typhon - a great serpent-like monster who epitomizes storms and water.  The titan was defeated and imprisoned deep underground... stop me if you've heard this story before...

So let's bring all that back to the story of Noah and the flood.  Where you read about the 'fountain of the deep' that word deep in Hebrew is Tehowm, a variation of the same word 'Tohu' used in Genesis 1:2 to describe the unformed water of primordial chaos, from which God formed the earth. 

The DEEP of Genesis 9 is no subterranean lake; this is one of those primordial monsters of water and chaos.  The Hebrew Tehowm IS the Greek Typhon and the Babylonian Tiamat and Job's Leviathan.

In the beginning... God had made the world by subduing these monsters, bringing order from chaos and land out of waters.   But here in Genesis 9 - Noah's day - God intends to UN-MAKE the world, and to do that He unleashes the old monster from its underground prison.  The whole world sinks back beneath the waves of primordial chaos... for a season.

And then... God stops the waters, and sends the monster back underground.  In Job 41, God indicates that he has made Leviathan his servant, put a hook in his nose to lead him as a beast subservient.

Finally, if all this is true, then we should read the story of Noah's flood as a creation story too.  The former earth was UN-MADE, and a new earth was RE-MADE - born out the waters, just as the first one.

Jarrod

Rella

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Tue May 28, 2024 - 13:23:55Science fails to explain it.  You need literature...

In Genesis 1, God forms the world out of the waters of primordial chaos.  The waters are called in Hebrew Tohu and Bohu, which words are translated 'without form' and 'void' in verse 2, respectively.  This will be important later.

In Job, we have another accounting of creation in which God establishes the pillars of the earth and the firmament.  Beside these stands a story of God subduing two monsters, the Behemoth and the Leviathan.  The Behemoth is a land-monster that drinks up whole rivers, while the Leviathan is a sea-monster with hard scales and sharp teeth that also breathes fire.  The word Behemoth in Hebrew is... Behemoth... and it turns out to be a variation of same word Bohu from Genesis 1.

In the creation story of Babylon (the Enuma Elish), God... well... the god Ea... but Ea appears to be their name for the real God... In that story, Ea subdues Tiamat, a beast of primordial chaos whose body is waters and whose domain is the oceans.  He then he takes its watery body and forms the earth from it.  He also slays Tiamat's lover, Absu (whose body is made of fresh water) and transforms it into a subterranean realm of water that he uses for His home.  This is called the Abyss, taking its name from the slain Absu.

The most ancient and revered Greek writer, Hesiod, likewise recounts a great battle between Zeus and the titan Typhon - a great serpent-like monster who epitomizes storms and water.  The titan was defeated and imprisoned deep underground... stop me if you've heard this story before...

So let's bring all that back to the story of Noah and the flood.  Where you read about the 'fountain of the deep' that word deep in Hebrew is Tehowm, a variation of the same word 'Tohu' used in Genesis 1:2 to describe the unformed water of primordial chaos, from which God formed the earth. 

The DEEP of Genesis 9 is no subterranean lake; this is one of those primordial monsters of water and chaos.  The Hebrew Tehowm IS the Greek Typhon and the Babylonian Tiamat and Job's Leviathan.

In the beginning... God had made the world by subduing these monsters, bringing order from chaos and land out of waters.  But here in Genesis 9 - Noah's day - God intends to UN-MAKE the world, and to do that He unleashes the old monster from its underground prison.  The whole world sinks back beneath the waves of primordial chaos... for a season.

And then... God stops the waters, and sends the monster back underground.  In Job 41, God indicates that he has made Leviathan his servant, put a hook in his nose to lead him as a beast subservient.

Finally, if all this is true, then we should read the story of Noah's flood as a creation story too.  The former earth was UN-MADE, and a new earth was RE-MADE - born out the waters, just as the first one.

Jarrod


Rella


Alan

Did God drown all of the Dinosaurs? 

Wycliffes_Shillelagh

Quote from: Rella on Tue May 28, 2024 - 16:20:03
Not a fan of literature?

Anyhow, I think I might re-run that post as an OP, elsewhere... mind if I include your quoted question?

Wycliffes_Shillelagh

Quote from: Alan on Wed May 29, 2024 - 12:07:23Did God drown all of the Dinosaurs?
Well He clearly didn't design T-Rex for swimming.  I mean... look at those arms.  Poor guy is struggling to keep his fangs above water.

Rella

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Wed May 29, 2024 - 12:17:48Not a fan of literature?

Anyhow, I think I might re-run that post as an OP, elsewhere... mind if I include your quoted question?

Sure. No problem...Just please give me a link

Alan

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Wed May 29, 2024 - 12:45:13Well He clearly didn't design T-Rex for swimming.  I mean... look at those arms.  Poor guy is struggling to keep his fangs above water.
Yeah, one of the obvious things that T-Rex would fail at, that and picking up the tab. 

Amo

Quote from: 4WD on Tue May 28, 2024 - 08:00:25Amo, Your attempt to use that information as support for a global flood is hilarious, but not surprising.

You reject any scientific data concerning "deep time" as "science so-called".  Yet you accept some data suggesting water contained in a mineral 400 miles below the surface is a source of the water of Noah's flood. What do you suggest?  You think that the water was "squeezed" out of the mineral 400 miles below the surface to form the global flood, and then was "reabsorbed" back within that mineral a year later?  I don't think the article you quoted could even come close to supporting that.  I seriously doubt the authors of that article would agree with you.

Talk about science so-called. rofl  rofl

Why would I suggest any such thing? As already stated many times over, I believe the present world, and the pre flood world are very different. Especially concerning the retention and or dispersion of water within and around the globe. As the scriptures themselves describe a totally different mechanism regarding the latter.

Of course, you already know this about what I believe, if you have paid attention at all over the last several years. So why the faulty accusation, and ridicule, built upon a faulty premise? 

Amo


Amo


Amo


Amo


Amo


Alan

Amo seems to be a stout adherent to science.  rofl

Amo

Luk 6:24 But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. 25 Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep. 26 Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.

Woe to those "Christian" false prophets of the day, who laugh at scientists supporting the creation account of scripture by observing the evidence visible to all. Woe to these false prophets, who bow down before their idol of evolution. Created, enlivened, and empowered by their false and self exalted claims that their speculations are factual truth, "science so called".

Psa 115:1 Not unto us, O LORD, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy mercy, and for thy truth's sake. 2 Wherefore should the heathen say, Where is now their God? 3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased. 4 Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men's hands. 5 They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not: 6 They have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not: 7 They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat. 8 They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them. 9 O Israel, trust thou in the LORD: he is their help and their shield. 10 O house of Aaron, trust in the LORD: he is their help and their shield. 11 Ye that fear the LORD, trust in the LORD: he is their help and their shield. 12 The LORD hath been mindful of us: he will bless us; he will bless the house of Israel; he will bless the house of Aaron. 13 He will bless them that fear the LORD, both small and great. 14 The LORD shall increase you more and more, you and your children. 15 Ye are blessed of the LORD which made heaven and earth. 16 The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD'S: but the earth hath he given to the children of men. 17 The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence. 18 But we will bless the LORD from this time forth and for evermore. Praise the LORD. 

Psa 96:1 O sing unto the LORD a new song: sing unto the LORD, all the earth. 2 Sing unto the LORD, bless his name; shew forth his salvation from day to day. 3 Declare his glory among the heathen, his wonders among all people. 4 For the LORD is great, and greatly to be praised: he is to be feared above all gods. 5 For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the LORD made the heavens. 6 Honour and majesty are before him: strength and beauty are in his sanctuary. 7 Give unto the LORD, O ye kindreds of the people, give unto the LORD glory and strength. 8 Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name: bring an offering, and come into his courts. 9 O worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness: fear before him, all the earth. 10 Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously. 11 Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth be glad; let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof. 12 Let the field be joyful, and all that is therein: then shall all the trees of the wood rejoice 13 Before the LORD: for he cometh, for he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth.


The false prophets declare the heavens and the earth and all that is in them came about according as the idol they have authored and created states, through and by deep time slow evolutionary processes. But the Lord Himself has spoken the truth of the matter.

Exo 20:1  And God spake all these words, saying,..........
8  Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.


The above words spoken to Israel by the mouth of God, and written for them twice with His own finger, declares the truth. For God is truth. The theory of evolution is simply a modern idol created by humanity declaring either no God, or a different god than that of holy scripture.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

The false prophets believe they are wiser than the prophets and apostles of holy scripture, whose words were inspired by the Holy Spirit of God. They have exchanged the creative power of the word of God alone to bring about that which He has declared, for deep time theories of slow development and evolution of "corruptible man, and birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.

Psa 33:1 Rejoice in the LORD, O ye righteous: for praise is comely for the upright. 2 Praise the LORD with harp: sing unto him with the psaltery and an instrument of ten strings. 3 Sing unto him a new song; play skilfully with a loud noise. 4 For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth. 5 He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the LORD. 6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. 7 He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: he layeth up the depth in storehouses. 8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him. 9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast. 10 The LORD bringeth the counsel of the heathen to nought: he maketh the devices of the people of none effect. 11 The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations. 12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance. 13 The LORD looketh from heaven; he beholdeth all the sons of men. 14 From the place of his habitation he looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth. 15 He fashioneth their hearts alike; he considereth all their works. 16 There is no king saved by the multitude of an host: a mighty man is not delivered by much strength. 17 An horse is a vain thing for safety: neither shall he deliver any by his great strength. 18 Behold, the eye of the LORD is upon them that fear him, upon them that hope in his mercy; 19 To deliver their soul from death, and to keep them alive in famine. 20 Our soul waiteth for the LORD: he is our help and our shield. 21 For our heart shall rejoice in him, because we have trusted in his holy name. 22 Let thy mercy, O LORD, be upon us, according as we hope in thee.

Choose you this day whom you will serve. The God of holy scripture, or the god defined by the man made theory of evolution. For they are not the same at all. 



+-Recent Topics

Creation scientists by 4WD
Today at 18:51:18

The Image of the Beast. by Hobie
Today at 18:49:09

Brutal, less than 5 min by Jaime
Today at 18:36:11

Keeping the Sabbath tells people Who you Worship. by Rella
Today at 13:34:38

mommydi by mommydi
Yesterday at 21:25:03

Gibbon\Rome by Amo
Yesterday at 12:32:26

Italian Teenager to Become the First Millennial Saint by armchairscholar
Yesterday at 05:55:53

Fellowship With Transgenders by Alan
Thu Jun 20, 2024 - 21:02:16

SCOTUS by Rella
Thu Jun 20, 2024 - 16:46:50

In the middle of our heat wave...... by Rella
Thu Jun 20, 2024 - 13:09:52

Powered by EzPortal