It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Testing The Bible Scientifically Part 3 / The Genesis Flood and More

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by banishedfromthisarea
 





Never heard of uplift?


Of course who hasn't?

But my point is or my q was - uplift from what?

Uplift from a lower point - in this case below the sea level which proves my point that at one point in time the mountain ranges were a lot lower that they are today. Due to tectonic plates and geologic forces as well as the weight and pressure of the water these plateaus were "uplifted" from the sea floors carrying with them marine life forms.

Do you agree?

Question is at what rate and when did these tremendous uplifting occurred?

What are the clues?




posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 



So you say that:


Those mountains weren't submerged...they were NEVER submerged.


Yet you also say that:




The soil and rock they're made of however were at one point in time. BIG DIFFERENCE!!


Huh????



Whut???



Those mountains weren't submerged...they were NEVER submerged.


but



The soil and rock they're made of however were at one point in time. BIG DIFFERENCE!!


So were they submerge or not?

anyway...since this is not my thread...I don't want to take over it.

I have more to say but it's best to post them in my own thread in order not to derail this thread and show respect to the thread owner.

bye.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by edmc^2
 


Dude, I just posted a link that answers all of those questions. Maybe you missed, it but please go back and read it. It shows how, when, where and why and which parts were underwater and when.
edit on 2-1-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by novastrike81
 


I will jump in on one question you ask. The question of a Flat Earth? Did you know that the earth is described as round by Jesus Christ and way way back in the Old Test. too?



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by novastrike81
 


I will jump in on one question you ask. The question of a Flat Earth? Did you know that the earth is described as round by Jesus Christ and way way back in the Old Test. too?


Show me where it says this in the Bible. I know it talks of a circle, but not a round Earth.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


This is a bit off topic of the recent posts and back to the link provided in the OP, where i'd like to point out a couple of things that just don't seem to add up.

The article uses Genesis 1:6-7 to support the claim there there was a vapor or water barrier suspended in the upper atmosphere. This is claimed to explain where the where the flood waters come from and also the extremely long lifespans of those living before the flood, the water barrier is supposed to absorb harmful radiation. Then the explanation is given that since the sun is outside of the layer of water that no rainbows could form due to the diffraction of the suns rays, and that the first rainbow ever witnessed was after the time of the flood.



And God said, “Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.” So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. (Genesis 1:6-7)


However the article neglects to mention what happens next, in Genesis 1:8-18. There, god gives to the newly created expanse the name 'sky' (as per the New International Version 1984 which the quote in the article seemed to come from). God then creates two lights, the sun and the moon, and places then IN the newly created sky... not beyond it, but IN. He then creates the stars places the stars IN the expanse as well. Remember now, this newly created expanse of sky is bounded by the waters below, and the waters above, as defined in Genesis 1:7. The text is quite clear on this, the sun, moon and stars are all placed withing this expanse of sky, which is UNDER where the article claims this water barrier to be.



8 God called the expanse “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.




14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good.


This realization basically undermines the entire premise of the article, but even without it, the logic of the article is seriously flawed. A barrier of water three miles thick the article claims? Sunlight cannot penetrate three miles beneath the ocean, there is no light at all at that depth, how could there be enough light for photosynthesis to occur? Was it a layer of vapor perhaps the maybe let some light through? We have all seen this already before, its called a cloud layer. Are we to believe that there was a perpetual cloud later over the earth during those days, the sun nothing more than a lighter patch of the cloud layer, and no knowledge whatsoever of the moon or stars? Id think Noah and his family would be flabbergasted at their first sight of the clear evening sky, but strange there is no mention of it in the text....
edit on 3-1-2012 by Donner because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Donner
 


Well I can only say what I can offer as opinion since I wasn't there. First of all, God creating in Genesis was long before Noah. I think that there was some "Settleing" down of the creation from Gods handy work, till the days of Noah. As far as what Noah migh have felt as be perplexing or to be "Wowed" at is a good point. The only thing that comes to mind for me is what would I think in his shoes.

Well I have to say I would probably already have prepared my heart and eyes for some crazy things to see since I was building an Ark in the desert and had a good idea that there were some "Strange New Things" to come in the near future , once it starts to rain.

Lastly, The Bible doesn't always give every little detail in the scope of things. If it did, as the gospels say, The life and miricals of Jesus would fill "All " the books you could read, so to speak.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by novastrike81

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by novastrike81
 


I will jump in on one question you ask. The question of a Flat Earth? Did you know that the earth is described as round by Jesus Christ and way way back in the Old Test. too?


Show me where it says this in the Bible. I know it talks of a circle, but not a round Earth.


I, too, am interested in this. Where did Jesus describe a round earth? What verse?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by novastrike81
 


I will jump in on one question you ask. The question of a Flat Earth? Did you know that the earth is described as round by Jesus Christ and way way back in the Old Test. too?


It was described as a circle. Just like the apparent shape of the Sun and Moon and even stars, in the Sky. Many believed the flat earth was circular back then, a more intuitive shape than triangular or rectangular.

The followers of the Old Testament, and those supposedly really close to the jesus account, all believed in a flat earth. No evidence that they had special insight as to the shape of the earth, none. Neither did Jesus or Yahweh stress that the earth was "Round" either. It was mentioned like common knowledge. Because it was common "knowledge" with the flat circular earth "theory". If he was truely giving a groundbreaking revelation, he would have stressed and clarified on it.

Unless Yahweh/Jesus gave information they knew would be misinterpreted(A lie, basically), just so that future readers could go back and see the true message, it's obvious that that isn't what was being said.

~
It's sad that the only scientific insight in the bible, wasn't there, interpreted, or meant to be interpreted, until after the discovery was made and accepted. Then people decide to interpret it as such.

That's somewhere between looking outside a cultural context, and just plain wishful thinking. What it isn't, for sure, is evidence that the bible was inspired out of some idea of scientific foresight.



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx
 


I think the OP abandoned her thread. Looks like we won't be getting the scripture where Jesus says the Earth is round.



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by novastrike81
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx
 


I think the OP abandoned her thread. Looks like we won't be getting the scripture where Jesus says the Earth is round.


Don't need the OP to post them. I was obviously familiar with most of them myself in order to respond to the claim.

This is the most often cited one.

Isaiah 40:22:
God sits above the circle of the earth. The people below seem like grasshoppers to him! He spreads out the heavens like a curtain and makes his tent from them.


As you can see, it's really about changing the interpretation after the facts have been discovered. No scientific foresight.

Also;

"Daniel 4:10-11. In Daniel, the king “saw a tree of great height at the centre of the earth...reaching with its top to the sky and visible to the earth's farthest bounds.” Only with a flat earth could tall tree be visible from “the earth's farthest bounds,” — this is impossible on a spherical earth.

"Isaiah 11:12 "And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth."

"Revelation 7:1 "And after these things I saw four angels standing on four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree."

Four Corners, while iffy on how it corresponds with the circular earth claim, downright contradicts the actual round earth facts.

Matthew 4:8, "The devil took him (Jesus) to a very high mountain and displayed before him all the kingdoms of the world in their magnificence...." The only plausible reason for the "very high mountain" was that the altitude would make it possible to see to the ends of the earth. Only on a flat earth would this be remotely possible, so the New Testament writers were as ignorant as the Old.


Source, RationalWiki
And also an EvoWiki link with more info.

~
If you look at all the scriptures as a whole, and the cultural ideas of the times the stories were written, it's easy to see that they were from a time where the held idea was of a flat earth, and that the writers shared the beliefs themselves. And there's no reason to claim a scientific insight as "proof" that it's an inspired book.



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to post by MrXYZ
 



So you say that:


Those mountains weren't submerged...they were NEVER submerged.


Yet you also say that:




The soil and rock they're made of however were at one point in time. BIG DIFFERENCE!!


Huh????



Whut???



Those mountains weren't submerged...they were NEVER submerged.


but



The soil and rock they're made of however were at one point in time. BIG DIFFERENCE!!


So were they submerge or not?

anyway...since this is not my thread...I don't want to take over it.

I have more to say but it's best to post them in my own thread in order not to derail this thread and show respect to the thread owner.

bye. [/quote

Please (!!) read the basic article about PLATE TECTONICS. It was posted before, and explains EXACTLY why seashells can end up on top of mountains. In short, as plates move, they can pile up as mountains over millions (billions) of years. This pushes up rock and soil that was at one point "sea floor" upwards until it forms part of a mountain.

Here's the link to the full article: LINK

All this has been explained to you more than once by the way



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 



BTW I abandoned nothing. I have had a dog recently die and I have not been on alot. In response to your question about Jesus's comments on a spherical globe,


Matthew 24:40
Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left

In the verse above the men are in the field,


Matthew 24:41
Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left

In the verse above, the women are grinding a hand mill. Work that is done in the day.


Luke 17:34
I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left


In the verse above Jesus points to the night also . night and day simultaniously. Day and Night at the same time. Because "The taking" is like a thief in the night it comes quickly and catches you off guard . Therefore no time to prepare for it ( a day in advance etc )

Jesus new day and night would be happening at the same time therefor a round earth
edit on 7-1-2012 by CherubBaby because: typo



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


That's a very poor excuse...

I'm sorry, OP, but what you quoted could mean anything, in any given context. It's blurry, to say the least...



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by BagBing
 


Its dayy and night at the same time to say the leaste



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by CherubBaby
reply to post by BagBing
 


Its day and night at the same time to say the leaste


In what way? I don't mean that in a derogatory sense, I'm just curious.



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by BagBing
 


You cant have day and night at the same time unless your on a round spherical globe



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


But the bible doesn't suggest this... Does it?



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by BagBing
 


Did you bother to read my post above? BTW I abandoned nothing. I have had a dog recently die and I have not been on alot. In response to your question about Jesus's comments on a spherical globe,


Matthew 24:40
Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left


In the verse above the men are in the field,


Matthew 24:41
Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left


In the verse above, the women are grinding a hand mill. Work that is done in the day.


Luke 17:34
I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left


In the verse above Jesus points to the night also . night and day simultaniously. Day and Night at the same time. Because "The taking" is like a thief in the night it comes quickly and catches you off guard . Therefore no time to prepare for it ( a day in advance etc )

Jesus new day and night would be happening at the same time therefor a round earth



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by CherubBaby
 


I had a dog too. Barney. He died of cancer.

One day, I (he) was attached by another dog. I clicked my fingers, and he lay down. I kicked the other dog off, time after time. Barney just lay there, because that was what he was told to do. The locals went berserk, because this other dog was uncrontrolable... But was he? He just did what he thought was best.

Barney, on the other hand, was well trained (he was a gun dog).

The point is, Barney was not only well trained, but he was very sociable. He truly loved people. Especially small children. So, Barney was not only gentle, but trustworthy.

Getting back to your point... Two men in a road... one a dog, the other me., One will be taken, the other left behind.

Now, you tell me... who is the most deserving? Me or Barney? The good dog verses just a normal person?

The quote you give above... how do YOU define the better person (or animal?)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join