Evidence for God from Science

Hi Sandy! Long time no see. Good to see you back.

jlay wrote:

If we look at sandstone deposits they are global and massive.

Is this support for Global Flood? Or am I just reading too much into your post?

Is it support?

Global deposits of sandstone are a fact. I think they do support the possibility of a GF. Modern science accounts for them the same way a GF theorists does. Oceans. The similarity ends there of course.

Canuckster1127 wrote:Hi Sandy! Long time no see. Good to see you back.

Thanks. It's good to be back and see you all too.

jlay wrote:

Sand comes from the weathering of rocks. How long does that take?

Are you asking me, or saying you don't know?
I'd say it depends. Is there only one way that sand is formed? Are the conditions on earth today reflective of how they've always been? There are many catostrophic events that could cause rapid formation of sand to be deposited. Meteor impact being one. More active tectonic activity is another.

If we look at sandstone deposits they are global and massive.

Means I don't know. I looked around a little but found nothing relevant. If the sand is a hard mineral, such as quartz, and if the grains are rounded through weathering, then it will take quite a while to produce the grains. I can't imagine a catastrophic formation of smooth sand.
But in general, as you say, conditions vary. If a tree falls, how long does it take to decay? Depends on the environment. Fast some places, slow others. I imagine rock formation is the same.

Way I see it, it's certainly not evidence against a global flood
Whale bones in desert -- sure flood is right up there..

This website has some of the Biblical answers concerning the Global Flood
See: http://globalflood.org/scripture/index.html

Here are some common sense questions regarding the Flood of Noah's Time-

{Quote} Many Christians today think the Flood of Noah’s time was only a local flood, confined to somewhere around Mesopotamia. This idea comes not from Scripture, but from the notion of “billions of years” of Earth history.

Look at the problems this concept involves:

â– If the Flood was local, why did Noah have to build an Ark? He could have walked to the other side of the mountains and missed it.

â– If the Flood was local, why did God send the animals to the Ark so they would escape death? There would have been other animals to reproduce that kind if these particular ones had died.

â– If the Flood was local, why was the Ark big enough to hold all kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed? If only Mesopotamian animals were aboard, the Ark could have been much smaller.1

â– If the Flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board? These could simply have winged across to a nearby mountain range.

â– If the Flood was local, how could the waters rise to 15 cubits (8 meters) above the mountains (Genesis 7:20)? Water seeks its own level. It couldn’t rise to cover the local mountains while leaving the rest of the world untouched.2

â– If the Flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin.3 If this happened, what did Christ mean when He likened the coming judgment of all men to the judgment of “all” men (Matthew 24:37–39) in the days of Noah? A partial judgment in Noah’s day means a partial judgment to come.

â– If the Flood was local, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again.

Belief in a world-wide Flood, as Scripture clearly indicates, has the backing of common sense, science and Christ Himself. {UnQuote}

See: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... 1/n3/flood

â– If the Flood was local, why did Noah have to build an Ark? He could have walked to the other side of the mountains and missed it.

â– If the Flood was local, why did God send the animals to the Ark so they would escape death? There would have been other animals to reproduce that kind if these particular ones had died.

â– If the Flood was local, why was the Ark big enough to hold all kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed? If only Mesopotamian animals were aboard, the Ark could have been much smaller.1

â– If the Flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board? These could simply have winged across to a nearby mountain range.

â– If the Flood was local, how could the waters rise to 15 cubits (8 meters) above the mountains (Genesis 7:20)? Water seeks its own level. It couldn’t rise to cover the local mountains while leaving the rest of the world untouched.2

â– If the Flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin.3 If this happened, what did Christ mean when He likened the coming judgment of all men to the judgment of “all” men (Matthew 24:37–39) in the days of Noah? A partial judgment in Noah’s day means a partial judgment to come.

â– If the Flood was local, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again.

B

elief in a world-wide Flood, as Scripture clearly indicates, has the backing of common sense, science and Christ Himself. {UnQuote}

I was gonna do a point-by-point answer but I don't think I will even bother....
If people want to believe that the flood was global ( and all the problems that go with that) that's fine.

Tiffany Dawn wrote:This website has some of the Biblical answers concerning the Global Flood
See: http://globalflood.org/scripture/index.html

Here are some common sense questions regarding the Flood of Noah's Time-

{Quote} Many Christians today think the Flood of Noah’s time was only a local flood, confined to somewhere around Mesopotamia. This idea comes not from Scripture, but from the notion of “billions of years” of Earth history.

Look at the problems this concept involves:

â– If the Flood was local, why did Noah have to build an Ark? He could have walked to the other side of the mountains and missed it.

â– If the Flood was local, why did God send the animals to the Ark so they would escape death? There would have been other animals to reproduce that kind if these particular ones had died.

â– If the Flood was local, why was the Ark big enough to hold all kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed? If only Mesopotamian animals were aboard, the Ark could have been much smaller.1

â– If the Flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board? These could simply have winged across to a nearby mountain range.

â– If the Flood was local, how could the waters rise to 15 cubits (8 meters) above the mountains (Genesis 7:20)? Water seeks its own level. It couldn’t rise to cover the local mountains while leaving the rest of the world untouched.2

â– If the Flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin.3 If this happened, what did Christ mean when He likened the coming judgment of all men to the judgment of “all” men (Matthew 24:37–39) in the days of Noah? A partial judgment in Noah’s day means a partial judgment to come.

â– If the Flood was local, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again.

Belief in a world-wide Flood, as Scripture clearly indicates, has the backing of common sense, science and Christ Himself. {UnQuote}

See: http://www.answersingenesis.org/article ... 1/n3/flood

Exaggeration would be my guess. But then that's my answer to many of the biblical claims.

Tiffany, this may help answer some of your questions:
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... flood.html

The more things change, the more Ken Ham stays the same.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/a ... christians

Nice, it both does and does not matter. Go Ken.

I find it so amazing how God has given us His WORD-even to the English Translations, which by the way, He will never change not even for one person, but yet there are thousands and thousands of people who go by the Title "Christian" who seem to go out of their way to stumble all over the Truth and the real facts.
There are actual "Christians" that don't believe in Harpazo, There are "Christians" that don't believe in a literal Hell, and there are some that probably don't believe in a real Global Flood.
I would like to know just how a person supposedly becomes a "born-again" "Christian" by supposedly accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and then turn around and not believe something that God put in His Word. By-the-way, calling God a liar is a serious matter. .
The Truth is ,if and when a “Christian” rejects any part of God’s Word they are really rejecting Jesus.
After all, isn’t it God’s Word that makes it so simple for us "as now truly born-again Christians" to confess God as our Lord and Savior? Confess our sins and believe that he died on a cross so that we could be saved from eternal damnation?
If that be true then how can one believe this part of God’s Word concerning confessing God as your Lord and Savior, but yet turn around and not believe in a literal hell, Not believe in Harpazo {aka} being caught up, and then question the Flood in Noah’s Time? How can this be?

Have some of you not been taught about adding and taking away from the Good News Gospel?

God has warned in His Word of that which will happen to those of whom add or take-away from His Word

Deuteronomy 4:2 states: You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you.

Revelation 22:18 states: I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

Revelation 22:19 states: And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Deuteronomy 12:32 states: See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.

Proverbs 30:6 states: Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

Now I'm wandering how many "Christians" don't believe these verses-If God said it that should settle it - You would think-

However, perhaps this is where Matthew 7:23 comes into play-which states "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Luke 13:27 states: "But he will reply, 'I don't know you or where you come from. Away from me, all you evildoers!'
It is very serious to be this confused about something that is contained within God's Word-Don't Ya think?

People surely cannot be this confused.

PaulSacramento wrote:

â– If the Flood was local, why did Noah have to build an Ark? He could have walked to the other side of the mountains and missed it.

â– If the Flood was local, why did God send the animals to the Ark so they would escape death? There would have been other animals to reproduce that kind if these particular ones had died.

â– If the Flood was local, why was the Ark big enough to hold all kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed? If only Mesopotamian animals were aboard, the Ark could have been much smaller.1

â– If the Flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board? These could simply have winged across to a nearby mountain range.

â– If the Flood was local, how could the waters rise to 15 cubits (8 meters) above the mountains (Genesis 7:20)? Water seeks its own level. It couldn’t rise to cover the local mountains while leaving the rest of the world untouched.2

â– If the Flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it. They would have escaped God’s judgment on sin.3 If this happened, what did Christ mean when He likened the coming judgment of all men to the judgment of “all” men (Matthew 24:37–39) in the days of Noah? A partial judgment in Noah’s day means a partial judgment to come.

â– If the Flood was local, God would have repeatedly broken His promise never to send such a flood again.

B

elief in a world-wide Flood, as Scripture clearly indicates, has the backing of common sense, science and Christ Himself. {UnQuote}

I was gonna do a point-by-point answer but I don't think I will even bother....
If people want to believe that the flood was global ( and all the problems that go with that) that's fine.

******************************************
Or if people doubt the truth of God's Word that's okay too-Right?

There are actual "Christians" that don't believe in Harpazo, There are "Christians" that don't believe in a literal Hell, and there are some that probably don't believe in a real Global Flood.

Tiffany, I have a little secret. But let's keep this between you and me. There might be Christians...I can't believe I'm actually saying this... There might actually be Christians, who don't believe that the days spoken of in Genesis, are actually 24hour days.







Tiffany, you do realize that one can interpret parts of scripture differently than you do, and still be a Christian, saved by the efficacious work of Christ, don't you?