3c82d9 No.601211
The more I read geology and astronomy the more reasonable an old earth becomes, at least hundreds of thousands of years, most likely millions or more…
12b97c No.601215
13953f No.601216
>sediment accumulates at the same rate today as in the past
[citation needed]
4b54bd No.601219
>>601211
>The more I read the earthly wisdom of men trying to explain the existence of life without God, the more false the Bible seems
Also, >>601216 is correct. They assume that there was never any kind of catastrophic event that laid down massive amounts of sediment.
3c82d9 No.601222
>>601216
>>601219
Milankovitch cycles
4b54bd No.601224
>>601222
Please read these. Just consider the viewpoint of another believer (I hope), and you present me with your viewpoint and theological arguments, and I will consider them as well. Quickly, before the thread is flooded with false-flaggers like always.
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/radiometric-dating-problems-with-the-assumptions/
http://www.icr.org/article/carbon-14-found-dinosaur-fossils/
9cad85 No.601225
The earth is young, flat, and aliens are demons.
/thread.
a19bfc No.601229
>>601225
These. The best part of holding these true views is that with society as degenerate as it is today, you're already an outcast for just being a Christian. Who cares what they think?
12e4ed No.601268
9a2115 No.601276
>>601225
>The earth is young, flat
Kek
9a2115 No.601277
>>601229
Yeah you're right believing in God is just as socially unacceptable as believing we live on a giant pizza pie surrounded by an ice wall with a giant snowglobe over it
It's not like one is an incredibly common belief and the other is almost inversely so
a19bfc No.601281
>>601277
I know you're mocking me, but what you said is sadly 100% correct.
8cd34c No.601294
>>601281
>but what you said is sadly 100% correct
You do realize that monotheism comprises the majority of religious belief right.
You do realize that the flat earth movement is not even 1% of the global population, right?
Anon?….
9a2115 No.601295
>>601294
Uhhhh don't you know??? If u believe round earth your an atheist globehead……….. simpleton's. Trusting Masonic erasthosthanes LIES
c006b5 No.601298
>>601211
Which isn't inconsistent with Christian theology, unless you're from some fringe fundamentalist Protestant sect.
Catholicism, for example, accepts theories such as evolution and the big bang (created by a Catholic priest) to be possibly true. It also doesn't rule out the possibility of a young earth.
Ultimately, I don't think these are important to our faith.
9b6015 No.601307
>>601298
That priest is an atheist
543ff8 No.601311
9ef479 No.601320
>>601268
>no
I hope you trip over the curvature of the earth.
147fdf No.601321
8cd34c No.601324
>>601311
>uhhh God just made everything look completely opposite to what it actually is to test ur faith :^)
The absolute state of young earth apologetics
12e4ed No.601327
>>601324
>God just made everything look completely opposite to what it actually is
No it doesn't. Watch more Hovind videos
12b97c No.601328
>>601311
>God is a liar
no. go back to >>>/islam/
8cd34c No.601331
>>601327
The Omphalos Hypothesis claims that the Universe looks old and the product of naturalistic forces is actually young and created by God with the appearance of age
12e4ed No.601335
>>601331
Yeah it kinda does but God probably didn't create all the different rock layers, it was probably from the flood. Also the mountains and oceans were formed during the flood
fedb70 No.601348
>>601335
What would you say about the presence of aeolian layers that can only be deposited by wind above water?
And if all sedimentary layers were deposited in such a violent fashion, why are they oftentimes well-sorted?
346025 No.601360
>>601335
You think the Tigris and Euphrates rivers survived the flood? They were named in Genesis before the flood…….
12e4ed No.601365
>>601360
Maybe but they also could have just named a new river after the flood that. Like New York, New Hapshire, New England
>>601348
Because water sorts rock layers. Again, watch more Hovind videos.
2c9c84 No.601371
>>601277
people believe on a genderless naturalistic god, not the christian God that hates random shit like cartoons.
346025 No.601376
>>601365
It would be called the New Euprhates then. There's no New York in England. It's just York….
>>601365
The Flood story is fake. How many pairs of each animal did Noah take onto the Ark? Answer that.
>>601371
I never said they were strict Christians but most religious people aside from liberation theologists believe in a single omnipotent benevolent deity
>not the christian God that hates random shit like cartoons.
Deuteronomy 3:24 Thou Shalt not watch Spongebob, neither may you partake in viewing of Bugs Bunny, Pokemon, or Doraemon. I am the LORD your God.
12e4ed No.601379
>>601376
Well old euphrates got destroyed
Like around 8,000
612ca6 No.601388
>>601376
>The Flood story is fake
How do you justify saying that scripture is false?
9c19bd No.601393
>>601376
>It would be called the New Euprhates then
Why do you assume this? Look at Alexander the Great giving the name of Alexandria to over twenty cities. Sure they all have distinctive names today, but back then they were all called Alexandria. Or for a more recent example, look at all the cities in towns in America named Paris, after Paris, France. Not "New Paris" just Paris.
fab5ee No.601397
>>601376
Wasn't it actually like 9 pairs or so and people commonly misinterpret it as 2 because that's the more memorable number.
Also should be noted that fish and probably insects (I don't recall any mention of bugs) weren't taken. So I don't know where all the bugs came from later. You could argue that some were dormant underground like cicadas but wasps and the like can't be waterlogged for 40 days and come out fine.
Also I think the current number of individuals needed to sustain a population of a species safely is what, in the high 40's>
e1036c No.601411
>>601379
Really. 8,000 what? BC? Years ago? Weeks ago?
>>601388
How many pairs of each animal did Noah take onto the Ark? Answer my question and it will help me answer yours.
>>601393
Well the example given was New York but I suppose you're right
>>601397
It's 2 in one verse and 7 in another. Also, there's an anachronism here since God specifies "clean" and "unclean" animals which wouldn't be a thing for a loooong while
oops. Maybe "Moses" added that bit?
612ca6 No.601416
>>601411
>Also, there's an anachronism here since God specifies "clean" and "unclean" animals which wouldn't be a thing for a loooong while
oops. Maybe "Moses" added that bit?
Atheist argument. They clearly still had those same laws for clean and unclean animals.
e1036c No.601422
>>601416
Actually, they couldn't even eat animals until after the Flood. There's no Mosaic Law– Noah gets hammered and passes out, so alcohol wasn't even forbidden. It's a blatant anachronism.
612ca6 No.601429
>>601422
He simply states that they may be eaten. Remember that Abel would sacrifice a lamb from his flock? And the wine is o anachronism, either. It was only ever forbidden for Levite priests. Now go away.
9c19bd No.601430
>>601411
>It's 2 in one verse and 7 in another
Those two verses aren't referring to the same group of animals. When God commanded Noah to bring the additional cattle into the ark, all of the other animals were already on board.
>>601422
This should clear things up. https://www.gotquestions.org/animals-clean-unclean.html
e1036c No.601433
>>601429
>He simply states that they may be eaten.
No, God is pretty clear in only allowing vegetarianism after the Fall. "I give you the green plants for food."
>Remember that Abel would sacrifice a lamb from his flock?
Animal sacrifice is another anachronism in Genesis fam.
>>601430
God made no specification of the "clean" and "unclean" distinction at the time of the Noah story
612ca6 No.601437
>>601433
You are a liar or illiterate, I'm not sure which. Go read the story of the garden of Eden again, and you'll see that a lamb was sacrificed at the expulsion from the garden, and that Cain's sacrifice of vegetables was not adequate compared to Abel's sacrifice. Yes, the law was later given to Moses, but it is never stated that God had never demanded sacrifices before that. In fact, I think you'll find that God demanded the sacrifice if the lamb at the garden.
e1036c No.601439
>>601437
First off, making sacrifices of animals =/= eating them
Secondly, I'm not disputing that Abel made a sacrifice of lamb to God– I'm arguing that its presence in Genesis doesn't make any sense because God never lays down any commands to sacrifice animals until Exodus.
612ca6 No.601444
>>601439
And I'm telling you that he does, when he killed the lamb to cover Adam and Eve's shame. Good night.
510b9d No.601462
>>601317
>My boy George finally getting credit for formulating the Primeval Atom Theory and not Hubble's dumbass red galaxies or some shit
This is the stuff I want to see
fbf98e No.601470
>>601439
>I'm arguing that its presence in Genesis doesn't make any sense because God never lays down any commands to sacrifice animals until Exodus.
Adam and Eve passed on this knowledge. They had it first hand. Genesis is written after the fact so it makes sense that it doesn't include that. It wasn't necessary for <oses and onwards to have that detail and I'm sure many others explicitly recorded so it wasn't.
df0833 No.601474
>>601439
The patriarchal worship of God has many features the future Levitical Priesthood would also incorporate. I'm not sure why you think animal sacrifice was established in Exodus and not codified.
4e61bd No.601517
>>601439
>I'm arguing that its presence in Genesis doesn't make any sense because God never lays down any commands to sacrifice animals until Exodus.
In the account in Genesis, God doesn't lay down commands against killing/homicide until Genesis 9:5, so according to your interpretation Cain was not in sin because he couldn't know about it? He "didn't know what the concept of killing was" because it was before the first command (in the Bible) regarding it? It couldn't possibly be a concept they already knew beforehand? A concept that God had to lay out for them in clear language in his commandment not to explain a concept they already knew but for the purpose that there were no loopholes?
62a176 No.601656
>>601422
Noah wasn't sinless. Only Jesus (and maybe Mary if you're into that kind of thing) were sinless.
4205bf No.610214
>>601225
you foolish unsaved man. the earth is flat, hollow, young, currently has dinosaurs, is run by lizard demons, and surrounded by an infinite frozen pole. if you don't believe this you aren't christian