And?It is the one you are advocating.
Why wouldn't I advocate a view defined in the bible, which is further described in scientific articles?
I think you have some seriously erroneous ideas.Or at least, that is your faith position. Given the writings attributed to Moses include his own death, I have always been dubious of that.
My "faith position" is in YHVH himself, through Jesus Christ.
The only reason I have no problem with the events and ideas presented in the bible is because I know YHVH, through his investment in my life for the past 45+ years.
As you don't know him, your incredulity is a gimme.
You have this completely backwards.I am going to believe what the evidence points to. Not what some blowhard on the internet is trying to bully me into believing.
I want you to meet, and know YHVH.
What you do with the history and events, and ideas described in the bible are an after-the-fact set of issues.
The bible simply describes what God did in that era/period of history.
I agree that much of it seems utterly impossible.
You actually meet him and he demonstrates himself to you. As your experience base with him increases, what you read in the bible becomes less and less troublesome.
Jesus was quite clear about this...
Nothing is impossible for God. Literally!
In general I would agree. Science isn't the problem here.Apologies if I gave that impression; it was certainly not meant that way. Science can be wrong. But it has an extremely good track record, and our ability to discuss it over such huge distances is testament to that.
People today who have bought the scientism mindset treat the bible as absolutely impossible.
They treat my repeated recovery from multiple recurrences of my cancer impossible.
Yet, both are clearly documented and testified to by scientists, each in their respective disciplines and fields of study and work.
There are many highly educated people who are scientists who have been able to scientifically verify the biblical narrative, and have been doing so since Copernicus, all the way through to today.
Just because the political institution of the church and Hollywood's vilification of the institution as a magisterium have eviscerated the believers and then their discoveries, doesn't mean that the bible has been disproven.
For the most part....That technology works is very good evidence that science is, for the most part, right.
This I think is important to note.
Most part doesn't mean ALL part...
The most recent evidence of the failure of science is in the covid pandemic.
The sheer volume of fear-inducing actions by certain scientific institutions, the news media and politicians was a global fuster-cluck (switch the f, and the cl positions if that does make sense to you)!
In my youth, the number of acceptable deaths, and severity of side effect illnesses and deaths were much much lower per capita.
It was pretty clear that they removed the cap, and whatever happened was acceptable. It became clear pretty early on that the drugs used have caused extensive injuries, subsequent damage and deaths to many patients.
Furthermore, politicians and the news media vilified many who refused to accept the narrative.
This was the first globally scaled clinical trial in the history of the human race.
It's actually the perfect example of scientism run amok.
It helps you confirm your biases. That's a you thing. I'm not particularly concerned about this. It's a belief system you'll have to decide for yourself what you're going to do about it.It certainly helps my arguments that you have not.
I guarantee clinging to it won't help you resolve the issues associated with your eternity.
I understood that.Okay. But the timing in the article says it was glaciers first, and rising sea levels later.
I'm not bothered by that.
As I stated yesterday, they need a source of water to explain it.
The water's being chemically unbound by God, from the rocks, with the release of the pressure, as evidenced by the Tongan volcanic eruption earlier this year, isn't a problem.
Remember, this isn't about what you're being told.
It's about what actually happened, but the actual order of occurrence is unknown, so it's being speculated about.
The bible says that the water was released from the atmosphere and from the earth through a geologic cataclysm.
I did read the article.Which you would know if you had bothered to read the article.
I saw the word pattern describing a series of flood events in a time before modern understanding. The point where the writer was saying that it's time to pay attention to the ancient stories in humanity's history.
Or did you miss that part?
Go back to the beginning of the article.
He is.And yet the Bible tells us God is perfectly capable of forgiving sin and preventing a person from going to hell, if God chooses to.
Turn to him from your sin and place your trust in Jesus Christ.
You will immediately be "translated from the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of the son of his dear love."
It's an instantaneous change from death to life. Based on my experience, I'd say that it takes longer for the realization to sink in than it does for God to do it.
Well, since you obviously know everything, I'd say that the truth doesn't actually matter, and this is a done deal.As far as I can see, hell is just God inflicting intense pain to punish those who reject him. Or torture them in other words.
Do you actually want to base your eternity on "as far as I can see" thinking?
That seems rather stupid to me.
Yeah, you clearly ignored the first several lines.What the article describes is:
- a rise in sea levels up to their present level
- that rise happened due to glaciers melting
- it occurring very slowing over about 10,000 years
The reasoning behind writing the paper is stated up front.
There are numerous anecdotal narratives of flooding that isolated a spit of land from France, creating the now present day island of Jersey. They started with an anecdote about the island previously being separated by only a creek that one could literally step across, and iirc, not get their feet wet.
Looking at the map right now, it appears to be a good mile or so off the north west coast of France. The anecdotes are the basis for the exploration and investigation into past narratives.
Dating back a few hundred years the people who talked about it laugh at the idea of Jersey being a creeks width from the mainland. But the evidence shows it actually was.
So, I again, reiterate my comfort with my submission of the article and my purpose for doing so.
There's no mention of an ice age.What the Bible describes.
- a rise in sea levels to cover all mountains
- that rise happened prior to the ice age
- it occurring very rapidly over just 40 days
There's no mention of the altitudes of the mountains.
There's mention of two events that resulted in the mountains being covered.
1- a rain storm that lasted 40 days/nights.
2- an opening of the fountains of the deep.
Scientists have subsequently discovered that there are "several oceans' worth of water stored in the mantle. Presently bound chemically, in rock formation known as ringwoodite.
It's long been known that pressures in the mantle are exceedingly high. I recently ran across an article that discusses diamond formation in the mantle.
So, as diamonds require carbon, heat, and pressure, I'm thinking that water, under high heat and high pressure would become rock (a solid). Once released to the atmosphere, the pressure and the heat are gone.
It's not that difficult to consider a change in state would result.
Considering that there's a sublimation that occurs when water reaches the triple point, and can be vapor, solid and liquid simultaneously, I'm thinking that this would happen under the conditions described in the bible.
And you've actually provided the best possible means that you are so caught up in your biases and preconceptions that you ignored the reason why the article was written in the first place.You are pretending the article say things it does not, presumably because you failed to read it and just assumed it must agree with your worldview.
Anecdotal reports over the course of antiquity should be given greater credence.
Bingo! 8 people survived that event.None of whom were there! All they have to go on is the same accounts that you and I do.
Based on the ages listed in the bible, Abraham met Shem. Noah was alive until Abraham was in his late 50's. It's possible that he met, and talked with Noah too.
So, the narrative would have survived through the descendants of Noah, and his family.