I would think it more a demonstration of how we will be tested for our own sake so we shall know. God already knew when we were growing in our mothers womb
1 Like
Marvin, thank you again for your reply.
I too believe God can see everything and see us when we are growing in our mother’s womb. With the proper equipment, like a sonogram we can also view fetuses in a womb. We only know of a pregnancy after a test has been made. If a sonogram was taken a year earlier there would be nothing and no knowledge of a fetus growing in a womb.
Much like the Watergate fiasco, the press kept asking what did Nixon know and when did he know it. I believe God has all knowledge concerning the past and the present. Using the Bible he has given us, I am looking at Scripture trying to determine how clearly he sees the future. Scripture tells us he has made us in his image. My image being made like him, does not have the ability to see into the future.
Let us continue to reason together by finding examples in Scripture.
Gen 22:1-2 Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!” “Here I am,” he replied. Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”
A question we should ask, is God testing Abraham for Abraham’s sake or God’s sake? Let’s put up the possibility that God is testing Abraham for both Abraham and God’s sake. Another question is what does God get out of the test?
Genesis 22:10-12 Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. 11 But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, “Abraham! Abraham!” “Here I am,” he replied. 12 “Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”
God says “now I know”, this verbiage suggests that he did not know the faith that Abraham had before he tested him. Only after the test did God know how much faith Abraham had in him.
Notice what action God took after the test.
Genesis 22:15-18 The angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven a second time 16 and said, “I swear by myself, declares the LORD, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, 17 I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, 18 and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.”
This line of thought disturbs many theologies. The two worst ones are the beneficial God who could not bring destruction or God as a uninvolved entity. So, the concept has been considered. I suspect the depth has not been formalized because too many people are still arguing about what the creation looked like.
My opinion about creation. God created everything, not just the nice things. Anything we can study, he made or made possible. Everything includes tsunamis, viruses, and giant rocks that fall out of the sky. None of these are evil. They are natural. Biblically, he did not create a perfect world or a perfect universe. It is dangerous.
My opinion on if God orchestrates such events. The Bible says he is involved and can do whatever he wants. However, that does not require him to adjust nature every moment. Nor does it demand him to tell us when or if he acts.
My opinion on free will. It is part of his creation. If God predestined everything then he would be a monster who condemns creatures who have no option. Biblically only a few things are predestined. This includes the groups that follow God. But individuals can choose to follow or not within that group. The group does not end even though most of the people choose poorly. God knows every possible future. He gives us the honor of picking which we will live. God then accepts our choice. Sometimes that requires him sending destruction.
Death is not an obstacle for God. It is not his enemy or a threat. He even tells us to not fear death, but we still do. Mass death disturbs our modern morality to the point we tell the Creator that it is bad, wrong, and sinful. But who are we to tell him his creation or his ways are wrong? Or maybe, we have finally matured enough as a species to see through his eyes. Maybe we should not stop being the prime cause of mass death. We should tend to each other, the creatures around us, and the planet. Our involvement may be needed for the next stage of human learning.
What exactly do you mean by that? We shouldn’t try and prevent genocides? Or we shouldn’t try to come up with vaccinations that save millions? Yes, I agree that from God’s perspective death is nothing. And yet we are told over and over again to value life. So wich one is it? You can’t have it both ways
Oops, rewrote sentence and should have read it again. Remove the “not”
1 Like
To clarify, the Bible does not specifically state that biological diversity is a particular goal of God. That’s the part that I would consider to be a plausible inference.
Note also that interpreting Noah’s flood as global is an interpretation of the text, not required by Scripture - we must beware of treating our interpretations as infallible.
The catastrophic flood, producing most geological layers, which is promoted by modern flood geology directly contradicts the Bible. Genesis 2:10-14 identifies the location of Eden in terms of features still visible post-flood. It also contradicts the scientific evidence, both the testimony from examining evidence of past events in the rock and the observed rules of physics and chemistry. God does work miracles, but there is no point in miraculously making a global flood look as though it did not happen.
Can you expand on this, be more specific? Why does global flood contradicts the Bible? Because it’s not mentioned??? There used to be someone here arguing that it was in fact proving Bible to be true
Are you thinking of gbob? He believed the Bible to be true, but had to bend it rather out of shape to get it to fit his geological history.
Yes, him. I actually visited his blog several times. Whatever you think, he did actually reconcile stuff. Never had a chat with him, which is a shame, but I read carefully what he had to say.
I do find it peculiar when someone claims Bible has been directly contradicted and it’s OK with it, that’s why I would like to hear more about it @paleomalacologist
Thanks
I did actually engage with him. And if you are free to modify what Genesis is saying to make it fit your history then I guess he did “reconcile” stuff.
1 Like
it is clear that the bible describes the cases of people proving their loyalty to God as if we were to prove our loyalty to him because as a story to prove things to ourselves just does not flow that well. God tests us so we can prove ourselves to him thus giving ourselves the reassurance of our loyalty under testing circumstances, out of free will. I don’t think you seriously believe you could jump up on God shouting “surprise, surprise” 
Do you think God took a bet on Job?
I believe what @paleomalacologist is refencing is Genesis 2:10-14:
“A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and there it divided and became four rivers. The name of the first is the Pishon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. And the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. The name of the second river is the Gihon. It is the one that flowed around the whole land of Cush. And the name of the third river is the Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.”
Two of those are easily identified modern rivers (Tigris & Euphrates). Kush, in this case, probable refers to the land of the Kassites or Kashshu in southen Iran. Hence, one of a few possible rivers there is probably the Gihon. Havilah is in north-western Arabia, based on Gen. 10. A likely valley for the Pishon has been found running across Arabia. The river forming the valley existed intermittently for the last few million years or so .The most recent wet period in Arabia (and the Sahara) was between 7500 and 2300 BC.
Given that all of the geography cited for Eden is still observable, the flood cannot have involved massive shifts in geography (smashing 2 billion years of plate tectonics into the flood, say). That would make the most likely candidate for the flood a filling or refilling of the Persian Gulf sometime in the last 100,000 years, analogous to the Black Sea 7000 years ago, or the Mediterranean a couple times in the Miocene.
On geographic changes during the flood, there is also the supernatural energy subtractor needed to keep the earth from turning itself into plasma within a few days.
The Bible does not rule out a global flood, but does not require it, either - the word can mean “land” (as in “the land of Egypt”, etc.) or the whole earth, depending on context. It does not support the wildly catastrophic global flood depositing most of the geologic column that is a standard feature of modern creation science. Eden is located in terms of the existing rivers of Mesopotamia, which are on top of practically all of the geologic column. If the problem is noticed, the flood geology reply is that the post-flood places were named after the pre-flood ones, but that is entirely unjustified by the text. (Modern global flood models also routinely contradict themselves - they are supposed to simultaneously be violent and calm, and what is pre-flood, flood, or post-flood depends on the moment, for example.)
1 Like
Sorry…what?! What do you mean? Is this serious or a joke??
1 Like
Hello David,
Well OK, but that can be said about just about anything, so I still don’t understand why would you say that there is a contradiction?
I’m not a geologist so excuse me if I get things wrong but wasn’t this catastrophic global
flood meant to take place before any human civilisation started? So I still don’t see a problem…if you have a problem with this then why not have a problem because Bible doesn’t mention dinosaurs, and 100s of other things?
Marta
Come let us reason again together. The book of Job is probably my favorite. It is considered the oldest book in the Bible. This book, like none other has changed my views about the nature of God and what he expects of his creation.
Job 1:6-7 One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them. The LORD said to Satan, “Where have you come from?” Satan answered the LORD, “From roaming throughout the earth, going back and forth on it.”
When reading these verses, I was surprised that Satan would present himself before God. I had always imagined that there was a war between God and Satan. They would never meet on a casual basis. So I had to look at things quite differently when I saw that Satan actually took directions from God.
The first question that came to my mind, was what does God think of Job?
Job 1:8 Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.”
Evidently Job was a righteous man who was considered blameless and upright, in other words he had a good or excellent relationship with God.
Imagine how shocked any of us would be to hear God saying to Satan the following about ourselves?
Job 1:11-12 But now stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face." The LORD said to Satan, “Very well, then, everything he has is in your power, but on the man himself do not lay a finger.” Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD.
Apparently the bet with Satan is on! A question that comes to mind, is this a fair bet? Most people believe that God knows exactly what’s going to happen in the future, he knew how Job would react and easily take that bet.
However this would be like a person who while playing poker had an ace up his sleeve. Another question that came to mind is would God cheat on a bet? I personally don’t think so because this would be a form of lying. One of God’s moral commandments is Exo 20:16 "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.
Satan loses the bet, however he comes back to double down.
Before God gives Satan another go at Job, God tells Satan how upset he is with himself for giving into the bet in the first place.
Job 2:3 Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil. And he still maintains his integrity, though you incited me against him to ruin him without any reason.”
Nevertheless God allows Satan to place a second bet.
Job 2:4-7 “Skin for skin!” Satan replied. “A man will give all he has for his own life. 5 But now stretch out your hand and strike his flesh and bones, and he will surely curse you to your face.” 6 The LORD said to Satan, “Very well, then, he is in your hands; but you must spare his life.” 7 So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD and afflicted Job with painful sores from the soles of his feet to the crown of his head.
In the end of all this happening, what did God and Job get out of the situation?
Job 42:1-6 Then Job replied to the LORD: 2 "I know that you can do all things; no purpose of yours can be thwarted. 3 You asked, ‘Who is this that obscures my plans without knowledge?’ Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know. 4 “You said, ‘Listen now, and I will speak; I will question you, and you shall answer me.’ 5 My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you. 6 Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes.”
Job now has the **knowledge of the truth".
1 Like
I think this is a reference to the heat that would be generated by the rapid shifting of the tectonic plates that is proposed in the model made in a global flood. Or it could be the heat generated by the accelerated radioactive decay proposed to explain how dating methods could be wrong. Or the heat released by the condensation of water to get the huge rate of global rain needed to cover the mountains worldwide in a global flood. In the end, a global flood 4000 years ago requires one to not only say God did it and miraculously did it in such a way as to leave no trace that it happened, but also placed worldwide evidence that it did not happen but something else (deep time and normal geologic processes) did that never took place.
1 Like
Ahh…I think they may have been some misunderstanding🙃 for the record- I do not believe in the global flood 4000 BC, I was talking about “global flood” that supposedly happened long before the start of civilisation… And even that, I don’t think that actually covered the mountain tops!
And I’m defo not a YEC lol
1 Like
Which global flood would that be? There have been several in the Near East if you go back in history far enough. And when do you date “the start of civilization”?