Who keeps liking posts that misunderstand what they are responding too? Does not that individual realise that is a rather silly thing to do? (ie blindly liking without actually reading and comprehending first?)
My point about sedimentary deposits should be self explanatory…the point is, given fossils are found all around the world IN SEDIMENTARY deposits…
i would suggest that the most likely cause of sedimentary deposit, where it has occurred rapidly enough to kill animals that are still engaged in daily activities such as in the process of eating (we have numerous examples of animals dying whilst eating), would be water transport and deposition.
So given that so many fossils are found in sedimentary deposits, and these are most likely as a result of water…well that supports the biblical flood model. All of the theories that focus on only supporting naturalistic claims…that does not detract from biblical support. I mean lets face it, even secularists conclude that an asteroid impact off the coast of Mexico caused massive tsunamis that flooded large regions across the US. They also claim other events such as that one have occurred elsewhere and that these are responsible for similar sedimentary deposits elsewhere around the world. There is a modern scientific theory that claims that these asteroids were first ejected from this earth and fell back to its surface causing that impact and those psunamis! Ive already posted a thread about that (although most here probably cant bring themselves to even bother reading it (which is no surprise). I criticise the individuals here for staying completely silent on Verneshot theory…obviously this theory is highly problematic for the pre existing naturalism views here.
Going back to Noahs flood and whether or not its a literal event…
If Christ (God) said the following:
Matt24:38,39 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark,and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away"
then a Christian either chooses to agree with Gods own statement, or deny it (I don’t see an in-between option there). Denying it is to deny one is Christian (and that’s because one does not believe what Christ has said!)
In response to your last statement…i refuse to allow errant theology to be isolated into a thread unrelated to misleading Christian eaders about the issues here. A Christian forum (this is a Christian forum is it not?), must adhere to the roots of Christianity…ie that Christ, God, lived among us, taught us, and gave us the gospel.
Whether or not one is capable of developing appropriate theology for this, the gospel is not simply “do unto others…”, its far bigger than that. It is inclusive of the entire bible (Old and New Testaments) because Christ himself often quoted Old Testament writings in his teachings. the Old Testament is paramount in the gospel because it forms the history of Christ even being on this earth in the first place “to pay the wages of sin is death” (ie make atonement for sin). Its such a white lie to only focus on the resurrection…the fact modern sunday worshiping evangelicals also throw out the Seventh Day Sabbath should raise red flags all over the place, particularly in light of the fact the 4th commandment also says “in six days God created the heavens and the earth”!
John in the Book of Revelation (written in the late first century whilst on the isle of Patmos), writes the following in Ch 14:12
12Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.
This verse quite simply means at the end of time (just before the second coming of Christ) a saint is a person who has two qualities:
- Keeps the commandments of God (ie 10 commandments) AND
- Has the Gospel (Testimony of Jesus)
Since John wrote this whilst in vision almost 30 years after the apostle Paul had been beheaded in approx AD 64, i have to make the claim that Johns authority supersedes Pauls (because John’s is the later revelation given in the 90’s)!
therefore the evangelical claim that only part 2 of the above is required for salvation is simply false…Johns statement in Revelation 14:12 categorically proves its a false understanding of what the apostle Paul taught.
Finally,
not a single follower of Christ on this earth will ever be saved by or through science…not a single one! So no amount of science proofs makes any difference. If one is only Christian because their religion aligns with science, then one has deluded oneself into believing human moral reasoning (because of Christs statement in Matthew 24) Samuel already addresses that when he said to King Saul, “to obey is better than to sacrifice”!