@MrWagman11, Creationism is a means to satisfy the scientific minds of those who believe the Bible, just like abiogenesis and evolution is a means to satisfy the minds of atheists. Christians want to reconcile scientific evidence with the Bible, and atheists want to reconcile the wonderful created world with their belief that there is no God. So Creation seeks to explain evidence (geological, genetic, etc) so that it can fit within the Bible's framework. Does that make sense?
@MrWagman11, well I have a logical mind, and I believe the Bible is accurate. If you would like to call me illogical, then you would first have to show how my beliefs are inconsistent with either themselves or with reality. We can do that via messages if you want.
hey buddy news for you NOAHS Ark is real why else do we find dinosaur bones ynder layers of MUD cause they were drowned and covered up i support you 100% Mateus I hope i spelt that right
Hey good vid you point out some valid logical fails made by this so-called geologist. There are seashells on top of Everest, maybe he didn't know that. For an excellent theory regarding the flood mechanism, continental shift, and mountain formation, read Walt Brown's hydroplate theory.
and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
@SnowBunnieSqueakyToy, that's true (see the posted verses). But it also says that the tops of the mountains became visible three hebrew months after that. I take it to mean "all of the mountains around the mountain the ark landed on," but it may mean "all of the mountains that are around the mountains of Ararat." But the question is, are there other visible mountains? If not, then how would they know when they became visible? Special revelation? It is at least a plausible explanation.
@forest51690 I think people came along and only named "parts" of the world. Like,"These are the Great Smokey 'Mountains'" But later on each "mountain" got it's own name in the Smokey Mountains. Makes sense that the Bible would say "Mountains" of Ararat. But I can't be sure
I greatly appreciate your efforts here. I am disappointed that very few really excellent apologists are even on youtube anymore. Well, I think it's time I come out of retirement on the apologetics issue because I need to do my part to help present and defend the evidences. Good job though...thanks for standing up. -TheVineRhyme
@forest51690 Much of Christianity is based on interpretation. In Christianity, people deliberately choose to believe one doctrine over another, ie homosexuality is wrong but its OK to allow cattle to graze together (forbidden in Leviticus 19:19). As a whole Science is WAY MORE objective than religion.
@MastaHowa, I think that the Law of Moses had two types of laws: practical and moral. Only some are applicable today. (Btw, Lev. 19:19 says do not mate two animals together and do not sow a field with two types of seed.)
@forest51690 that's exactly my point. Because you "think that the Law of Moses had two types" you are interpreting them personally. If the Bible was absolute truth then there would be no need to to interpret. Science on the other hand allows you to draw conclusions through LOGICAL interpretation, not emotional or personal.
@forest51690 Hi. I only read about the Ark etc at primary school - as it was a chold's story. Is the animals going 2 by 2 part of the Bible story or was that made up? Because if everything was destroyed apart from what was on the ark, i) what about the fish?, ii) why would a god do such a thing - do you really want to worship an evil god? and iii) what did the carnivores eat while they waited for the flood to subside? When you say the mountains have grown, in how long, 3,000 years?
@blueray1969, yes, most animals came in pairs of 2, but birds and "clean" animals were brought in pairs of 7. See Genesis 7. It also says in verse 22 that "Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died." So fish are not included. See Ch. 6 v. 5 and 11 for why God brought the flood. The world was full of violence and evil ("only evil all the time"). Carnivores do not have to eat meat. See the case of the lion who refused to eat meat all his life.
@forest51690 I see, so all of the carnivores, including c.126 varieties of spider, became vegetarian for 40 days plus the number of days it took the other insects to breed enough so that the carnivores could come off their diets? Who fed the spiders and snakes etc for 40+ days with suitable vegetarian alternatives?
@blueray1969, Hm, good point. I don't know what the spiders and snakes would have eaten. They could have been sustained by God who led them all into the ark in the first place, just like he kept the Israelites' sandals and clothes from wearing out in the 40 years they wandered through the desert. Or, they could have eaten vegetarian diets made from foods we don't know about. The flood probably wiped out plants that we don't know about today. I don't know exactly what they would have eaten.
Oh, and study before you post... Great flood probably really happened, but it didn't involve the whole world, but most likely just the Mediterranean Sea.
And we have soil all over the planet? Is that the evidence!?!?!? There is a way how soil with particular fossils that match particular places were created.
You can't turn to believe just because we don't understand something.
Know first, then believe, or you'll live in the dark the whole life.
Scientists should say if god exists, we should accept that? What's that!? That's not science!!! Science is, "We have to prove whether there is a god or not and accept the result regardless whether it is yes or no" !!! Tomas, the great skeptic in The Bible! I'll believe it when i see it! That's the science way. Believe has no place in science.
@Kropikovo, I don't think science can prove God. God cannot be grasped by science. The problem is that mainstream science assumes there is no God.
You mentioned Thomas, who is a great example of unreasonable skepticism. Many of his close friends claimed to have seen Jesus, but he chose not to believe them. Why? It was not reasonable of him to choose no to believe them.
@forest51690 It's a matter of fact that science cannot prove the existence of God, so true skeptic will say that we cannot prove whether it (better than he) exists or not. Whether you put your believes on which ever side is your choice. I personally prefer to be responsible for my life. Only my actions and coincidence will decide my fate, not dogma. If God's existence is proven later, i will acknowledge it.
Btw: Thomas has done the only sane thing. Think before you believe, not the other way...
People deny Creation because they want to deny they are Sinners and they therefore deny God. Well God will one day say to unbelievers "Depart from ME, I never KNEW YOU". Your chance to escape Hell and God's judgement of a Sinful World is NOW, TODAY.
Planets loose their amount of water. It is decreasing. Another proof this Earth is young. The Earth at Noah's time have more water and just one land mass.
@forest51690 ok if i got when the ice age was wrong, it was still before this "flood" ever happened.
so in your thinking, and correct me if im wrong, 6000 years ago the earth looked nothing like it does now? the highest mountain was ararat and not everest? and there was 1 big continent? then after the flood an ice age happened? did noah have wolly mammoth on his boat? sorry you're wrong...
@danthman114 The text (Gen 8) does not say that Ararat was the tallest mountain. It just says that the ark came to rest on Ararat, and then later the tops of the mountains became visible. The question is, to whom did they become visible? It can be interpreted that Ararat was only the tallest mountain in the region, not in the whole earth.
And yes, Noah probably did have a wooly mammoth on the ark. The boat was about 4 stories high. At Liberty University, our main building is built to the exact dimensions of the ark. So I can tell you that there is enough room for a mammoth.
@forest51690 and no, he didnt have any mammoths aboard since they went extinct a good 4000 years before this bs flood. wow you have a serious case of denial.
@danthman114 You are operating under the assumption that life evolved over millions of years. Don't you know that the flood laid down most of the fossil layers. Tell me, when in the fossil layer did mammoths become extinct?
@forest51690 they say the flood happened about 6000 years ago, well the ice age ended almost 10,000 years ago. sorry bro, most of the "stories" in the bible are made up to scare people into submission. to control them, if you will...
@danthman114 those two dates are given by different groups of scientists who accept different time scales for the earth. Creation scientists would say that the ice age wasn't 10,000 years ago. It isn't a cold hard fact like it may seem.
Pangea or a REPRESENTATION might have existed closer than we think to our time,(keep in mind you are adding massive amounts of firmament waters..and releasing the springs of the deep at the same time..salt/fresh/supercold water mix in a chaotic slurry.. there is no model man can make for that. continents would buckle and rise causing an increase in mountain height or durring the flood stripping those mountains of any soil due to utra intense inundation the world has and never will see again!.
Scientists follow proven methods that are logical and is based on evidence. Scientists know 40 days of nonstop raining will not add up to fill the world completely. Noah's ark thing happened less than 20,000 years ago. Do you really think Himalaya and other mountain ranges were much much shorter at that time??? Maybe you would think oceans were much smaller like your backyard swimming pool. You are illogical and irrational.
@candoyja Nonstop raining can fill any volume. It depends on the rate. Yes I believe the mountain ranges were much smaller back then. Mountain ranges aren't growing as fast now. I do think oceans were much smaller back then. Watch this video: /watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ
Not all scientists follow proven methods that are logical and based on evidence. Don't fool yourself. We have plenty of Creation Scientists (Dr. Walter Veith, Ph.D. Zoologist is one) who claim to follow "proven methods that are logical and based on evidence", yet even they have bias, just like the evolutionists scientists. No matter what one tries to say, atheism is a religion, whether you like it or not.
@candoyja, simply living the right way can save time, money, and energy whether or not you believe in God. But a person who denies the existence of God is a fool who is not wise and does not do good things. (Psalm 51 :1)
@candoyja Oh, one more thing. Killings done by those who have accepted god are doing the right things, right? You will never see non-believers killing others for the sake of not believing anything. If you look at religious history, it is full of killings.
You cannot kill people anymore because murderers will be punished by laws. So christians are going to have to cherry-pick rules in the bible.
@candoyja, there was only one true saint as far as deeds are concerned. That was Jesus. Yes, Christians are saints, but not because we're good.. it's because we're wearing the goodness of Jesus. That's what the Bible says. "By observing the law, no one will be declared righteous" in God's sight.
Also, Jesus taught peace. Any killing in the name of religion goes against the nature of religion. Any killers are not obeying Jesus.
@candoyja Not if you would flat out the earth. I believe that the mountains were formed toward the end of the flood, when the water came off the higher places (forming continents) and gathering in the lower places (forming oceans). The water probably came from a layer of water around the earth, which is not there anymore, and a layer of water below the surface of the earth, which cracked open and released the water (you can still find evidence for that).
@gugeyewalker And I love science too. But what is science? Figuring out how the world works. And what science has figured out has increased my view of God's greatness and power and wisdom.
@forest51690 Then your view must have evolved somewhat since this video has made. Because the gentleman geologist pretty much scientifically busted the myth of a world-wide flood. But consider that the world to the people of the Mediterranean was largely unknown at the time. And it is very possible (maybe even probable) that a great flood occurred in 'their world'.
@gugeyewalker What is the scientific method? Isn't it the process of testing hypothesis? So it deals with the present and not the past. You see, there are two types of science, and one of those is called historical science. I liken it to crime scene investgators asking, "How did this happen?" This science takes data and draws conclusions from it. There is no testing and no scientific method applied. There is only examination of the facts. Am I making sense?
@forest51690 No I can't say I follow you there. There is no separation of historical science and present science. But in the 'present' we can observe and document the erosion of say, the Grand Canyon, and from that calculate how long it the Colorado river has been eroding it. Now you will likely say 'It proves nothing because you weren't there 8000 years ago." But ya know what, you cannot disprove that flying monkeys exist either. Could be a fun road to go down though.
and you can look at the proof found on mt st. helens of how when it erupted canyons one fortieth of the size of the grand canyone were formed in a matter of minutes..so i think that the flood had enough magnitude to form things like the grand canyon
in reference to the water; and not having the capacity to cover the earth, there was also an expance, it refers to this in the Gen 6 wen God creates the sky, "And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so." and it had never rained before the flood, so they had the rain and this massive layer of water dumping on the earth. Also its a theory that
the water above the sky acted as an ozone layer and protected people from the radition of the sun while still letting light through, ergo people living for 900 years and such. this is a direct response to the videos, i didnt read any other comments, tho i probably should have
How do you study creation?
MrWagman11 6 months ago
@MrWagman11, Creationism is a means to satisfy the scientific minds of those who believe the Bible, just like abiogenesis and evolution is a means to satisfy the minds of atheists. Christians want to reconcile scientific evidence with the Bible, and atheists want to reconcile the wonderful created world with their belief that there is no God. So Creation seeks to explain evidence (geological, genetic, etc) so that it can fit within the Bible's framework. Does that make sense?
forest51690 6 months ago
@forest51690 It's extremely hard to comprehend how anyone with a scientific mind, or any kind of mind, can believe the Bible is true and accurate.
MrWagman11 6 months ago
@MrWagman11, well I have a logical mind, and I believe the Bible is accurate. If you would like to call me illogical, then you would first have to show how my beliefs are inconsistent with either themselves or with reality. We can do that via messages if you want.
forest51690 6 months ago
hey buddy news for you NOAHS Ark is real why else do we find dinosaur bones ynder layers of MUD cause they were drowned and covered up i support you 100% Mateus I hope i spelt that right
TaoYingarrani 7 months ago
Hey good vid you point out some valid logical fails made by this so-called geologist. There are seashells on top of Everest, maybe he didn't know that. For an excellent theory regarding the flood mechanism, continental shift, and mountain formation, read Walt Brown's hydroplate theory.
karnoch 9 months ago
Actually they found Noah's Ark on Mount Judi (15 miles from Mount Ararat) which sense because the Bible says "mountains of Ararat"
SnowBunnieSqueakyToy 9 months ago
and in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
(Gen 8:4-5)
forest51690 9 months ago
@SnowBunnieSqueakyToy, that's true (see the posted verses). But it also says that the tops of the mountains became visible three hebrew months after that. I take it to mean "all of the mountains around the mountain the ark landed on," but it may mean "all of the mountains that are around the mountains of Ararat." But the question is, are there other visible mountains? If not, then how would they know when they became visible? Special revelation? It is at least a plausible explanation.
forest51690 9 months ago 2
@forest51690 I think people came along and only named "parts" of the world. Like,"These are the Great Smokey 'Mountains'" But later on each "mountain" got it's own name in the Smokey Mountains. Makes sense that the Bible would say "Mountains" of Ararat. But I can't be sure
SnowBunnieSqueakyToy 9 months ago
lol I like your music, and the way you explain things with your hands haha..
SnowBunnieSqueakyToy 9 months ago
I greatly appreciate your efforts here. I am disappointed that very few really excellent apologists are even on youtube anymore. Well, I think it's time I come out of retirement on the apologetics issue because I need to do my part to help present and defend the evidences. Good job though...thanks for standing up. -TheVineRhyme
branchingvine 10 months ago
@forest51690 Much of Christianity is based on interpretation. In Christianity, people deliberately choose to believe one doctrine over another, ie homosexuality is wrong but its OK to allow cattle to graze together (forbidden in Leviticus 19:19). As a whole Science is WAY MORE objective than religion.
MastaHowa 10 months ago
@MastaHowa, I think that the Law of Moses had two types of laws: practical and moral. Only some are applicable today. (Btw, Lev. 19:19 says do not mate two animals together and do not sow a field with two types of seed.)
forest51690 10 months ago
@forest51690 that's exactly my point. Because you "think that the Law of Moses had two types" you are interpreting them personally. If the Bible was absolute truth then there would be no need to to interpret. Science on the other hand allows you to draw conclusions through LOGICAL interpretation, not emotional or personal.
MastaHowa 10 months ago
@forest51690 Hi. I only read about the Ark etc at primary school - as it was a chold's story. Is the animals going 2 by 2 part of the Bible story or was that made up? Because if everything was destroyed apart from what was on the ark, i) what about the fish?, ii) why would a god do such a thing - do you really want to worship an evil god? and iii) what did the carnivores eat while they waited for the flood to subside? When you say the mountains have grown, in how long, 3,000 years?
blueray1969 10 months ago
@blueray1969, yes, most animals came in pairs of 2, but birds and "clean" animals were brought in pairs of 7. See Genesis 7. It also says in verse 22 that "Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died." So fish are not included. See Ch. 6 v. 5 and 11 for why God brought the flood. The world was full of violence and evil ("only evil all the time"). Carnivores do not have to eat meat. See the case of the lion who refused to eat meat all his life.
forest51690 10 months ago
@forest51690 I see, so all of the carnivores, including c.126 varieties of spider, became vegetarian for 40 days plus the number of days it took the other insects to breed enough so that the carnivores could come off their diets? Who fed the spiders and snakes etc for 40+ days with suitable vegetarian alternatives?
blueray1969 10 months ago
@blueray1969, Hm, good point. I don't know what the spiders and snakes would have eaten. They could have been sustained by God who led them all into the ark in the first place, just like he kept the Israelites' sandals and clothes from wearing out in the 40 years they wandered through the desert. Or, they could have eaten vegetarian diets made from foods we don't know about. The flood probably wiped out plants that we don't know about today. I don't know exactly what they would have eaten.
forest51690 10 months ago
Oh, and study before you post... Great flood probably really happened, but it didn't involve the whole world, but most likely just the Mediterranean Sea.
And we have soil all over the planet? Is that the evidence!?!?!? There is a way how soil with particular fossils that match particular places were created.
You can't turn to believe just because we don't understand something.
Know first, then believe, or you'll live in the dark the whole life.
Kropikovo 11 months ago
Scientists should say if god exists, we should accept that? What's that!? That's not science!!! Science is, "We have to prove whether there is a god or not and accept the result regardless whether it is yes or no" !!! Tomas, the great skeptic in The Bible! I'll believe it when i see it! That's the science way. Believe has no place in science.
Kropikovo 11 months ago
@Kropikovo, I don't think science can prove God. God cannot be grasped by science. The problem is that mainstream science assumes there is no God.
You mentioned Thomas, who is a great example of unreasonable skepticism. Many of his close friends claimed to have seen Jesus, but he chose not to believe them. Why? It was not reasonable of him to choose no to believe them.
forest51690 11 months ago
@forest51690 It's a matter of fact that science cannot prove the existence of God, so true skeptic will say that we cannot prove whether it (better than he) exists or not. Whether you put your believes on which ever side is your choice. I personally prefer to be responsible for my life. Only my actions and coincidence will decide my fate, not dogma. If God's existence is proven later, i will acknowledge it.
Btw: Thomas has done the only sane thing. Think before you believe, not the other way...
Kropikovo 10 months ago
People deny Creation because they want to deny they are Sinners and they therefore deny God. Well God will one day say to unbelievers "Depart from ME, I never KNEW YOU". Your chance to escape Hell and God's judgement of a Sinful World is NOW, TODAY.
Planets loose their amount of water. It is decreasing. Another proof this Earth is young. The Earth at Noah's time have more water and just one land mass.
NBSStudioUK 1 year ago
mammoths became extinct about 10000 years ago. there was no flood.
danthman114 1 year ago
@forest51690 ok if i got when the ice age was wrong, it was still before this "flood" ever happened.
so in your thinking, and correct me if im wrong, 6000 years ago the earth looked nothing like it does now? the highest mountain was ararat and not everest? and there was 1 big continent? then after the flood an ice age happened? did noah have wolly mammoth on his boat? sorry you're wrong...
danthman114 1 year ago
@danthman114 The text (Gen 8) does not say that Ararat was the tallest mountain. It just says that the ark came to rest on Ararat, and then later the tops of the mountains became visible. The question is, to whom did they become visible? It can be interpreted that Ararat was only the tallest mountain in the region, not in the whole earth.
forest51690 1 year ago
And yes, Noah probably did have a wooly mammoth on the ark. The boat was about 4 stories high. At Liberty University, our main building is built to the exact dimensions of the ark. So I can tell you that there is enough room for a mammoth.
forest51690 1 year ago
@forest51690 and no, he didnt have any mammoths aboard since they went extinct a good 4000 years before this bs flood. wow you have a serious case of denial.
danthman114 1 year ago
@danthman114 You are operating under the assumption that life evolved over millions of years. Don't you know that the flood laid down most of the fossil layers. Tell me, when in the fossil layer did mammoths become extinct?
forest51690 1 year ago
the ice age happened before this so called flood and it has been proven that the continents were about the same as they are now...
danthman114 1 year ago
@danthman114 I haven't studied this, but I hear that creation scientists say there was an ice age after the flood.
forest51690 1 year ago
@forest51690 they say the flood happened about 6000 years ago, well the ice age ended almost 10,000 years ago. sorry bro, most of the "stories" in the bible are made up to scare people into submission. to control them, if you will...
danthman114 1 year ago
@danthman114 those two dates are given by different groups of scientists who accept different time scales for the earth. Creation scientists would say that the ice age wasn't 10,000 years ago. It isn't a cold hard fact like it may seem.
forest51690 1 year ago
@TheJohnFrum everyone else is indoctrinated into evolution from a young age by the media and the schools.
forest51690 1 year ago
How can anybody deny the great flood? Noah's ark has been discovered every year for at least 150 years.
drflynn73 1 year ago
Pangea or a REPRESENTATION might have existed closer than we think to our time,(keep in mind you are adding massive amounts of firmament waters..and releasing the springs of the deep at the same time..salt/fresh/supercold water mix in a chaotic slurry.. there is no model man can make for that. continents would buckle and rise causing an increase in mountain height or durring the flood stripping those mountains of any soil due to utra intense inundation the world has and never will see again!.
realistromeo 1 year ago
Scientists follow proven methods that are logical and is based on evidence. Scientists know 40 days of nonstop raining will not add up to fill the world completely. Noah's ark thing happened less than 20,000 years ago. Do you really think Himalaya and other mountain ranges were much much shorter at that time??? Maybe you would think oceans were much smaller like your backyard swimming pool. You are illogical and irrational.
candoyja 1 year ago 11
@candoyja Nonstop raining can fill any volume. It depends on the rate. Yes I believe the mountain ranges were much smaller back then. Mountain ranges aren't growing as fast now. I do think oceans were much smaller back then. Watch this video: /watch?v=oJfBSc6e7QQ
forest51690 1 year ago
@candoyja
Not all scientists follow proven methods that are logical and based on evidence. Don't fool yourself. We have plenty of Creation Scientists (Dr. Walter Veith, Ph.D. Zoologist is one) who claim to follow "proven methods that are logical and based on evidence", yet even they have bias, just like the evolutionists scientists. No matter what one tries to say, atheism is a religion, whether you like it or not.
Lysimachus78 11 months ago
@Lysimachus78
Atheism is a religion that will save you time, money, energy and false hope. I don't have any problem with that.
candoyja 11 months ago
@candoyja, simply living the right way can save time, money, and energy whether or not you believe in God. But a person who denies the existence of God is a fool who is not wise and does not do good things. (Psalm 51 :1)
forest51690 11 months ago
@forest51690 Are you saying non-christians and non-believers (rational people) do bad things?
Okay. I deny the existence of God and have been doing bad things.
Christians are all saints. Woo hoo.
candoyja 11 months ago
@candoyja Oh, one more thing. Killings done by those who have accepted god are doing the right things, right? You will never see non-believers killing others for the sake of not believing anything. If you look at religious history, it is full of killings.
You cannot kill people anymore because murderers will be punished by laws. So christians are going to have to cherry-pick rules in the bible.
candoyja 11 months ago
@candoyja, there was only one true saint as far as deeds are concerned. That was Jesus. Yes, Christians are saints, but not because we're good.. it's because we're wearing the goodness of Jesus. That's what the Bible says. "By observing the law, no one will be declared righteous" in God's sight.
Also, Jesus taught peace. Any killing in the name of religion goes against the nature of religion. Any killers are not obeying Jesus.
forest51690 11 months ago
@candoyja Not if you would flat out the earth. I believe that the mountains were formed toward the end of the flood, when the water came off the higher places (forming continents) and gathering in the lower places (forming oceans). The water probably came from a layer of water around the earth, which is not there anymore, and a layer of water below the surface of the earth, which cracked open and released the water (you can still find evidence for that).
ViDeOfee1994 1 month ago
@gugeyewalker And I love science too. But what is science? Figuring out how the world works. And what science has figured out has increased my view of God's greatness and power and wisdom.
forest51690 1 year ago
@forest51690 Then your view must have evolved somewhat since this video has made. Because the gentleman geologist pretty much scientifically busted the myth of a world-wide flood. But consider that the world to the people of the Mediterranean was largely unknown at the time. And it is very possible (maybe even probable) that a great flood occurred in 'their world'.
gugeyewalker 1 year ago
@gugeyewalker What is the scientific method? Isn't it the process of testing hypothesis? So it deals with the present and not the past. You see, there are two types of science, and one of those is called historical science. I liken it to crime scene investgators asking, "How did this happen?" This science takes data and draws conclusions from it. There is no testing and no scientific method applied. There is only examination of the facts. Am I making sense?
forest51690 1 year ago
@forest51690 No I can't say I follow you there. There is no separation of historical science and present science. But in the 'present' we can observe and document the erosion of say, the Grand Canyon, and from that calculate how long it the Colorado river has been eroding it. Now you will likely say 'It proves nothing because you weren't there 8000 years ago." But ya know what, you cannot disprove that flying monkeys exist either. Could be a fun road to go down though.
gugeyewalker 1 year ago
and you can look at the proof found on mt st. helens of how when it erupted canyons one fortieth of the size of the grand canyone were formed in a matter of minutes..so i think that the flood had enough magnitude to form things like the grand canyon
AxCxEofSpades 1 year ago
@AxCxEofSpades
The "canyons" you mention are not through rock. Ther are on the Tootle river and are formed in days through mud and ash.
achtungcircus 1 year ago
in reference to the water; and not having the capacity to cover the earth, there was also an expance, it refers to this in the Gen 6 wen God creates the sky, "And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so." and it had never rained before the flood, so they had the rain and this massive layer of water dumping on the earth. Also its a theory that
superfriendelmo 1 year ago
the water above the sky acted as an ozone layer and protected people from the radition of the sun while still letting light through, ergo people living for 900 years and such. this is a direct response to the videos, i didnt read any other comments, tho i probably should have
superfriendelmo 1 year ago
flip those the second one comes first
superfriendelmo 1 year ago
If they really did find Noah's ark, then, wow!
jakkin03 1 year ago
@jakkin03
No they haven't . What is talked about is the hoaxes done by Ron Wyatt. He is exposed by the Christian site "Tentmaker" and also by his own church.
Draugh39 1 year ago