New Testament Support for the FLOOD

Discussion in 'Creation vs. Evolution' started by A_Christian, May 29, 2003.

  1. A_Christian

    A_Christian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    0
    John 14:26 (Jesus speaking to the Apostles)

    But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost,
    whom the Father will send IN MY NAME, he shall
    teach YOU ALL things, and BRING THINGS TO YOUR
    REMEMBERANCE, whatsoever I have said unto you.

    Hebrews 11:7

    By faith Noah, being warned of GOD of things not
    seen YET, being wary prepared an ark to the
    saving of his house; by the which he (NOAH)
    comdemned the world, and became heir of the
    righteousness which is by faith.

    I Peter 3:19-20
    By which also he went and preached unto the
    spirits in prison: which sometime were disobedient
    when once longsuffering GOD waited in the days of
    Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few,
    that is eight souls were saved by water.

    II Peter 2:5

    And spared not the old world, but saved Noah
    the eigth person, a PREACHER of righteousness,
    bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.

    John 14:2

    In my Father's house are many mansions: if not so,
    I would have told you...
     
  2. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    Thank you, A-Christian. For those who are wondering about the last part of your quotes, Jesus has told us that He WOULD tell us if something were not true.

    He spent a lot of time trashing the teachings of men, but not one second indicating that anything in Scripture itself was anything other than the truth.

    This, by itself, should make us very, very wary of anytime the teachings of man disagree with Scripture if we are claiming to be followers of Christ!
     
  3. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm still waiting for the verse in which he said that this was literal, rather than allegorical, or the verse in which it says that citing an allegorical verse makes it literal.

    Can't find it anywhere.
     
  4. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    That's OK, Galatian. The rest of us are happy to presume that Jesus knew what He was talking about -- in Genesis as well as in the rest of the Bible.
     
  5. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    We all agree that He knew what He was talking about. I'm just waiting for the verse in which He said these parts of Genesis were literal.

    Or a verse in which it says that citing an allegory converts it to literal history.

    Do you know of one? I don't.
     
  6. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    In contrast to your dependance on human wisdom first, Galatian, I am quite willing to assume that the Bible, as God's Word to us, is telling the truth about history in a straightforward way simply because Jesus never says it isn't history in the truest sense (not allegorical). Have you ever seen where He said it is allegorical? I can't find any place at all. He just kept referring to it as fact.

    Or a verse where citing history converts it to allegory.

    I can't find one.
     
  7. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    It appears that you have relied upon human wisdom, yourself. In the absence of God saying that Genesis is literal, you have assumed that it is, even in light of obvious contradictions.

    The error is in assuming that it is literal history. You are assuming what you propose to prove. Circularity, in other words.

    He says neither. So, in the absence of His opinion, we have to look at the text itself to see. And a literal interpretation leads to insurmountable logical contradictions.

    It is a common misconception that allegory means "not true". It can be (and in the case of Genesis, is) both true and allegorical. "Fact" doesn't appear in the NT in that context.

    True. We don't have either, as I pointed out before. However, it's not hard, as most Christians acknowledge, to see that it is not a literal history.

    If this was a major concern for God, I'm sure He would have made it plain for us all. But it isn't a major concern for Him.
     
  8. WillRain

    WillRain
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2003
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Galatian:

    Honest question here, not just being argumentative:

    Can you cite a quotation in which Christ cites an Old Testament passage as if it were literal in which we KNOW from a third textual source that it was an allogory?

    If there is such a case it would lend great credence to your position.

    Keep in mind, I'm not looking for the sort of circular reasoning which would say:

    "We know the flood did not happen so we know its an allogory so we know Christ cited an allogory as if it were real so we know that the flood might possibly have been known to Christ as an allogory"

    The source which proves it an allogory would have to be Scripture or valid textual criticism.
     
  9. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know of any verse He cites as though it were literal at all. He never says.

    It's easier than that. If Jesus does not say whether the text is literal or not, then we have to look to other ways to know.
     
  10. Mickes

    Mickes
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    0
    Any body that has been to Dr. Hovinds creation seminar will see the truth and realize evolution is just destrurtive to our faith His web sight is www.drdino.com check it out he has a scientific answer for all your Questions [​IMG]
     
  11. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hovind is widely laughed at, even by many creationists.

    What do you think Hovind's best argument against evolution might be?
     
  12. Mickes

    Mickes
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that Hovin's best evidence, like anyones best evidence against evolution, is the truth revealed in God's inherent word, the Bible! If you don't believe in Genesis how can you truly believe in the rest of the bible?
     
  13. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    I, and most Christians believe in Genesis. Hovind just doesn't like what it has to say.

    So you're saying that an unorthodox interpretation of Genesis is the best "evidence" against evolution?
     
  14. john6:63

    john6:63
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    0
    “The real argument here is the authority of the Word of God vs man’s fallible theories.
    Those in the Church who do not accept God’s Word as written concerning the literal days of Creation have greatly contributed to the Christian demise of the culture, and will be held responsible before the Lord for leading so many lives astray. They have undermined the text of Scripture because they didn’t accept the words as written.

    Why do Christians believe in the bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ? Because of the words of Scripture (‘according to the Scriptures’).

    And why should Christians believe in the six literal days of Creation? Because of the words of Scripture (‘In six days the Lord made …’).

    The real issue is one of authority—is God’s Word the authority, or is man’s word the authority? How the church answers this question will determine the future of the nations of the world.” -Ken Ham
     
  15. A_Christian

    A_Christian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jesus does give creedience to the Flood very
    directly if you read Luke 17 through.

    Starting at verse 26

    And as it WAS in the days of Noe, so shall it be
    also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat,
    they drank, they married wives, they were given in
    marriage, until the day Noe entered into the ark,
    and the flood CAME, and destroyed them ALL.
    LIKEWISE ALSO as it was in the days of LOT; they
    DID eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they
    planted, they built; but the same day that LOT
    went out of Sodom it RAINED fire and brimstone
    from heaven, and destroyed them all.

    CHRIST has connected Abraham's nephew's escape
    from Sodom with that of Noah. Abraham was a
    direct ancestor of both Joseph and Mary. If
    you deny Noah and the event of the FLOOD you
    must LIKEWISE deny LOT and the event of SODOM.
    AND if one does that in ANYWAY. One MUST deny
    that Abraham was real and the father of the
    nation of Israel because you MUST accept LOT
    as LIKEWISE.
     
  16. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's been said before. Dr Dino is a charlatan who got his degree from a dimploma mill. He uses the topic of creation/evolution to defraud foolish but well meaning Christians and part them from their money. Regardless of what side of the debate you're on, one should never support this con artist.
     
  17. john6:63

    john6:63
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    0
    In Exodus 20:11, we find out why a infinite Creator God created everything in 6 literal days, when he very well could’ve created everything in no time.

    The Bible tells us that God created Adam on day six and he lived through day 6 and day 7, but when Adam died he was only a mere 930 years old. Whoa now, we have a major problem. If each of these days were thousands or millions of years, how could Adam die at 930 yrs old?

    (Romans 3:4) “…let God be true, but every man a liar, as it is written…”
     
  18. A_Christian

    A_Christian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2003
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    0
    Romans 3:10 & 11 follow

    As it is WRITTEN, There is none righteous, no, not
    one: there is none that understandeth, there is
    none that seeketh after GOD.

    Remember Meatros, without GOD NOTHING is
    possible. Evolution is founded without God.
    Evolution and not Creationism is called into
    question. What do you trust---the logic of men
    or the revelation of GOD?
     
  19. Meatros

    Meatros
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2003
    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why is evolution founded without God, because you say so??

    You set up a strawman again (and again). Evolution does not disprove God. You can be a Christian and accept evolution.

    To take Genesis literally is to not only not read Genesis (1&2 contradict each other if you take it literally), but it is also to show God as a liar (the earth is not 6-10k years old, as my meteor example proves).
     
  20. john6:63

    john6:63
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    886
    Likes Received:
    0
    That still doesn’t explain how Adam only lived to be 930 yrs of age. When he was created on day 6.

    What Romans chapter 3 is describing is that God isn’t limited to the Jews only. He is also the God of the Gentiles. And it still doesn't change that every man is a liar who doesn't believe Gods word to be true.

    Furthermore, there is no contradiction between Genesis 1 and 2. Genesis 1 is a detailed explanation of the six days of creation, day by day. Genesis two is a recap and a more detailed explanation of the sixth day, the day that Adam and Eve were made. The recap is stated in Gen. 2:4, "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven." Then, Moses goes on to detail the creation of Adam and Eve as is seen in verses 7 thru 24 of Gen. 2. Proof that it is not a creative account is found in the fact that animals aren't even mentioned until after the creation of Adam. Why? Probably because their purpose was designated by Adam. They didn't need to be mentioned until after Adam was created.
     

Share This Page

Loading...