Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
One of the terms that I used to find those images.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Understanding the holy scriptures is impossible unless God gives you the interpretation
- Thread starter 74x12
- Start date
‘9- to 16-million-y.o. whale fossils discovered near the peaks of the Andes’, yet “the Andes Mountains were created over 50 million years old.”
???
Whales on Mountaintops | Science | Smithsonian Magazine
10 Fascinating Facts About the Andes Mountains
Did these whales fly? Must have.
Really, some scientists are clueless.
Well, @Audie , @Subduction Zone , and @danieldemol (and whoever else wants to join them): at least you are in esteemed company...
albeit misled.
It’s certainly not truth, these contradictory interpretations!
???
Whales on Mountaintops | Science | Smithsonian Magazine
10 Fascinating Facts About the Andes Mountains
Did these whales fly? Must have.
Really, some scientists are clueless.
Well, @Audie , @Subduction Zone , and @danieldemol (and whoever else wants to join them): at least you are in esteemed company...
albeit misled.
It’s certainly not truth, these contradictory interpretations!
If two Christians have a different interpretation of scripture and both claim divine guidance and understanding, how can they both be correct? If other Christians back one and not the other, how can anyone know if they are correct? What if different bunches of Christians back both people? What prevents someone from claiming divine discernment? How would you know? If you know, how can I know you know?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
The Andes are still being formed today. They were not all formed 50 million years ago. When a source says that the range is 50 million years old that is the age when the oldest mountains were formed. It does not mean that the whole range formed then.
Sheesh, is that all that you have? And it is not the scientists that are cluelesss.
An excerpt from the Wikipedia article on the Andes:
"
The formation of the modern Andes began with the events of the Triassic when Pangaea began the break up that resulted in developing several rifts. The development continued through the Jurassic Period. It was during the Cretaceous Period that the Andes began to take their present form, by the uplifting, faulting and folding of sedimentary and metamorphic rocks of the ancient cratons to the east. The rise of the Andes has not been constant, as different regions have had different degrees of tectonic stress, uplift, and erosion.
Tectonic forces above the subduction zone along the entire west coast of South America where the Nazca Plate and a part of the Antarctic Plate are sliding beneath the South American Plate continue to produce an ongoing orogenic event resulting in minor to major earthquakes and volcanic eruptions to this day. In the extreme south, a major transform fault separates Tierra del Fuego from the small Scotia Plate. Across the 1,000 km (620 mi) wide Drake Passage lie the mountains of the Antarctic Peninsula south of the Scotia Plate which appear to be a continuation of the Andes chain.[11]"
So no reasonable and established geological event like uplift can explain how marine animal fossils got on top of a mountain after millions of years? It has to be a flood for which there is no definitive evidence and for which there is much evidence against it?
The beginning of the Andes’ orogenies are in dispute with the fossils’ ages.
The chronologies are at odds.
That was my point.
So, now it’s “definitive” evidence, is it?
Tell me, besides observation & experimentation supporting a concept, what really is definitive evidence?
They can’t.
But to determine if one is possibly more accurate than another....
Which ones, along with their respective groups, show ‘love for their brothers’ in spite of war? -(John 13:35) Or apply Matthew 5:44?
Which ones, along with their respective groups, acknowledge the Father (and not Jesus) as the Source of enlightenment? — Luke 10:21
74x12
Well-Known Member
This is an old post but I'm happy there is still interest.
If you receive the holy Spirit yourself you won't have to worry about other people's opinion or disagreement. That is so long as you keep learning from the holy Spirit. I'm not claiming you'll instantly know everything.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
So that included Paul then?
So can we ignore his version of Christianity?
The observations and evidence do not support the flood. That is the entire point. There is no evidence that cannot be explained by more reliable reasons. Timelines differing does not alter the fact of uplift by natural processes.
Most all of the flood believers I have read cling to very tenuous threads that defy the preponderance of evidence that says there was no flood.
It really only matters in how you view the Bible and has nothing to do with faith and belief in God. If the flood is allegorical, it does not eliminate God.
Yup. To paraphrase Groucho Marx, "Those are the facts. If you don't like them... well, I can make up others."
Audie
Veteran Member
I take back my representation of your
"research" as facile; it does not even rise to that level.
Andes Mountains Are Older Than Previously Believed
It's long interested me what passages like that are referring to. If they are referring to anything, that is. My suspicion is Paul's "Spirit" is his term -- or, more precisely, his interpretation -- of a mystical experience, or something closely akin to a mystical experience.
If so, the most curious thing about the passage for me is Paul's apparently ridiculous claim that the "natural man" cannot have a mystical experience. Utter BS. The world's largest database of first hand accounts of mystical experiences -- which is kept at the University of Pennsylvania -- is 22.2% comprised of accounts of mystical experiences had by atheists. Pauline nonsense aside, the fact is there's ample evidence the "natural man" can and does have mystical experiences.
Of course, one might argue that Paul was not referring to mystical experiences, but to me, that would make the whole of his claims nonsense, and not just part of them.
By the way, if you can't tell, one of the things I really detest about Paul -- as quite distinct from Jesus -- is he was a snob.
Audie
Veteran Member
You sure put a lot of faith and trust in the
reliability of a person who makes no effot
to read for comprehension.
Or rather who so carefully avoids doing so.
Last edited:
Audie
Veteran Member
Imagine the vast ego of a person who thinks
a cursory glance at a few pop-science articles
puts him in a position to be condescending,
to think he knows better than every scientist in the world.
Mom told me as a child that I would find that
the human capacity for self deception is infinite.
I always took it to just be the sort of poisoning of the well often found in cults: "don't listen to outsiders; listen only to your leader. Any information that hasn't been vetted by me isn't to be trusted, because there's something horribly wrong with everyone not in our group."
Audie
Veteran Member
It sure has echoed down the years.
Truly, Jeff, I have thought the very same thing! Really makes you wonder who Paul might have been 'grooming' and precisely what he could have been grooming them for.
Audie
Veteran Member
Maybe he just thought he was that wonderful.
Even Jesus didn't go about with God protecting him from all harm.
Audie, for years -- at least years, maybe decades -- Paul has given me the same creepy feeling that I get when I see people I know to be predators grooming someone.
I used to frequent a coffee shop, the most popular in town at the time, that everyone from the mayor and city council members to a tenth of the local homeless population frequented. It numbered among its clientele a handful of pornographers and other predators who preyed on the kids. There was even one guy who'd had fake business cards printed up announcing he was a talent scout for a Hollywood studio! You can imagine what he used them for. At any rate, you get to know the 'type'.
And Paul gives me the vibe of being the type.