Hoops wrote:Given the above, it's not unreasonable to assume that the land masses were still connected or close to each other as they were before the flood. It would also seem reasonable that the receding waters would have enough power to move the continets relatively close to where they are now.
For the land masses to seperate it took millions of years. Talk to a geologist about this and you will see how wrong this theory is.
The way the world looks right now is really close to the way it was 4000 years ago. I have never heard of the waters being so shallow in that time frame to allow a kangaroo to hop from asia to australia.
dogmatic wrote:the Bible uses the "whole world" or earth in a local meaning many times, like when paul says the gospel has gone out to the whole world, there are other places of this use but I'd have to look them up. and just a curious question, didn't evolutionary theorist say all man came from one point in Africa, like 75,000 years ago?
just found this: Hebrew word "erets", especially in the Book of Genesis. Its translated "earth" 665 times, "land" 1581 times, "country" 44 times, "ground" 119 times, "lands" 57 times, "countries", 15 times, and a few others.
Also, the energy scales, even for a catastrophic flood, would be much different than the cumulative energy needed to move continental plates across the earth. It shows a lack of even a basic understanding of science to even suggest that a single catastrophic flood would have had sufficient energy to move billions of tons of rocks halfway across the earth.
I don't follow. What do you mean the energy scales would be different?
(4-22) Genesis 10:25 . Was the Earth Divided in the Days of Peleg?
“The dividing of the earth was not an act of division by the inhabitants of the earth by tribes and peoples, but a breaking asunder of the continents, thus dividing the land surface and creating the Eastern Hemisphere and Western Hemisphere. By looking at a wall map of the world, you will discover how the land surface along the northern and southern coast of the American Hemisphere and Europe and Africa has the appearance of having been together at one time. Of course, there have been many changes on the earth’s surface since the beginning. We are informed by revelation that the time will come when this condition will be changed and that the land surface of the earth will come back again as it was in the beginning and all be in one place. This is definitely stated in the Doctrine and Covenants. [ D&C 133:18–20 is then cited.]” (Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 5:73–74.)
Cinpero, I always thought that part of the Bible was a part that was not translated correctly. As a kid I knew the pangea didn't seperate in a day.
Your link took me to a Mormon site... I thought you said Scholars? That doesn't much matter. I'll find you a prestigious scholar that says it was local if you want.
..must make sacrifice of his own life to atone. for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail." - Bruce R. McConkie
And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven, … Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man (a.k.a., Jesus) will be forgiven (Matthew 12:31-32).
Also, the energy scales, even for a catastrophic flood, would be much different than the cumulative energy needed to move continental plates across the earth. It shows a lack of even a basic understanding of science to even suggest that a single catastrophic flood would have had sufficient energy to move billions of tons of rocks halfway across the earth.
I don't follow. What do you mean the energy scales would be different?
The continents move by plate tectonics.
The continents can be shaped by rivers and oceans erroding them over long periods of time.
For the land masses to seperate it took millions of years. Talk to a geologist about this and you will see how wrong this theory is.
The way the world looks right now is really close to the way it was 4000 years ago. I have never heard of the waters being so shallow in that time frame to allow a kangaroo to hop from asia to australia.
As you know, the Bible doesn't tell us about animal migration after the flood. My point, however, is that it seems terrible difficult to super-impose the way the earth looks now on the earth immediately (relatively) after the flood. It would seem that there would be significant environmental consequences to a catastrophic flood of this size that could cause any number of events to make animal migration possible.
The continents can be shaped by rivers and oceans erroding them over long periods of time.
The Bible tells us that the fountains of the deep were unleashed. Possibly by hugely significant volcanic activity. That alone might cause shifting of land masses in whatever proportions. In addition, when the waters receded back to underground, that might cause other manipulations of land masses.
dogmatic wrote:Your link took me to a Mormon site... I thought you said Scholars? That doesn't much matter. I'll find you a prestigious scholar that says it was local if you want.
If Dr. Parry isn't a Hebrew scholar, than I don't know what is: