Posted on 02/21/2005 7:04:50 AM PST by Alex Marko
Well I don't know if the Garden of Eden was in Iraq, but if it was the place went into Babylon = confusion, since those days.
Restoring "Eden" is a noble and laudable goal, and a very intriguing one at that. Thanks for posting this!
I'm sure God knew about airplanes way back when he dictated those words.
I don't presume to understand their full meaning.
But, hey, !IF! you care to presume greater knowledge than God, He's likely to let you get away with such a presumption . . . for a while.
> If the Colorado river in Arizona was once a babbling brook through verdant pastures and some 'event' turned it into what it is now, then I would say it has been remade, yet it is still the Colorado.
Well, according to the "all the water was suspended in the sky"-type Creationists, the Earth was remarkably flat prior to the flood. Also, the Grand Canyon was carved out by the flood. As a consequence, there would have been no particluar reason or even *ability* for there to be a Colorado river of any description prior to the flood. It would have been a flat, verdant plain; any creek or stream in the area would have been wholly unrelated to the Colorado that results from the Flood tearing the Earth up and forming the mountains.
Similarly, had there been Tigris/Euphrates rivers prior to the FLood, they, too would have been unrelated to rivers post-flood, since the source and sink for the rivers woudl have been entirely different.
This is, of course, idle fantastical specualtion.
There are certainly plenty of references indicating God does precisely that.
But, what I'm curious about and find much more odd . . . just when did you become big enough to tell God HE can't or oughten to do that? He'd likely be up for a good chuckle to but He already knows.
LOVE your tag!
> just when did you become big enough to tell God HE can't or oughten to do that?
Just when did you become big enough to tell other people not to question things?
What that location has going for it is that its near the city of Ur(religious importance need not even be explained)
That's a pretty big leap of illogic!
I think the attitude of the heart is rather important when it comes to questioning things God has said.
And, I haven't found the attitude of the heart to be that great amongst those who seem most at odds with; most cheeky in wording about; most skeptical about the things God has said. But then, they don't seem that intimate with God's heart, either, so I guess it figures.
As to what the attitude of your heart is--God knows. But from the available evidence, I wouldn't want to bet the farm on it.
Shall we interpret that as a confession that you're reevaluating whether you're big enough to tell God how He has to do something or what He meant in Scripture?
> when it comes to questioning things God has said.
I'm not questioning what God has said. I'm questioning what the *Bible* says. Whether those thigns are one and the same is an arguement that has been going on for centuries.
Shall we interpret that as a confession that you're reevaluating whether you're big enough to tell other ppeople what questions they dare ask?
Southern Mesopotamia, where the Tigris and the Euphrates flowed, first separately, then united, towards the Persian Gulf, was more beguiling in history than in fact. Here were Babylon and Nineveh, here Sennacherib had fought his battles, here indeed, some said, had been the Garden of Eden at the start of the world. But it was a fearful country now. .... In the summer it was indescribably hot, in the winter unbearably cold. In the dry season everything was baked like leather, in the wet season 10,000 square miles were flooded, the waters gradually oozing away to leave malodorous wastes of marsh. Fleas, sand-flies and mosquitoes tormented the place, and its inhabitants lived lives of ignorant poverty, enlivened only by sporadic excitements of crime or brigandage, the illusions of religion and the consolations of sex.Is this the land of dear old Adam (one British soldier wondered),
And beautiful Mother Eve?
If so dear reader small blame to them
For sinning and having to leave..
-- James (Jan) Morris, Farewell the Trumpets.
Nah! The enviromental whackos don't even believe the Bible.
And they fight anything that's common sense.
Or for that matter.... "faith based".
aaahhhhhhh.
Wellllllllll, The Bible has won a lot of arguments. Won another one recently. Said Edom was at such and such a time and state. Scholars heretofore had said that was impossible. Recent archeological evidence for the umpteen hundredth time has shown The Bible accurate to the last detail.
I think I'll go with The Bible.
I guess you missed that part about the attitude of the heart.
Not surprisingly.
> Said Edom was at such and such a time and state. Scholars heretofore had said that was impossible.
Which scholars said that it was *impossible?* Same ones who said that Troy was a myth... until it was found, thus proving the truth of the Iliad and revealing the actual divinity of the Olympian gods? </sarcasm>
> Recent archeological evidence for the umpteen hundredth time has shown The Bible accurate to the last detail.
Yes, in things of which there is no particular controversy. A religious text written in, say, New York City, buried for three millenia and then rediscovered woudl hardly be proven to be God's Hoenst Truth just because the remains of the city of New York are found, now would it?
> Said Edom was at such and such a time and state. Scholars heretofore had said that was impossible.
Which scholars said that it was *impossible?* Same ones who said that Troy was a myth... until it was found, thus proving the truth of the Iliad and revealing the actual divinity of the Olympian gods? </sarcasm>
> Recent archeological evidence for the umpteen hundredth time has shown The Bible accurate to the last detail.
Yes, in things of which there is no particular controversy. A religious text written in, say, New York City, buried for three millenia and then rediscovered woudl hardly be proven to be God's Hoenst Truth just because the remains of the city of New York are found, now would it?
> I guess you missed that part about the attitude of the heart. Not surprisingly.
No, it's not surprising. My heart has no attitude. It is just a muscle, incapable of emotional response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.