What are the theological consequences of evolution...

> Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”
So he basically murdered everyone and everything and Noah was somehow able to collect all the hundreds of thousand different species of insects within 7 days to bring aboard the Ark? kek

wtf im atheist now

Well not to be a twerp, but... who's to say that's not what happened?

So much for an 'omnipotent' God, if his conception of 'the world' is the Middle East.

>multiple civilizations near large rivers that regularly flooded in an difficult to effectively predict, destructive fashion had legends about great floods

Ya don't fucking say.

how did plants survive the flood?
did noah collect seeds of every species?

Plants don't have lungs, retard.

>who's to say that's not what happened?

Well, just to start off and ignore the idiocy of the question, there's an user above you who is arguing the Flood did happen, but only on a local scale affecting the Middle East. Does this mean God only created the Middle-East, and as such, as only able to destroy the Middle-East?

Secondly, the "watery void" is simply a myth. There is no "watery void" or Firmament.

answersingenesis.org/the-flood/how-did-plants-survive-the-flood/

The Bible states there was a worldwide Flood.
We see plants today.
Therefore plants survived the Flood.

>13 On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark. 14 They had with them every wild animal according to its kind, all livestock according to their kinds, every creature that moves along the ground according to its kind and every bird according to its kind, everything with wings. 15 Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark. 16 The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the Lord shut him in.

the plants walked to noah?

>answersingenesis.org/the-flood/how-did-plants-survive-the-flood/
This is profoundly sound logic.

>The Bible states there was a worldwide Flood.
>We see plants today.
>Therefore plants survived the Flood.
I'm convinced.

Did they have an aquarium? Remember, the floodwaters were not regular water: they were the waters of oblivion, of the void which existed before the Creation ("The earth was formless and empty, and darkness covered the deep waters"). The Flood was thus a reversal of Creation and a return to formless nothingness, and this too would have destroyed the fish in the seas.

So, did Noah also build aquariums to contain aquatic life? Did he gather up animals from the New World?

>One big reason is that plants today have undergone 4,400 years of speciation, mutations, and genetic deterioration. This must mean some of the genetic information has been lost.

>>speciation

wait wow

>Secondly, the "watery void" is simply a myth. There is no "watery void" or Firmament.

What's outside the universe?

>We know for certain that plants and seeds did survive the Flood; however, we don’t know exactly all the ways they survived. Not knowing how each survived does not mean they did not or could not.
>After leaving the Ark any seeds the animals ingested during their final days on the Ark could have passed through and then left on the ground in the animals’ excrement.
>Many herbivorous animals died in the Flood and their carcasses could have floated as carrion on the surface of the waters holding and protecting seeds in their bodies.
>Conclusion
There is no doubt that plants survived the Flood. The means by which they survived are numerous, but only a few examples are given here. So the skeptics’ claim that, “plants could not have survived the Flood,” is without warrant. Furthermore, by making this claim they inadvertently invalidate some of the studies of Darwin himself. However, the real question becomes: how can any skeptics’ claims (man’s ideas) survive the great flood of logic from God’s Word and common sense? They can’t!

Well the Bible says there was a global flood. We see fish, animals, and plants today. So the only logical explanation is that they survived the flood. This is God we are talking about, he could have made the Ark indestructible and built aquariums in there as well as green houses.

You're seriously trying to argue that the Hebrew/Sumerian cosmological model is real? You then have to accept the existence of a solid Frmament and a flat Earth and a geocentric model as true.

why didn't god create hamburgers out of rocks? i guess he isn't omnipotent after all

>Christians actually believe this

It truly is hilarious seeing the mental gymnastics they will go through to defend their Greek fanfictions and Iron Age myths.

God turned water into wine, he can do anything.

Well, that was legit logic. If there exist a reason to not do it than God is limited by something.

>he could

where are the references to aquariums and greenhouses in scripture

There are no direct "references", it is implied. There is no scripture describing Jesus going to the bathroom, why would God feel the need to include it? Maybe he wants to test your faith in him.

>a couple of young earth creationist fundamentalist protestant denominations
>representing all of christendom

>a couple of
More like over half of America..

omnipotence refers to his will rather than being unlimited generally

actually not that many adherring denominations (as opposed to members)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism#Adhering_church_bodies

The earth is flat, fucking atheists.

how did this happen?

Just a little something for the young-earthers.
Also, stop giving our belief system a bad reputation. Remember St Augustine:

"Often, a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances, … and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, which people see as ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn.

The shame is not so much that an ignorant person is laughed at, but rather that people outside the faith believe that we hold such opinions, and thus our teachings are rejected as ignorant and unlearned. If they find a Christian mistaken in a subject that they know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions as based on our teachings, how are they going to believe these teachings in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think these teachings are filled with fallacies about facts which they have learnt from experience and reason.

Reckless and presumptuous expounders of Scripture bring about much harm when they are caught in their mischievous false opinions by those not bound by our sacred texts. And even more so when they then try to defend their rash and obviously untrue statements by quoting a shower of words from Scripture and even recite from memory passages which they think will support their case ‘without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance.’ (1 Timothy 1:7)"

A combination of hyper literalism with hyper capitalism.

Roughly the same thing happened in Saudi Arabia

the animals came to the ark

St. Augustine was a young earther.

Where are the fossil kangaroos from Ararat to Australia then?

True, but I don't think he would be if he was raised in this day and age

It was the 4th century A.D., what else would he be? If he had access to our tools today, he'd come to the same conclusion that modern scientists have.

>fossil

satan's snare

...

Personally I'm Catholic and am leaning toward a global flood.

...

That depends on where he would be raise, since Augustine was in his own time heavily influenced by Mani. That's probably where he got his insistence on non-literalism from.

Also, Christians waving with Augustine's non-literalism is still a little dishonest, since someone from within Christianity, Joachim of Flora, reversed the non-literalism later on back towards literalism

but are you leaning towards a young earth?
what are your thoughts on evolution?
catholicism can accomodate all these views

how common is this imagery in america?

I love this but I can't believe Chicanos are that high up

Evolution is a meaningless material formality.

That's actually meant to be a parody. They have one with Cthulhu sleeping.

There's two big groups. (1) The bible is symbolic bruh. (2) Evolution is a Satanic lie.

Neither can conciliate so they just wait and see what happens.

Group 1 here. This is a bit too accurate.

>God said that the Bible is infallible?

he does? even christians know that the bible was put together hundreds of years after Christ.

>Christians
You mean eveyone else save for a few Protestant denominations. It's all in Appalachia, so probably Baptist or something similar. We here in the South think they're kooks.
Pic related: it's a slide from some heavily dated and biased creationist slideshow.

God did it.

Duh

>that the Bible is infallible?
He was only joking. If the bible should teach you anything it's that Yahweh is an absolute madman.

No one's posted this yet so I guess I will

Is there a part two?

There's a little bit that was left out. Mainly the fundie becomes an atheist and realized how stupid Christianity is. I prefer this version.
Also, someone made a live action version.
youtube.com/watch?v=3L9VaMhbSPs

I'm not sure I know a whole lot about the biblical account of Creation to speak about it, but in regards to Noah and the Ark, when Moses writes that the entire world flooded, it's very possible that he was talking about what he thought was the whole world, that is, the middle East, Mesopotamian area. And when you look and see that many cultures at that place around the same time all speak of a devastating flood, ahh well now things become interesting.

>t. Evangelical Christian who is an old earth creationist

No, the flood is a clear act of the Jews aligning themselves with their Babylonian overlords who themselves got the flood myth due to intense contact with Sumer.

EVERYONE in the Middle East had the flood myth because EVERYONE was masturbating about the glory of Sumer. Lots of American/European culture has a similar effect with Greece and Rome. One such Romanism is Christianity repainting Yahweh as being one of the many figures that filled the *deiwós archetype (Bearded guy watching from the clouds).

>And when you look and see that many cultures at that place around the same time all speak of a devastating flood, ahh well now things become interesting.

It's almost like water and rivers are important for civilizations to thrive or something