Man was in Pangaea

[dad2]

It is very probable that the ark landed when the continents were still together. It is also likely that the tower of Babel happened ((over a century after the flood year) on the supercontinent. That would make it easy for man and animals and plants to migrate to the various areas and what are now separate continents. Something changed quickly and the continents separated, carrying all the people and life on them. This seems to have happened at the same time as the lifespans of men dropping suddenly and drastically. (the best plotting of when lifespans changed points not to the flood but the time of Peleg) It was also in the days of Peleg that the bible says that the world was split or divided. That includes nations and languages, but many also believe it includes the physical division of the land masses.
This thread is to discuss the scientific or historical aspects of this.

 

[tyndale1946]

It is very probable that the ark landed when the continents were still together. It is also likely that the tower of Babel happened ((over a century after the flood year) on the supercontinent. That would make it easy for man and animals and plants to migrate to the various areas and what are now separate continents. Something changed quickly and the continents separated, carrying all the people and life on them. This seems to have happened at the same time as the lifespans of men dropping suddenly and drastically. (the best plotting of when lifespans changed points not to the flood but the time of Peleg) It was also in the days of Peleg that the bible says that the world was split or divided. That includes nations and languages, but many also believe it includes the physical division of the land masses.
This thread is to discuss the scientific or historical aspects of this.

Here is an article that talks about it... In The Days Of Peleg... Brother Glen

In the Days of Peleg

 

[dad2]

Here is an article that talks about it... In The Days Of Peleg... Brother Glen

In the Days of Peleg

The articles says it is 'unlikely' it happened fast. Hilarious.

from your article "Some suggest the continents of the earth were divided at this time. However, this seems unlikely, as such a process would have had to occur within a very confined time period. The resultant geological violence would be overwhelmingly catastrophic"

Mountain building likely happened at this time also. The uplifting of high ranges etc. What is wrong with some 'geological violence'? We do not know what laws even existed at that time. Therefore how rocks heat up today is no way to imagine how friction and etc would have worked back then. Or are you claiming that you can prove that the laws of physics were the same then? Much was different then. Trees grew in weeks. Man lived well over 9 centuries. Things were not the same. They changed. Answers in Genesis should not be sidelining the bible and bowing before modern so called science.

 

[AustinC]

The articles says it is 'unlikely' it happened fast. Hilarious.

from your article "Some suggest the continents of the earth were divided at this time. However, this seems unlikely, as such a process would have had to occur within a very confined time period. The resultant geological violence would be overwhelmingly catastrophic"

Mountain building likely happened at this time also. The uplifting of high ranges etc. What is wrong with some 'geological violence'? We do not know what laws even existed at that time. Therefore how rocks heat up today is no way to imagine how friction and etc would have worked back then. Or are you claiming that you can prove that the laws of physics were the same then? Much was different then. Trees grew in weeks. Man lived well over 9 centuries. Things were not the same. They changed. Answers in Genesis should not be sidelining the bible and bowing before modern so called science.

dad2, are you saying that the laws of nature, which God created, were suspended so that the continents could be moved as though they were giant turtles swimming to a new log?

God certainly could move land masses. He could have separated the languages and people's by transporting these continents very quickly. He could have done this after Babel. But, there is no geologic evidence that God did this (not saying God couldn't, just saying the earth does not show evidence of this happening). Plate tectonics would indicate a slow movement.

That said, if we read the flood narrative with Noah, we see a cataclysmic upheaval of water from within the earth as well as from above the earth. In that upheaval the earth could have changed the continents. But, to have it after Babel does require God to suspend the laws of physics and move earth, water, and animal life around in very miraculous ways.

Ultimately I won't lose any sleep over speculations regarding God's work in a prehistoric era where we received an oral history, passed down to Moses, with the real purpose being the revelation of God to men.

 

[dad2]

dad2, are you saying that the laws of nature, which God created, were suspended so that the continents could be moved as though they were giant turtles swimming to a new log?

No. I am saying that we do not know that the laws of nature we live with and know even existed in that world that was! How would we know now? Why were spirits able to marry women right here on earth? In today's nature we can't have that. In today's nature, trees take many years usually to grow. In today's nature man does not live over 9 centuries. In today's nature all mankind does not speak just one language. It is consistent with the record of life in Genesis that nature was different. Why should we assume God did not change it? Looking at the future we know it sure will be different in the ages to come! Man again will live for many centuries and etc.

God certainly could move land masses. He could have separated the languages and people's by transporting these continents very quickly. He could have done this after Babel. But, there is no geologic evidence that God did this (not saying God couldn't, just saying the earth does not show evidence of this happening). Plate tectonics would indicate a slow movement.

I do not concur. Who says there is no evidence? The only issue is how we interpret what we see. The rate of movement in recent history means nothing in relation to any great and sudden move that happened pre history!

That said, if we read the flood narrative with Noah, we see a cataclysmic upheaval of water from within the earth as well as from above the earth. In that upheaval the earth could have changed the continents. But, to have it after Babel does require God to suspend the laws of physics and move earth, water, and animal life around in very miraculous ways.

No. The animals and man had over a century to move around. They were likely ON the continents when the land masses moved. God did not need to transport them in some special way. The people who claim the flood did it all need some special transportation! There is no reason in or out of science that I have heard that says a flood would cause a supercontient to divide suddenly? Walt Brown did propose a theory based on laws of science that would allow a rapid move of continents. However, since he used only present laws of physics for the theory, it basically didn't work. I have talked to scientists who pointed out that great heat would have been generated in any hydroplate scenario. The spreading of architecture (pyramid style structures) and customs and languages and people and animals absolutely fits a post Babel scenario.

Ultimately I won't lose any sleep over speculations regarding God's work in a prehistoric era where we received an oral history, passed down to Moses, with the real purpose being the revelation of God to men.

Part of that revelation is that Genesis really is true. He that comes to God needs to know He is real and true and really is our creator.

 

[AustinC]

No. I am saying that we do not know that the laws of nature we live with and know even existed in that world that was! How would we know now? Why were spirits able to marry women right here on earth? In today's nature we can't have that. In today's nature, trees take many years usually to grow. In today's nature man does not live over 9 centuries. In today's nature all mankind does not speak just one language. It is consistent with the record of life in Genesis that nature was different. Why should we assume God did not change it? Looking at the future we know it sure will be different in the ages to come! Man again will live for many centuries and etc.



I do not concur. Who says there is no evidence? The only issue is how we interpret what we see. The rate of movement in recent history means nothing in relation to any great and sudden move that happened pre history!


No. The animals and man had over a century to move around. They were likely ON the continents when the land masses moved. God did not need to transport them in some special way. The people who claim the flood did it all need some special transportation! There is no reason in or out of science that I have heard that says a flood would cause a supercontient to divide suddenly? Walt Brown did propose a theory based on laws of science that would allow a rapid move of continents. However, since he used only present laws of physics for the theory, it basically didn't work. I have talked to scientists who pointed out that great heat would have been generated in any hydroplate scenario. The spreading of architecture (pyramid style structures) and customs and languages and people and animals absolutely fits a post Babel scenario.


Part of that revelation is that Genesis really is true. He that comes to God needs to know He is real and true and really is our creator.

@dad2 you can believe anything you want and make up all sorts of stories to create your scenario. What you cannot do is prove your hypothesis using scientific method. If you presented your hypothesis, without any means of testing to see if it physically could happen, you would be laughed out of the building and immediately labeled as a fantasy writer, not a scientist.

Now, could God have broken all the laws of nature that science physically observes today? Sure. He's God. He can do miracles that defy the laws of nature. But, science cannot observe that happening and therefore cannot state it as fact.

Do you understand that you have no scientific leg to stand on with your hypothesis?

 

[KenH]

Man again will live for many centuries

God's elect will live forever. Centuries won't matter.

 

[dad2]

@dad2 you can believe anything you want and make up all sorts of stories to create your scenario.

As can science and you and anyone else. I use the bible so unless you think it is made up that shoe does not fit.

What you cannot do is prove your hypothesis using scientific method.

That is foolishness. That method does not and cannot cover what nature was like. You might as well ask someone to prove the pre flood world by a corn flake box.

If you presented your hypothesis, without any means of testing to see if it physically could happen, you would be laughed out of the building and immediately labeled as a fantasy writer, not a scientist.

That would show that people who get paid to make stuff up hate God. So? That is news to you?

Now, could God have broken all the laws of nature that science physically observes today? Sure. He's God. He can do miracles that defy the laws of nature. But, science cannot observe that happening and therefore cannot state it as fact.

There is no indication that the change that He made on earth was by millions and billions of little fairies working against nature! God did not send a pixie to every man to ensure that they would not live 9 centuries any more, He did not send fairies or angels to every tree, so that it made them grow slow after the time of Babel. etc. He did something that changed things for all the world.

[/QUOTE]Do you understand that you have no scientific leg to stand on with your hypothesis?[/QUOTE] That is not the right question. Do you understand that you have no scientific leg to stand on with any claim that nature was the same in the world that was? Since no one has any such leg then what matters is the record we have been given from God.

 

[dad2]

God's elect will live forever. Centuries won't matter.

They will if the nations we rule over in the millennium involve mortal men.

 

[AustinC]

As can science and you and anyone else. I use the bible so unless you think it is made up that shoe does not fit.



That is foolishness. That method does not and cannot cover what nature was like. You might as well ask someone to prove the pre flood world by a corn flake box.


That would show that people who get paid to make stuff up hate God. So? That is news to you?



There is no indication that the change that He made on earth was by millions and billions of little fairies working against nature! God did not send a pixie to every man to ensure that they would not live 9 centuries any more, He did not send fairies or angels to every tree, so that it made them grow slow after the time of Babel. etc. He did something that changed things for all the world.

That is not the right question. Do you understand that you have no scientific leg to stand on with any claim that nature was the same in the world that was? Since no one has any such leg then what matters is the record we have been given from God.

dad2, first, God did not write a science book. His purpose is to reveal himself to us, not explain how he created. Second, nothing you have written has any scientific merit. You are reading the Bible and speculating on how God moved humans and animals throughout the continents. You are attempting to understand geography, which is a social science, not a physical science. I agree that the social sciences are subjective. You also are being subjective.
Geology is study observation of rocks. It observes how the physical, laws of nature function in building rock and weathering rock. This is testable. It is not something you just make up out of thin air.

You are free to create a fantasy from what you read in the Bible. However, neither the Bible, nor science supports your present conjecture. You and I have to live by faith and know that God ordained what He ordained and He didn't tell us how He did it.

 

[KenH]

They will if the nations we rule over in the millennium involve mortal men.

I do not agree with premillennialism, not historic nor especially dispensational.

 

[dad2]

dad2, first, God did not write a science book.

Who cares, since science cannot cover the old world or anything spiritual? That means science is out of the picture on the issue. As I mentioned you might as well say the bible is not a corn flakes box.

His purpose is to reveal himself to us, not explain how he created.

What He revealed is that He created it all. That is who He is.

Second, nothing you have written has any scientific merit.

Nor you. So there. That would be because there IS NO science that tells us what nature in the old world was like. Period.

You are reading the Bible and speculating on how God moved humans and animals throughout the continents.

That trumps so called science and it's diciples and true believers who speculate on how life originated without using the bible!

You are attempting to understand geography, which is a social science, not a physical science.

Who cares what you call it? We can understand more than the world. If we believe His record we have plenty of clues and information. Did you think there was something wrong with actually understanding the past?

I agree that the social sciences are subjective. You also are being subjective.

All things are subject to God and His record is worthy of being subject to respect and belief. There is no science that can disagree.


[/QUOTE]
Geology is study observation of rocks. It observes how the physical, laws of nature function in building rock and weathering rock. This is testable. It is not something you just make up out of thin air.[/QUOTE] False and ridiculous. The dates cannot be tested. They are made up and belief based by imposing a set of beliefs on to rocks! We do not know what laws God used when creating rocks! We do not know what laws were in place when many early rocks formed after creation! All geology reads into rocks is belief based, and assumes that the present is the big key to the past. It also basically assumes that there was no creation that started things. Science omits creation and assumes the nature of the past was both the same and responsiblle for froming all that exists!

You are free to create a fantasy from what you read in the Bible.

Using the bible to supplement what is unknown provides us with knowledge. Not using the bible leaves you unable to ever possibly get beyond the unknown.

However, neither the Bible, nor science supports your present conjecture.

Science does not oppose it either. So as mentioned science is sidelined, useless, not relevant and out of the game here. That leaves the bible. That does support the idea that whatever happened did so in a recent past. It also supports the idea man was here along with other kinds since creation week. Your claim that the bible does not support these things is ludicrous and patently false.

 

[dad2]

I do not agree with premillennialism, not historic nor especially dispensational.

I can't help you with that as I don't really know what those things are, or care. However we do know He will rule the nations of men and that they will live many centuries in the future.

 

[KenH]

I can't help you with that as I don't really know what those things are, or care. However we do know He will rule the nations of men and that they will live many centuries in the future.

When Christ returns this heavens and earth will be replaced immediately with the new heavens and earth wherein dwells righteousness. (2 Peter 3:10-13)

There won't be any need to count centuries. Eternity is timeless.

 

[dad2]

When Christ returns this heavens and earth will be replaced immediately with the new heavens and earth wherein dwells righteousness. (2 Peter 3:10-13)
.

Says you. The day of the Lord period covers the whole 1000 years At the end is when it is burned and made new.

 

[AustinC]

Who cares, since science cannot cover the old world or anything spiritual? That means science is out of the picture on the issue. As I mentioned you might as well say the bible is not a corn flakes box.



What He revealed is that He created it all. That is who He is.


Nor you. So there. That would be because there IS NO science that tells us what nature in the old world was like. Period.


That trumps so called science and it's diciples and true believers who speculate on how life originated without using the bible!



Who cares what you call it? We can understand more than the world. If we believe His record we have plenty of clues and information. Did you think there was something wrong with actually understanding the past?




All things are subject to God and His record is worthy of being subject to respect and belief. There is no science that can disagree.



Geology is study observation of rocks. It observes how the physical, laws of nature function in building rock and weathering rock. This is testable. It is not something you just make up out of thin air. False and ridiculous. The dates cannot be tested. They are made up and belief based by imposing a set of beliefs on to rocks! We do not know what laws God used when creating rocks! We do not know what laws were in place when many early rocks formed after creation! All geology reads into rocks is belief based, and assumes that the present is the big key to the past. It also basically assumes that there was no creation that started things. Science omits creation and assumes the nature of the past was both the same and responsiblle for froming all that exists!




Using the bible to supplement what is unknown provides us with knowledge. Not using the bible leaves you unable to ever possibly get beyond the unknown.

Science does not oppose it either. So as mentioned science is sidelined, useless, not relevant and out of the game here. That leaves the bible. That does support the idea that whatever happened did so in a recent past. It also supports the idea man was here along with other kinds since creation week. Your claim that the bible does not support these things is ludicrous and patently false.

It is clear you have no understanding in this topic. I will stop responding after this post.

 

[37818]

When Christ returns this heavens and earth will be replaced immediately with the new heavens and earth wherein dwells righteousness. (2 Peter 3:10-13)

Not according to Revelation 20 which details 2 Peter 3:10-13.

 

[dad2]

It is clear you have no understanding in this topic. I will stop responding after this post.

You posted no science that addresses the issue. It is clear you cannot. You are welcome to your beliefs. I understand the bible record is very true. You have said nothing that challenges that or that even addresses the issue in any direct or meaningful way. I would retreat if I were you also.

 

[KenH]

@dad2 @37818 There wlll be no physical 1000 year reign on this physical earth. I reject historic premillennialism, dispensational premillennialism, and postmillennialism. The best commentary that I have come across on the book of Revelation, that is faithful to the Bible as a whole, is by William Hendriksen, entitled More Than Conquerors - Hendricksen-W-More_Than_Conquerors_-1940.pdf (tn-biblecollege.edu).

 

[37818]

. . . There wlll be no physical 1000 year reign . . . .

I have never heard of read a good justification for it's denial.