Search results

@Yorzhik The "rain" in verse 12 is introduced by "the windows of heaven were opened" in verse 11. That's how the passage reads. It simply doesn't allow for a canopy of any sort.

One of my favorite pages in "In the Beginning" is this one, which describes exaclty what you say wasn't happening. https://hpt.rsr.org/onlinebook/TechnicalNotes6.html Enough of the debris made it to the moon with enough force to partially melt the surface. It's not implausible to think that...

Then the burden of proof is on you to show that these phenomena existed, as Scripture does not state that there were such, nor does physics support the idea. Not liquid water. Rather, that's an explanation that secular scientists have come up with to explain where the frozen water on Mars...

So are you? If so, just say it! "I, Arthur Brain, am against child trafficking, and support the movie's message against it." You won't! So why are you complaining about a movie against that sort of thing? Who cares!? I have yet to see any criticism of the movie itself, only about what...

You do realize that the movie is based on a true story, right?

https://jalopnik.com/nissan-pathfinder-stuck-in-california-redwood-tree-1850607169 Oops.

You're sure doing a lot of yippin'! The movie is about freeing children from trafficking rings. I support that. Who cares what the actors think.

Ya know, when you throw a stone at a pack of dogs, the one that yelps is the one that got hit... Sounds like the movie is making a few people yip...

My point was that, except with outside influence (the "miracles" I mentioned) hydrogen in a canopy above the earth would simply dissipate, and quickly. It would not form a solid or enter a metallic state.

Just two verses? So, you've formed your beliefs on two verses? Do you not see the problem with that? You say "we don't have enough evidence" but when you see "windows of heaven" two times in scripture you come up with some weird theory theory based on another dead theory? And all that in...

Where's Private Ryan when you need him!

Not necessarily. Generally speaking yes, but not if it's a Christian. False. To the people of the law. Just because you cannot see a difference doesn't mean there isn't one, Hoping. Fulfilling the law is not the same as fulfilling the righteous requirement of the law. You seem to think...

Uh, no. That's not what HPT says. Nor is it what the Bible says, more importantly. Then you don't understand the theory. Hence why I posted the link above. I recommend you read it, so that you can be on the same page as us.

Saying it doesn't make it so. God calling the firmament (Hebrew: raqia - an extended surface, expanse) that He created in the midst of the waters which were introduced in verse 2, that states that the Spirit of God was hovering ABOVE the face of which, perfectly describes the crust of the earth...

"Sinners" are called that because they are slaves to sin, not because they can do nothing but sin. Likewise, we Christians are no longer sinners, because we are not slaves to sin. It doesn't mean, however, that we cannot or will not sin. Non-sequitur. Because that's what they are. ALL...

Paul was a Jew, who became the Apostle to the Gentiles, and who agreed with the Twelve that He should go to the uncircumcised, while they go to the circumcised.

Again, Neandertals were human beings.

Correct, because there was no canopy. A priori assumption that there was a canopy. Chapter, verse. Or those changes were caused by something else, and you're just assuming it was a canopy. What anomalies? Which of them cannot be explained by the HPT?

But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach): that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes...