Mars=Garden of Eden?

[Galad Aglaron]

zz1000zz

Spike Zantren

ryuu_chan

Could be fun if it were. I very much doubt that it's so. If there is or was life on Mars, they probably have their own story. My personal opinion is that Eden was in the middle of aforementioned four rivers... in Pangea. You know, that blob that was once one huge land mass then broke apart? When the contents started to form into... well, continents, the Garden was broken as well. Otherwise, I image we'd still see an angel with a flaming sword hanging around, and it'd be rather easy to pinpoint. mrgreen

If I may interject with some of my fundamentalist thoughts.

I believe that the continents are still connected below the oceans. There's dirt under there, so I'd be more likely to suggest that it was the flood of Noah (I take the flood story literally) that destroyed the Garden of Eden (or flooded it and it remains underwater) and gave us our oceans and left the continents similar to where they are now.

If you were not anti-science, you would know, rather than believe, the continents are connected through solid earth.

This made me laugh.

@Ryuu: It's Pangaea, by the way. From the Greek, "pan" meaning "all" and "Gaea", the titan of the Earth.  

[Priestley]

zz1000zz

Spike Zantren

ryuu_chan

Could be fun if it were. I very much doubt that it's so. If there is or was life on Mars, they probably have their own story. My personal opinion is that Eden was in the middle of aforementioned four rivers... in Pangea. You know, that blob that was once one huge land mass then broke apart? When the contents started to form into... well, continents, the Garden was broken as well. Otherwise, I image we'd still see an angel with a flaming sword hanging around, and it'd be rather easy to pinpoint. mrgreen

If I may interject with some of my fundamentalist thoughts.

I believe that the continents are still connected below the oceans. There's dirt under there, so I'd be more likely to suggest that it was the flood of Noah (I take the flood story literally) that destroyed the Garden of Eden (or flooded it and it remains underwater) and gave us our oceans and left the continents similar to where they are now.

If you were not anti-science, you would know, rather than believe, the continents are connected through solid earth.

To further your point, the term 'connected' means they are not free-floating, right?  

[zz1000zz]

Priestley

zz1000zz

Spike Zantren

ryuu_chan

Could be fun if it were. I very much doubt that it's so. If there is or was life on Mars, they probably have their own story. My personal opinion is that Eden was in the middle of aforementioned four rivers... in Pangea. You know, that blob that was once one huge land mass then broke apart? When the contents started to form into... well, continents, the Garden was broken as well. Otherwise, I image we'd still see an angel with a flaming sword hanging around, and it'd be rather easy to pinpoint. mrgreen

If I may interject with some of my fundamentalist thoughts.

I believe that the continents are still connected below the oceans. There's dirt under there, so I'd be more likely to suggest that it was the flood of Noah (I take the flood story literally) that destroyed the Garden of Eden (or flooded it and it remains underwater) and gave us our oceans and left the continents similar to where they are now.

If you were not anti-science, you would know, rather than believe, the continents are connected through solid earth.

To further your point, the term 'connected' means they are not free-floating, right?

Correct. Free floating earth would be impossible for any significant land mass.  

[Priestley]

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Spike Zantren

ryuu_chan

Could be fun if it were. I very much doubt that it's so. If there is or was life on Mars, they probably have their own story. My personal opinion is that Eden was in the middle of aforementioned four rivers... in Pangea. You know, that blob that was once one huge land mass then broke apart? When the contents started to form into... well, continents, the Garden was broken as well. Otherwise, I image we'd still see an angel with a flaming sword hanging around, and it'd be rather easy to pinpoint. mrgreen

If I may interject with some of my fundamentalist thoughts.

I believe that the continents are still connected below the oceans. There's dirt under there, so I'd be more likely to suggest that it was the flood of Noah (I take the flood story literally) that destroyed the Garden of Eden (or flooded it and it remains underwater) and gave us our oceans and left the continents similar to where they are now.

If you were not anti-science, you would know, rather than believe, the continents are connected through solid earth.

To further your point, the term 'connected' means they are not free-floating, right?

Correct. Free floating earth would be impossible for any significant land mass.

I can't remember exactly what I was trying to get at with that clarification. I think it was something along the lines that the tectonic plates aren't actually connected in the sense of being linked or joined but instead in a constant state of movement against, on top and underneath one another at the edges.  

[Romjacks]

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

Spike Zantren

ryuu_chan

Could be fun if it were. I very much doubt that it's so. If there is or was life on Mars, they probably have their own story. My personal opinion is that Eden was in the middle of aforementioned four rivers... in Pangea. You know, that blob that was once one huge land mass then broke apart? When the contents started to form into... well, continents, the Garden was broken as well. Otherwise, I image we'd still see an angel with a flaming sword hanging around, and it'd be rather easy to pinpoint. mrgreen

If I may interject with some of my fundamentalist thoughts.

I believe that the continents are still connected below the oceans. There's dirt under there, so I'd be more likely to suggest that it was the flood of Noah (I take the flood story literally) that destroyed the Garden of Eden (or flooded it and it remains underwater) and gave us our oceans and left the continents similar to where they are now.

If you were not anti-science, you would know, rather than believe, the continents are connected through solid earth.

To further your point, the term 'connected' means they are not free-floating, right?

Correct. Free floating earth would be impossible for any significant land mass.

I can't remember exactly what I was trying to get at with that clarification. I think it was something along the lines that the tectonic plates aren't actually connected in the sense of being linked or joined but instead in a constant state of movement against, on top and underneath one another at the edges.

I wasn't using the term "believe" as in "I don't know" I was using it in a different sense meaning "I'm almost certain."

And I'm not anti-science, I love science. The popular interpretation of science is wrong and needs to be rechecked.

People were once taught that the Earth was flat. That's wrong.

It was a popular scientific belief that big rocks fell faster than little rocks and was taught for 2000 years. Galileo proved that wrong.

You have to take a different view of the evidence to come to a decent conclusion. The bible is correct, and you don't need to compromise it for what some Evolutionist says.

There's no way that I can think of that could move the continents that far away from each other without significantly huge holes in the earth from the "early ocean" of Pangaea with the tectonic plates moving.  

[Edith Puthie]

Spike Zantren

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

If you were not anti-science, you would know, rather than believe, the continents are connected through solid earth.

To further your point, the term 'connected' means they are not free-floating, right?

Correct. Free floating earth would be impossible for any significant land mass.

I can't remember exactly what I was trying to get at with that clarification. I think it was something along the lines that the tectonic plates aren't actually connected in the sense of being linked or joined but instead in a constant state of movement against, on top and underneath one another at the edges.

I wasn't using the term "believe" as in "I don't know" I was using it in a different sense meaning "I'm almost certain."

And I'm not anti-science, I love science. The popular interpretation of science is wrong and needs to be rechecked.

People were once taught that the Earth was flat. That's wrong.

It was a popular scientific belief that big rocks fell faster than little rocks and was taught for 2000 years. Galileo proved that wrong.

You have to take a different view of the evidence to come to a decent conclusion. The bible is correct, and you don't need to compromise it for what some Evolutionist says.

There's no way that I can think of that could move the continents that far away from each other without significantly huge holes in the earth from the "early ocean" of Pangaea with the tectonic plates moving.

Science!

Actually that is a proven thing, those holes are filled with lava, which connects the two land masses back again.  

[Romjacks]

Paranormal Zombiiie

Spike Zantren

Priestley

zz1000zz

Priestley

zz1000zz

If you were not anti-science, you would know, rather than believe, the continents are connected through solid earth.

To further your point, the term 'connected' means they are not free-floating, right?

Correct. Free floating earth would be impossible for any significant land mass.

I can't remember exactly what I was trying to get at with that clarification. I think it was something along the lines that the tectonic plates aren't actually connected in the sense of being linked or joined but instead in a constant state of movement against, on top and underneath one another at the edges.

I wasn't using the term "believe" as in "I don't know" I was using it in a different sense meaning "I'm almost certain."

And I'm not anti-science, I love science. The popular interpretation of science is wrong and needs to be rechecked.

People were once taught that the Earth was flat. That's wrong.

It was a popular scientific belief that big rocks fell faster than little rocks and was taught for 2000 years. Galileo proved that wrong.

You have to take a different view of the evidence to come to a decent conclusion. The bible is correct, and you don't need to compromise it for what some Evolutionist says.

There's no way that I can think of that could move the continents that far away from each other without significantly huge holes in the earth from the "early ocean" of Pangaea with the tectonic plates moving.

Science!

Actually that is a proven thing, those holes are filled with lava, which connects the two land masses back again.

Ah. Well, thanks for correcting me. Now I understand the other side a teensy bit better. I still don't buy into the billions of years thing, but it's good to be corrected so that I don't make that mistake again, thanks.

I still think the Flood story makes more sense. I'd go off on a rabbit trail on the topic of young/old earth but that's not what this topic is for, so I'll leave it with my original view; Noah's Flood.  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

Spike Zantren

I'd go off on a rabbit trail on the topic of young/old earth but that's not what this topic is for, so I'll leave it with my original view; Noah's Flood.

Feel free to make a new thread on it. 3nodding We'd all love to discuss it I'm sure.  

[Romjacks]

Fushigi na Butterfly

Spike Zantren

I'd go off on a rabbit trail on the topic of young/old earth but that's not what this topic is for, so I'll leave it with my original view; Noah's Flood.

Feel free to make a new thread on it. 3nodding We'd all love to discuss it I'm sure.

Maybe later if someone else doesn't make one. I have exams to do for the next week, so I wouldn't be able to keep up with any new posts. sweatdrop  

[The Amazing Ryuu]

Spike Zantren

I believe that the continents are still connected below the oceans. There's dirt under there, so I'd be more likely to suggest that it was the flood of Noah (I take the flood story literally) that destroyed the Garden of Eden (or flooded it and it remains underwater) and gave us our oceans and left the continents similar to where they are now.

I doubt the current river Euphrates is the same one mentioned in the early chapters of Genesis because after the flood, the people left over to repopulate the world could've easily renamed things that look similar to places they've been before; like the English and French did when they came to the Americas, with places like New York and my home province, Nova Scotia (New Scotland in Latin) which reminded the colonials of York and Scotland.

True in both points. Though... I can easily see the first bit of it supporting Fushigi's Discovery Channel special. mrgreen Maybe there IS a scientific explanation to the Flood. Either way, I'm fairly sure that the whole Garden isn't sitting at the bottom of the ocean like another Atlantis.

Galad Damodred

@Ryuu: It's Pangaea, by the way. From the Greek, "pan" meaning "all" and "Gaea", the titan of the Earth.

Isn't that what I put? *checks* Ahh, typo, we meet again.



@Priestly: You're just chock full of useless history, aren't you? heart  

[BluePoisons]

Personally, what I think is that there was a Garden of Eden. But when Adam and Eve disobeyed God, He punished them by banishing them from the the Garden of Eden. Then he placed on the east side He placed a cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the Tree of Life(Genesis 3: 23-24)
I couldn't go into much research but from what I heard, is that when God sent the Great Flood. Not only did it wipe out all wickedness but it also made it where Eden could never be found. It could still be in the Mid East, but no one has proven it's exact location.
Also, one of you said that God has taken the Tree of Life with Him in heaven. For it says, on each side of the river stood the tree of life...(Revelation 22:2). I think God made the location of Eden mysterious and took the tree with Him, so that if we did find Eden, they wouldn't be able to take from the tree.  

[zz1000zz]

Spike Zantren

And I'm not anti-science, I love science.

This topic is hardly the appropriate place to deal with this issue. If you wish to discuss it in any detail, I would be more than willing to do so in an appropriate topic.

I do not care what your religious beliefs may be, but when you sponsor disinformation I care. When you sponsor false statements about science, I care a great deal. The links in your profile are filled with nonsense.

Edit: I clicked on the second link offered in that profile, and this is the first thing I saw on the page:

Quote:

Compromisers often times take silly positions that, in the end, make them look really dumb.

The next thing I noticed was the image above this, which contains the text, "Things that make EVOLUTIONISTS look stupid - wisdom teeth." Sponsoring personal insults is a bad way to appear open minded.  

[zz1000zz]

Before I had just glanced at the links in that profile. Having actually read more of what is in these sites, I almost feel obligated to make a topic discussing just how wrong they are.

Would anyone be interested in me doing this?  

[Fushigi na Butterfly]

It depends on what the topics are, specifically. If they follow the guild and Gaia's rules, go for it. 3nodding