161
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 74:
Line 74: + +
→Not seen before the Great Flood
Again, it can be reinserted if someone has any kind of source citation.I'd also be OK with a statement and citation for a significantly weaker assertion, like "there is no good evidence of rainbows having been seen before the Great Flood." That's close to vacuously true, but if a well-known published source said it—i.e. ''if something like this is widely and commonly asserted in fundamentalist/creationist circles''—I'd be OK with it. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 09:31, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Again, it can be reinserted if someone has any kind of source citation.I'd also be OK with a statement and citation for a significantly weaker assertion, like "there is no good evidence of rainbows having been seen before the Great Flood." That's close to vacuously true, but if a well-known published source said it—i.e. ''if something like this is widely and commonly asserted in fundamentalist/creationist circles''—I'd be OK with it. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 09:31, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Seems to me there some readers are being a little liberal in their interpretation of the Bible here. The words of Genesis leave little room for interpretation: 'And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud'. You really have to be adding your own words to the text for 'it shall come to pass' to mean 'it has always been the case.' The Bible says God changed physics. Is that so hard to believe? --[[User:QPR|QPR]] 13:39, 12 September 2011 (EDT)