Question about flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-03-2015, 09:47 AM
RE: Question about flood
(16-03-2015 04:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  Because you absolutely have to have an answer right now, you'll take an incorrect one.

Saying that my answer is the INCORRECT one is to assume that nature is the CORRECT one, which is the fallacy of begging the question.

(16-03-2015 04:45 PM)Chas Wrote:  You sound like a three-year-old. Drinking Beverage

I was intellectually spanking kids when I was 3 yrs old, too. Now I am an adult intellectually spanking adults. Who knew? Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 09:55 AM
RE: Question about flood
(17-03-2015 09:37 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Well, if you take God out of the equation, then evolution depends on abiogenesis...so until you can explain how life could have arisen from nonlife, then you will never get to the origin of any species....evolutionists often ignore this...which is the cart before the horse fallacy.

So, to solve the question about where life comes from, we just posit that God does it because we don't have another answer (that you like)? Sounds like an informal logical fallacy to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:00 AM
RE: Question about flood
(16-03-2015 05:03 PM)SevenPatch Wrote:  Exactly. If science were to find evidence of God tomorrow and provide demonstrable evidence for everyone to see that God in fact did create all life

"If science were to find evidence of God tomorrow" Laughat

Im sorry, couldn't help myself on that one.

(16-03-2015 05:03 PM)SevenPatch Wrote:  (thus invalidating abiogenesis), the Theory of Evolution would still stand unscathed as the theory is primarily based on existing life today and works back from there.

I am talking about evolution WITHOUT God...of course, if God exists, he can use whatever method he want to create stuff. If you guys are running around talking about how much of an atheist you are, lets just cut the crap and talk about reality in your warped little brains, and that is evolution without God, which is, dare I say, IMPOSSIBLE.

(16-03-2015 05:03 PM)SevenPatch Wrote:  I have to say, I'm not sure if it is funny or disturbing that someone would think the ToE is drowning.

It is what it is Yes

(16-03-2015 05:03 PM)SevenPatch Wrote:  I'd hate to make fun of someone's ignorance but I would find it amusing how desperate someone would have to be to pretend something is false just to hold onto preconceived beliefs.

I find it amusing how people are so desperate negate the God hypothesis that they will believe in logical absurdities.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:07 AM
RE: Question about flood
(16-03-2015 05:06 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  For corroborating with themselves, you would think that Matthew and Luke could agree on a geneology or birthing story.

They both agree on one very important thing regarding Christ' birth...they both agree with the fact that he was....born.

(16-03-2015 05:06 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  Also, we have moved beyond the Origin of Species and our knowledge has vastly improved life on this planet as a result. What contributions has your religion made to humanity in the last 500 years other than getting lots of people killed?

Last 500 years? I can't speak for other religions, but MY religion has been saying that the universe began to exist for the past 3,000 years!!! While your peers (atheists) were saying that the universe is static and eternal...and what happened, science has now confirmed what us religious folks have been saying for the past 3,000 years.

But that doesn't count, does it?

(16-03-2015 05:06 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  I hope you realize this is literally "I don't know so I'll make some shit up."

More like "Science can't explain the origin of the universe, life, consciousness, and morality...so next up to the plate is God, and he is batting 1000."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:16 AM
RE: Question about flood
(16-03-2015 09:35 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  That's because NAVY SEALS cannot just magic away their problems like an omnipotent deity can.

Dude, that is not even the point, and you know it.

(16-03-2015 09:35 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Except some of us have informed opinions, and others are ignorant uncritical shills. Guess which you are?

Coming on here and finding someone with an informed opinion is like an evolutionist finding a missing link in the "fossil record". Laugh out load

Catch my drift? Big Grin

(16-03-2015 09:35 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You're not judged by your actions, you're judged by your beliefs. Now either people can choose their beliefs, and getting into heaven is as simple as a last minute repentance and belief switch regardless of their actions.

Lets just hope that you will be lucky enough to get a "death bed/cross" conversion like the thief at the cross (Luke 22:32-43).

(16-03-2015 09:35 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Or your beliefs are determined by your knowledge, in which case the vast majority of good people who simply believe the wrong things will get punished; in other words this is a huge miscarry of justice, and given the infinite timescale, makes this system infinitely unjust. Ignoring for an instant that this system involves eternal punishment for thought crimes, it also ignore that the vast majority of people who have never even heard of Christianity get eternal punishment by default because they cannot believe in what they do not know.

Christians serve a a just and holy God...a God that will judge people not according to what they don't know, but based on what they DO know.

(16-03-2015 09:35 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  This system is not fair, meritorious, or just; it is the antithesis of all three. Sound, rational, unbiased people can see this and recognize it for what it is. I imagine you however have been drilled into any number of logically fallacious denials and excuses.

What isn't fair about it...you have the Gospel, you have knowledge of Jesus, God, and salvation...yet you are worried about people that don't know, instead of worrying about yourself. You have the knowledge, and you reject the means of salvation, yet you talk about what is fair, or isn't fair??

Please..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:19 AM
RE: Question about flood
(17-03-2015 09:41 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  Now you're getting it. That's how we make progress, by moving forward one step at a time. We'll never have a model that fully explains the history of reality because then the model would itself be reality. We build up models of reality that make unerring predictions about reality and when we find a disagreement between our model and reality we modify or replace our model and let reality be our guide.

The progress that has been made is pointing out the blunders of Charles Darwin. The progress that HASN'T been made is pointing out how animals began transforming into different kinds of life forms (reptile to bird).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:22 AM
RE: Question about flood
(17-03-2015 09:55 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  So, to solve the question about where life comes from, we just posit that God does it because we don't have another answer (that you like)? Sounds like an informal logical fallacy to me.

So, to solve the question about where life comes from, we just posit that nature does it because we don't like the idea of a transcendent Creator?

Sounds like nature_of_the_gaps informal logical fallacy to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:26 AM
RE: Question about flood
Wasn't Call of the Wild the same person who argued the human brain is made up of or filled with cartilage?

Why does anyone bother to engage him after that? The discussion can certainly carry on around his blatherings.

In other words, ignore his feeble-minded thought vomit and let's really delve into the flood topic on far more intellectual level.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
17-03-2015, 10:33 AM
RE: Question about flood
(17-03-2015 10:26 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Wasn't Call of the Wild the same person who argued the human brain is made up of or filled with cartilage?

Yup, we are the same guy Big Grin

(17-03-2015 10:26 AM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Why does anyone bother to engage him after that? The discussion can certainly carry on around his blatherings.

In other words, ignore his feeble-minded thought vomit and let's really delve into the flood topic on far more intellectual level.

Is the feeble-minded thought vomit of others being ignored? Or is it only the Christian?? Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:47 AM
RE: Question about flood
(13-03-2015 04:43 AM)Typho2k Wrote:  I asked a christian yesterday about how Noah and his animals could survive the altitude of 8000m and the oxygen problems.

He said "The sea could be at different heights/levels at different parts of the world as you don't need 8000m with water to cover England as an example."
"There can be local floods without other countries being flood, too."

Is this a valid arguement?
Could the waterlevel be different at different places in the world and therefore eliminating the altitude arguement?

Going back to OP, if that were true then one might suggest some areas only had a few extra feet (or less) of water, hardly enough to kill a person. Which actually goes back to the whole most cultures have a flood myth, in areas prone to flooding. Just like other cultures where volcanos are more an imminent threat have myths about those.

Either way, the bible would be incorrect that all "life" was destroyed.

Why doesn't anyone ever bring up the fact regardless of how large or small the "flood" event was, it's far more likely the ark wouldn't have survived at all? This isn't like gently pouring water into a vessel, there would be storm conditions. Flash floods are devastating, trees, debris.

Without even getting the challenge of added weight or ballast, carnivores along side other animals they'd want to eat and atrophy that would occur naturally in captivity. The ark itself would have sank like a stone.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Momsurroundedbyboys's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: