The flood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-01-2011, 10:37 AM
RE: The flood
(07-01-2011 05:26 PM)Kikko Wrote:  Although I think discussion with you isn't going anywhere, I'd still like to see your response to this one thing, so I'll repost it just to remind you.
________
me Wrote:
you Wrote:Psalm 104:6-9.

Psalms are songs made by people. You claim that the topography of the earth was very different before than after 'the flood' and defend that claim with a part of a psalm. In one or two psalms it is said that the earth is established and unmovable, so do you agree that the earth is fixed?
________
The Bible is intended for everybody, including those who don't have our modern scientific knowledge. If God had revealed that the earth was actually a globe in space this would have caused many people to reject it because they could see for themselves that this wasn't true. Knowing about God is more important than correct knowledge of science, so the Bible describes the earth and celestial phenomena not as they actually are but as they appear to people. This is why the Bible describes the earth as stationary and speaks of the sun rising and setting. We still use terms such as sunrise and sunset today even though we know they aren't literally true because this is the easiest way to describe what is happening.

(08-01-2011 08:23 AM)ashley.hunt60 Wrote:  Yeah, I feel that a dog chasing his tail is being more productive than us right now. I think this guy might be a troll. That, or incredibly delusional/brainwashed.
I think that brainwashed is a good description of my condition. I have spent a lot of time studying the Bible and one thing the Bible does is cleanse people's minds from the effects of sin. But it hasn't made me delusional. It has helped me to see things as they really are.

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2011, 04:06 PM
RE: The flood
(08-01-2011 10:37 AM)theophilus Wrote:  The Bible is intended for everybody, including those who don't have our modern scientific knowledge. If God had revealed that the earth was actually a globe in space this would have caused many people to reject it because they could see for themselves that this wasn't true. Knowing about God is more important than correct knowledge of science, so the Bible describes the earth and celestial phenomena not as they actually are but as they appear to people. This is why the Bible describes the earth as stationary and speaks of the sun rising and setting. We still use terms such as sunrise and sunset today even though we know they aren't literally true because this is the easiest way to describe what is happening.

So, if god is willing to say a few white lies in order to procreate belief of himself, is it not plausible that god said some other little white lies, such as the 6 day creation? And I've noticed that you use "Maybe", and "Could be". I just want to you to try to be intellectually honest. Don't believe in the idea that makes what you want to believe more believable.

And going back to the sources argument you had earlier. I'm not sure if someone else made this point, but you commented that atheistic/evolution based sources are biased towards atheism/evolution. But, creationism based sources are just as biased. So, if you have two unreliable, biased sources, wouldn't it be most intellectually honest to go with neither and humble yourself by saying you don't know?

I'm trying to work from your perspective here, and I think that you need to investigate all sources. Read from AnswersInGenesis, but also go to TalkOrigins. Watch some debates, not from a Christian perspective, but from the perspective of a curious thinker. I've done similar things several times, where I set aside everyone that leads me to be an atheist, and attempt to find god. It's investigation of the other side, and it's healthy for a bright mind. If you are right, than the worse thing that could happen is that you understand out viewpoint better.

I don't believe Jesus is the son of God until I see the long form birth certificate!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2011, 04:28 PM
RE: The flood
I'd just like to add something here theophilus.

"If God had revealed that the earth was actually a globe in space this would have caused many people to reject it because they could see for themselves that this wasn't true."

the world bbeing round isn't something new, the Greeks knew this fact and it was a Greek man who first measured the circumference of the earth. Saying no one would have believed it is an outright fabrication of the truth, and your God would have known this. So why tell a lie if there were people who would believe and understand the truth? why not tell the truth and let honesty and understanding spread instead of disinformation and censorship of new ideas?

Hey brother christian, with your high and mighty errand, your actions speak so loud, I can't hear a word you're saying.

"This machine kills fascists..."

"Well this machine kills commies!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2011, 04:52 PM
RE: The flood
I think that brainwashed is a good description of my condition. I have spent a lot of time studying the Bible and one thing the Bible does is cleanse people's minds from the effects of sin. But it hasn't made me delusional. It has helped me to see things as they really are.
[/quote]

Actually, when it comes to anything about science and religion, your thinking is extremely delusional. Your arguments are flawed to the point of being rediculous, and you can't see that at all. Every time you post, you remind me why religion is dangerous. It is run by people who place fiction above facts, and believe that they are right. That is humanities greatest failing.

When I find myself in times of trouble, Richard Dawkins comes to me, speaking words of reason, now I see, now I see.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2011, 08:43 PM
RE: The flood
(06-01-2011 11:50 AM)theophilus Wrote:  All scholars have proven is that there are many stories of a flood. They can't prove that the Bible version came from the other stories. As I pointed out in a previous post the fact that so many culture have myths of a flood suggests that there must have been some historical basis for them.

Riiiiight.... It couldn't be because humans tended to live near water for their survival, or that they did not have the means to control the seasonal flooding of rivers, or that they did not know why the rivers flooded so often. It couldn't be that they made up stories of an angry, irrational god who punishes them for not worshipping him/her/it correctly by flooding their homes.

Remember that the flood story tradition came out of Mesopotamia, literally "between the rivers". Rivers and water were very important for our ancestors, and so it would be natural for them to tell (and later, write) stories about them, and to embellish the stories as they were passed down. Ever play the game "telephone" as a kid? Then you'll know how stories can change as they are told over and over.

"Remember, my friend, that knowledge is stronger than memory, and we should not trust the weaker." - Dr. Van Helsing, Dracula
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2011, 12:08 AM
 
RE: The flood
(03-01-2011 12:15 PM)theophilus Wrote:  This shows that before the flood the topography of the earth was entirely different from what it is today. It was much flatter so that the water now found in the oceans covered the earth completely.


Prove it.

Quote:The flood ended when the continents that exist now rose above the rest of the earth's surface.

Prove it.

Quote:The waters didn't have to cover Mt. Everest because it didn't exist then.

Prove it.

Quote:The flood is also the reason for the existence of fossils:

One more time: Prove it. And using the Bible to prove the Bible doesn't count unless you've lost all sense of what the word "evidence" means.
Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2011, 05:40 AM
RE: The flood
Quote:The Bible is intended for everybody, including those who don't have our modern scientific knowledge. If God had revealed that the earth was actually a globe in space this would have caused many people to reject it because they could see for themselves that this wasn't true. Knowing about God is more important than correct knowledge of science, so the Bible describes the earth and celestial phenomena not as they actually are but as they appear to people. This is why the Bible describes the earth as stationary and speaks of the sun rising and setting. We still use terms such as sunrise and sunset today even though we know they aren't literally true because this is the easiest way to describe what is happening.
The all-powerful God couldn't convince people that the earth is not flat and fixed? Please...Tongue
And how do you know this stuff about God?
___________________________________________________________________________
If you don't make some sense in your next post, I'll leave you alone.

Correct me when I'm wrong.
Accept me or go to hell.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2011, 01:41 PM
RE: The flood
(08-01-2011 04:06 PM)ashley.hunt60 Wrote:  And going back to the sources argument you had earlier. I'm not sure if someone else made this point, but you commented that atheistic/evolution based sources are biased towards atheism/evolution. But, creationism based sources are just as biased. So, if you have two unreliable, biased sources, wouldn't it be most intellectually honest to go with neither and humble yourself by saying you don't know?
I know that both sides are biased, but the problem is that while everyone recognizes the bias of those who believe in creation there is a widespread belief that those who believe in evolution are objective. Their bias is more dangerous because it isn't as widely recognized.

On the subject of evolution, I have been on both sides. I was educated in public schools where evolution was accepted as truth and I used to believe in it because I thought that it had been scientifically proven. It was only after I learned that the things I learned in school weren't necessarily true that I came to the conclusion that it wasn't true.

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2011, 02:25 PM
RE: The flood
Evolution is a fact. change over time happens, whether your book says it does or not.
theres a reason why its taught in public schools instead of creation, evolution happens to be factually accurate. do some research, theres a lot of evidence to its validity.

Second I fail to see how something that is factually accurate is biased.
Charles Darwin didn't say "well I want something to prove my position right... I got it, complex things must have come from less complex things Big Grin"

Hey brother christian, with your high and mighty errand, your actions speak so loud, I can't hear a word you're saying.

"This machine kills fascists..."

"Well this machine kills commies!"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2011, 02:27 PM
RE: The flood
Quote:It is the belief that there is no God. Bias is something that is inherent in human nature. We have a tendency to reject anything which contradicts what we already believe. Atheists aren't exempt from this tendency.
You used the bias definition of Atheism rather than the ACTUAL definition. Atheism is non-theistic belief, this can be anybody from a hard-core "there is no chance that there is a God" Atheist to "I don't believe in a God, but I do not deny the possibility that there is one (or many)" Atheist.

However I do not deny that individuals that are atheist are biased, I deny that there is an inherent bias caused by atheism. It simply is not true, because there is no dogmatic belief to cause it. The sooner you understand this the sooner we can actually have an intelligent conversation.

Quote:I know that both sides are biased, but the problem is that while everyone recognizes the bias of those who believe in creation there is a widespread belief that those who believe in evolution are objective. Their bias is more dangerous because it isn't as widely recognized.

On the subject of evolution, I have been on both sides. I was educated in public schools where evolution was accepted as truth and I used to believe in it because I thought that it had been scientifically proven. It was only after I learned that the things I learned in school weren't necessarily true that I came to the conclusion that it wasn't true.

A bias towards information is not a bias. Evolution is based on information, it's an actual theory, not a myth from thousands of years of oral tradition. You do not really have to believe in evolution, you either accept it, or you reject, however since it has evidence to support it, to reject it without information is brainwash and stubborness.

Are you serious? You are going off the public school version of evolution? The whole macro/micro evolution dogma? You have no real understanding of evolution, high school biology is the most depthless class I have ever taken. There is simply no understanding through it. It is because of those with such large bias that this low understanding in biology class occurs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: