Archaeopteryx
Wanderer
What evidence exactly? The evidence you've presented seems to suggest that many different cultures have similar myths, not that those myths accurately depict something that actually happened.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I do not know 100% that a flood occurred. All I'm saying is the evidence suggests several cataclysmic events occurred, one being a flood.
Like I said before according to Enoch and the other texts as well as other sources they were nephilimic progeny and those that worshipped them. You are free to believe whatever you want. I am not 100% sure about anything but the evidence does suggest that.
Yes, and don't you find that suspicious that many different religions have a different spin on a very similar story, doesn't it make sense that these stories have been passed down and people have gradually changed it over time?
Yes, and don't you find that suspicious that many different religions have a different spin on a very similar story, doesn't it make sense that these stories have been passed down and people have gradually changed it over time?
According to the texts there was nothing but nephilim and their progeny as well as those that completely worshipped them. Apparently Noahs family etc was the only line that wasn't tampered with by the Nephilim. Interestingly there are over 200 cataclysmic flood stories all over the world that allude to very a very similar situation.
Ruthie only reads and believe the scholars who buy the story and she has either stayed away from the many scholars/historians who will state the bible is a book of theology and not a book of history and has many credibility issues.
Let's face it, the bible itself has been studied mostly by people who are Christian to begin with and have significant bias in how much credibility they put into the story, from a historical standpoint. In fact, many of these scholars and historians, would be blackballed, if they were highly critical of the book, because some of them get a paycheck from a theology institution.
It has only been in recent decades, that this has started to change and the bible and NT specifically, has undergone a more objective, thorough historical method analysis. Bottom line, the majority of properly credentialed NT historians and scholars will say, the bible may have tidbits that are historically credible, but overall, there are many parts that can not be considered historically credible (for many reasons).
Those who choose to believe the story and need to believe the story, will use confirmation bias and pick out the people who tell them what they want to hear.
Stories does not equate to truth Ruthie. Anyone can tell a story, at any time.
To determine whether something as what the bible declares regarding a flood happened, there would be obvious evidence that geologists and other scientists would identify and be able to confirm a flood did indeed occur. Scientists have been looking for evidence of a flood for centuries and no one has found any and they have only discovered, the evidence show that no flood during that time period ever occurred.
I disagree
Then, it would appear you do not require objective evidence to substantiate whether a flood happened, you would believe stories instead, even in the absence of evidence that would be present and easily identifiable if a flood did indeed occur.
That's fine if it works for you and confirms what you need to believe, but I wouldn't expect that your perception would be accurate.
If you were sick, would you believe a story someone told you regarding a disease they thought you had based on what the bible said, or would you go to the doctor and have him or her run objective testing, that would determine whether you had the disease? If the objective testing came back that you did not have the disease, would you still believe you had the disease because a story claimed that you did?
I disagree because I do have evidence for a cataclysm including a flood. I don't rely 100% on myths. You have to look at other things.
I disagree because I do have evidence for a cataclysm including a flood. I don't rely 100% on myths. You have to look at other things.
I disagree because I do have evidence for a cataclysm including a flood. I don't rely 100% on myths. You have to look at other things.
I don't know what you are talking about. Like I said before, I'm not a 100% on anything. I just see a lot of discrepancy.
Since you refer to religious writings, including ones to do with Christianity, you just called Christianity a myth and not a religion.
Oh for Pete's sake Syd, why don't you read a little bit more into what I said. I am referring to the 200 flood myths all over the world. Give me a break. I said I am not 100% sure on the cataclysm, therefore I rely on the flood myths all over the world, archeology, and geology.
Listen, if you are so convinced there is no God, why do you care what I think or believe. I already told you it's your freedom to believe whatever you want. So what do you care what I believe or don't believe? Seriously? I can't prove anything 100% and neither can you. Honestly what do you care?
I enjoy debating.
I enjoy seeing how religious people think.
I also think it's important to have people think about their beliefs, not necessarily change them in any way but to have a good grasp on what they base their lives on.
Oh for Pete's sake, seriously? As if I need a lecture from you? And I'm the one that's self righteous? Really? Woman do you even know me as a person? The answer to that is a big fat NO. It's not your job to get me to "think" about my beliefs and how they affect my life. What kind of arrogant crap is that? As if I haven't gone over the god question my entire life. Oh but I have to "think some more" because I just couldn't possibly be right according to your world view. Do you people get it that it's not cool to force your agenda down people's throats or get them to "think" as if they don't have the capacity already? What the hell is wrong with you people? I have repeatedly told you it's your right to believe however you want. Who gave you the magic god/godless wand and granted you all authority on world religions? What a bunch of sanctimonious crap.
Oh for Pete's sake, seriously? As if I need a lecture from you? And I'm the one that's self righteous? Really? Woman do you even know me as a person? The answer to that is a big fat NO. It's not your job to get me to "think" about my beliefs and how they affect my life. What kind of arrogant crap is that? As if I haven't gone over the god question my entire life. Oh but I have to "think some more" because I just couldn't possibly be right according to your world view. Do you people get it that it's not cool to force your agenda down people's throats or get them to "think" as if they don't have the capacity already? What the hell is wrong with you people? I have repeatedly told you it's your right to believe however you want. Who gave you the magic god/godless wand and granted you all authority on world religions? What a bunch of sanctimonious crap.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?