Creationists are told the flood is true and actually happened,

[HitchSlap]

Show me where the Bible is not 100% accurate and true. You want to build a strawman and then tear apart your own lack of understanding of what we read in our Bible.

People don't rise from the grave... silly goose.

 

[HitchSlap]

Show me where the Bible is not 100% accurate and true. You want to build a strawman and then tear apart your own lack of understanding of what we read in our Bible.

People cannot both fall on their sword and hang themselves... silly goose.

 

[HitchSlap]

Show me where the Bible is not 100% accurate and true. You want to build a strawman and then tear apart your own lack of understanding of what we read in our Bible.

How many horse stalls did Solomon have... silly goose.

 

[HitchSlap]

Show me where the Bible is not 100% accurate and true. You want to build a strawman and then tear apart your own lack of understanding of what we read in our Bible.

Was Jesus' name Emmanuel ... silly goose.

 

[HitchSlap]

Show me where the Bible is not 100% accurate and true. You want to build a strawman and then tear apart your own lack of understanding of what we read in our Bible.

Virgins can't give birth... silly goose.

 

[AV1611VET]

Show me where "it" says that.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Ephesians 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

 

[AV1611VET]

... silly goose.

Wrong gender, chief.

 

[HitchSlap]

Wrong gender, chief.

Sorry, cowgirl.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry, cowgirl.

I know your [claimed] savior is myopic, but I didn't realize it was that bad!

 

[HitchSlap]

I know your [claimed] savior is myopic, but I didn't realize it was that bad!

Well, you were made in his image.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Well You will believe what you choose to believe...even though its not true.

I don't choose to believe it, the evidence supports it and that is all. It's a continuous process we freely observe.

 

[klutedavid]

if the flood was just something to be believed then no evidence is required, but if it actually happened why do they never ask to see the evidence? some even say it happened but you must just believe it happened because God must have cleaned up any evidence, and these are supposed to be reasonable and sensible people, is it any wonder creationists are dismissed as being backward and ignorant?

Hello God's mission.

The flood likely happened but was certainly not a world wide flood. For example, Paul said that the Gospel had reached the whole world in his era. Yet the whole world in Paul's day was the Roman empire, other empires existed that the Gospel had not reached.

Noah definitely existed and so did the ark, think local flood and your problems are solved.

 

[USincognito]

You say that as a plural, but there's only one I know of that is notable, and that is in a desert in Chile... which is close enough to the ocean that if a portion of the ice caps melted, some new whale fossils could form. Not to mention that, again, the height of land masses above sea level isn't constantly the same. Also, all the "whale" fossils there are of extinct species, like walrus whales.

Gingerich found a number of transitional cetaceans fossils in the Sahara. Not sure if enough to be considered a graveyard, but IIRC, it was more than one or two.

 

[pitabread]

Noah definitely existed and so did the ark

There's no evidence of this. And especially given the Ark described in the Bible, it wouldn't likely have been a sea-worthy craft to begin with.

I guess if you really interpreted it loosely and assumed that a guy named Noah got on a boat with some animals at some point in history, that probably happened. But past that... eh.

 

[AV1611VET]

There's no evidence of this.

If you're demanding evidence of Noah and his Ark, you must really be a die-hard scientist.

This is what happens when educatees don't believe in miracles: they stand on the street corners of life, calling for something that isn't going to show up.

And especially given the Ark described in the Bible, it wouldn't likely have been a sea-worthy craft to begin with.

Yes and Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego weren't fire retardant either.

Yet they came out of the furnace with not even the smell of smoke on them.

Remember: amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Hindenburg.

I guess if you really interpreted it loosely and assumed that a guy named Noah got on a boat with some animals at some point in history, that probably happened.

Boat?

Yup ... you're educated alright.

If I had that much education, I wouldn't understand, either.

But past that... eh.

Past what? an unseaworthy boat?

Sorry ... Noah's Ark wasn't a boat.

Not outside the confines* of academia anyway.

* That's an appropriate word!

 

[USincognito]

Interesting view...Snails and clams on top of high mountains. Whale graveyards in the middle of deserts. Trees buried in mud while standing up. Fish and other creatures buried together defying the so called geologic table. Every people on the Earth having flood legends. Proof the flood is only legend? I think not. Science proves the flood happened.

Note to self...

 

[mindlight]

if the flood was just something to be believed then no evidence is required, but if it actually happened why do they never ask to see the evidence? some even say it happened but you must just believe it happened because God must have cleaned up any evidence, and these are supposed to be reasonable and sensible people, is it any wonder creationists are dismissed as being backward and ignorant?

It is easy to believe if you have witnessed a single miracle.

Because then uniformitarian assumptions cannot be applied to what cannot be scientifically tested. Also there are no direct scientific experiments that conclusively prove the date of the flood. Arguments or rationalisations on the basis of what cannot be proved are not conclusive proofs.

 

[PsychoSarah]

It is easy to believe if you have witnessed a single miracle.

I bet. Too bad I haven't witnessed any.

Because then uniformitarian assumptions cannot be applied to what cannot be scientifically tested. Also there are no direct scientific experiments that conclusively prove the date of the flood. Arguments or rationalisations on the basis of what cannot be proved are not conclusive proofs.

Saying that science can't test a conclusion isn't an excuse to keep supporting that conclusion; it's an argument against supporting that conclusion, because the fact that science can't test it means it doesn't leave behind any evidence, just like things that don't represent reality and don't exist.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Too bad I haven't witnessed any.

For some people everything is a miracle, for some people nothing is a miracle. Doctors still like to use the spontaneous healing theory when someone defies the odds and they get better.

 

[mindlight]

I bet. Too bad I haven't witnessed any.

When you consider the conditions that are necessary to support the existence of life and which are present on earth. When you consider the incredible intricacy of our design and how it all somehow comes together to support intelligent creatures like yourself then surely the logical conclusion is that you yourself are better explained as a miracle than an accident.

Saying that science can't test a conclusion isn't an excuse to keep supporting that conclusion; it's an argument against supporting that conclusion, because the fact that science can't test it means it doesn't leave behind any evidence, just like things that don't represent reality and don't exist.

If science cannot prove its conclusions it is not science.

I see layers of rock which. I believe were formed over a year of unanalogous churning and upheaval which I associate with a global flood. I see fossils of fish giving birth or eating each other which would happen if rock layers formed rapidly. It is simply not clear to say that these geological layers were formed over millions of years. It is unscientific to assert this also.