How many of you think there was a World Wide Flood? please vote.

[theIdi0t]

Where does it say in the Bible --- literally or figuratively --- that Jesus was a sheep?

He is the Shepherd - we are the sheep.

John 1
[ Jesus the Lamb of God ] The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

Do you stand corrected?

 

[anffyddwyr]

Ya --- here's my "complicated explaining":

• The Bible says it - that settles it.

In fact, that "complicated explanation" is our motto.

When all else fails, Goddidit.
Just wait for AV1611VET to be reduced to 'Goddidit' and you have won.

 

[AV1611VET]

Where does it say in the Bible --- literally or figuratively --- that Jesus was a sheep?

He is the Shepherd - we are the sheep.

John 1
[ Jesus the Lamb of God ] The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

Do you stand corrected?

No --- but you did answer my question. I'll give you reps for that, how's that?

 

[AV1611VET]

When all else fails, Goddidit.
Just wait for AV1611VET to be reduced to 'Goddidit' and you have won.

That's: God did it --- case closed. (See my sig.)

Reps to you, too.

 

[Elduran]

Ya --- here's my "complicated explaining":

• The Bible says it - that settles it.

In fact, that "complicated explanation" is our motto.

Personally I prefer to deal with reality.

 

[theIdi0t]

Anyway, I agree. If the flood isn't true, how can ANY of the Bible be true? Simple answer: It isn't.

Believing something to be literal does not make it true, nor does believing something to be allegorical make it false.

I don't believe Jesus literally was a sheep, so following your line of logic how can I know anything is true if I believe Jesus wasn't literally a sheep?

Let's define truth as the understanding the writer wanted the readers to have. If you believe the writer of Genesis was trying to describe literal events, and tell his readers about science, then you know nothing of the past, and only see through the lens of the present, in the age of science and ignorance.

So if the writer is conveying an allegorical/symbolic story, then believing the story to be allegorical, means we are believing what is true, and if we are taking what is meant to be allegorical as literal we are believing what is false. Returning to the Noah story, the narrative is written in a chiastic structure, with the middle concept being God remembers.

 

[RomanumCatholicam]

We have written thousands and thousands of words for and against there ever being a World Wide Flood,
so don't write anything, just vote.
Do you or don't you think there was a 'World Wide Flood'?

Seems to me that only atheists are voting, a typical problem in Christianity, we don't stand together...

 

[KitsapGirl]

So find a geologist who accepts the global flood because of scientific evidence and not religious belief. Even Kurt Wise has stated that no such geologist exists.

I'd like to know who polled ALL geologists? No one has, so we cannot possibly know that none of them believe in the flood solely on geologic merits.

 

[Jet Black]

Seems to me that only atheists are voting, a typical problem in Christianity, we don't stand together...

you might actually be suprised to learn that there are an awful lot, indeed the majority, of christians who don't think there was a world wide flood either. Heck even people like the Pope doesn't. You should read up on St Augustine, very clever chap who understood things He was a Christian too.

 

[Elduran]

Seems to me that only atheists are voting, a typical problem in Christianity, we don't stand together...

What does atheism have to do with the facts associated with geology? If there was a global flood, it would be represented in the geological column, and we'd be able to see the evidence for ourselves in many places around the world. This evidence doesn't exist.

That's why pretty much the entire relevant scientific community accepts as fact that there wasn't a global flood, christian, atheist or other religious inclination. In fact, the only people who DO believe that there was a flood do so because of religious reasons, and these same people are, for the most part (and this may seem like an overly harsh generalisation), woefully ignorant of the science that backs modern geology.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Seems to me that only atheists are voting, a typical problem in Christianity, we don't stand together...

More nonsense. Being Christian has nothing to do with accepting the massive evidence for an old earth and against the global flood. Check the Affiliation of Christian Geologists or Answer in Creation for examples. Perhaps you should also read Glenn Morton's Story and History of the Collapse of Flood Geology and a Young Earth by Evangelical Christian Davis Young.

 

[Jet Black]

I'd like to know who polled ALL geologists? No one has, so we cannot possibly know that none of them believe in the flood solely on geologic merits.

even Kurt Wise admits there is no physical evidence for a flood. You should look up other creationists like Glenn Morton as well.

 

[KitsapGirl]

I suppose it is not your problem because you have decided long ago to ignore the mass of scientific evidence the contradicts your interpretation of the Bible but it is a problem for flood geologists. Your constant repeating of the phrase "keep looking" doen't help you though because the more science looks the more evidence it finds against the global flood.


No, they interpret it the only way that makes any logical sense. Don't forget that the scientists who first falsified the global flood had been taught that it was a real event. Perhaps you should read Glenn Morton's story. He tried hard to interpret the data he collected in the way he had been taught, that is in terms of a global flood, but found it was impossible. The same was true of David Young and several other geologists who were trained as flood believers. It is only recently that there have been a few (very few) geologists who have been sufficiently indocrinated in the flood myth to hold it against the evidence of modern geology.

Perhaps you could also tell us how to interpret biogeography and biodiversity and the fossil record in terms of a global flood. All the attempts I have seen from flood believers so far lead to complete absurdities and I have seen a lot of them.


That is because you close you eyes to the multiple falsifications of the global flood. But accepting science over religious dogma does not really cause me any problems.

Can you send me a link to these "falsifications" of the flood of Noah? I'd like to read them.

 

[Jet Black]

KitsapGirl: I really suggest reading glenn morton's story there. He has a number of web pages about things that contradict the global flood, and he talks about things from the perspective of having been a YEC and Geologist at the same time.

It's a very interesting read, I've read that several times.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I'd like to know who polled ALL geologists? No one has, so we cannot possibly know that none of them believe in the flood solely on geologic merits.

So find us a geologist who has accepted the flood based on the evidence from geology and not because of their religious belief. I have seen this challenge posted many times and never answered. You might might want to read The Creationists by Ronald Numbers. He documents that until very recently there were no geologists in any of the YEC organization because they kept dropping out after they actually went into the field to study geology. It is only recently that there have been people so thoroughly indoctrinated in YEC that their beliefs could survive actual work in geology. This is the major reason that ICR first instituted its oath of faith.

 

[anffyddwyr]

Personally I prefer to deal with reality.

I am sorry but you are not allowed to do that,
this a Creationist/Christian forum,
please leave reality at the door,
you can bring in as many angels or spirits as you like,
but reality is a definite NO NO and will not be tolerated.

 

[anffyddwyr]

Can you send me a link to these "falsifications" of the flood of Noah? I'd like to read them.

Do you 'genuinely' need someone to tell you the flood story is not true?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Can you send me a link to these "falsifications" of the flood of Noah? I'd like to read them.

Several years ago I collected links to a few of the ones we had discussed under a thread title Falsifications of the Worldwide Flood. Some of the links in those post no longer work but we could discuss any particular subject if you like, maybe salt deposits, or trace fossils or biogeography or the fossil record in general or where the water came from and where it went or the impossibility of 8 people taking care of all the animals or the problem of cramming massive earth impacts and huge volcanic eruptions into a short time frame. You can find quite a few on Glenn Morton's homepage. The web site Creation Science and Earth History also has several and there are many other lists.

 

[KitsapGirl]

Several years ago I collected links to a few of the ones we had discussed under a thread title Falsifications of the Worldwide Flood. Some of the links in those post no longer work but we could discuss any particular subject if you like, maybe salt deposits, or trace fossils or biogeography or the fossil record in general or where the water came from and where it went or the impossibility of 8 people taking care of all the animals or the problem of cramming massive earth impacts and huge volcanic eruptions into a short time frame. You can find quite a few on Glenn Morton's homepage. The web site Creation Science and Earth History also has several and there are many other lists.

Thank you. I'll get back to you after I've read them.

 

[Baggins]

It will be a hot day in Helsinki when that happens.

Friday it is then:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/5day.shtml?world=0034