Question about the flood

[Bible Highlighter]

So what did you mean by "...Christians who aren't meeting your expectations...?"

The Christians who don't meet my expectations are "Bible-believing" Christians. Your mileage may vary.

Prosperity preachers, Christians who think porn is not a grievous sin, liberal Christians who think many of God's stories are fairy tales, Universal Salvationists, etc.


...

 

[Speedwell]

Prosperity preachers, Christians who think porn is not a grievous sin, liberal Christians who think many of God's stories are fairy tales, Universal Salvationists, etc.


...

I am more concerned about Christians who promote an egregious right-wing political agenda because they have been persuaded that it is "Biblical," Christians who tolerate the Klan and other such groups, who think that the Civil War is something the South should be proud of, Christians whose morality is largely based on perverted and inaccurate ideas about human sexuality...

 

[Subduction Zone]

Its well documented:
2 Corinthians 2:17 Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God
for profit. ...

Revelation 1:2 who testifies to everything he saw--that is, the the word
of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. ...

Colossians 1:25 I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to
present to you the word of God in its fullness ...

2 Corinthians 4:2 Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception,
nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by ...

1 Peter 1:23 For you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable,
through the living and enduring word of God. ...


Bible Search: Word of God

The same sort of fail as in the previous post that tried to substantiate their claim. You are conflating the Bible with the "word of God" when you have shown no reason to assume that it is at all.

It would help if you understood the history of the Bible a bit. It did not appear out of nowhere fully written.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You must not understand what "faith" means...it appears you think it is simply acceptance of something or things for which there is no indication. Like as if someone believed there really is a rabbit named Bugs or that life arose on its own from dead matter.

No, I understand "faith" quite well. You are the one that appears to be confused here. You use poor excuses to accept the Bible. You have not put it to the test. But then the writers of the Bible knew that it would fail tests which is why you are told not to.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Prosperity preachers, Christians who think porn is not a grievous sin, liberal Christians who think many of God's stories are fairy tales, Universal Salvationists, etc.


...

Why do you think that porn is such a "grievous sin"? It clearly is not. Perhaps you could not handle it, that does not mean that it affects everyone badly.

Here is a related example. I personally do not like marijuana. I tried it in college but I did not like how long it took to get it out of my system. Yet I also know that not everyone has the same reactions. When the legalization vote came in my state I realized that there were more evils form keeping it illegal than would result from legalization. I voted for legalization. It has been legal for several years now and the state has not suffered.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I would be careful of projecting your own failings as an atheist onto others.

That is surely not a nice thing to say. I do not have these failings as you imply.

But it is common for atheists to see no harm in these things because there is no such thing as Absolute Morality in their world view.


...

 

[Speedwell]

The divine inspiration of scripture (and whatever various groups of Christians think that means) is entirely a faith-based and unfalsifiable proposition. "...it is simply acceptance of something or things for which there is no indication."

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is surely not a nice thing to say. I do not have these failings as you imply.

Atheists do not have those failings either. It is much more likely that you do have those failings. That is a typical tactic of those that want to make another side look bad.

But it is common for atheists to see no harm in these things because there is no such thing as Absolute Morality in their world view.


...

Please, you don't have "Absolute Morality" either. You simply do not realize that.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

We've had whole threads here about the supposed flood. There are multiple independent lines of evidence that it couldn't have happened, and considerable evidence pointing to regional flooding as the most likely origin of the story. The reasons you provided are poor quality propaganda - I'd take them back and get a refund.

It has nothing to do with the evidences whatsoever. You reject the evidences out of hand out right before you even start because of your world view.

Ah, no. Most of those allow considerable variation, and some are simply stunningly ignorant - for example, the oxygen in the atmosphere was produced by early anaerobic life and went from almost zero to 35% in the Carboniferous, and has since dropped to around 21%. And saying that 'Earth is at the right age to support life' is like a puddle marvelling how well the pothole fits it.

There are some good fine-tuning points to be made, but for some reason you didn't mention them.

Wait - were those 20 just a joke ? If so, I did laugh, but I also thought you were serious, so you got me.

The evidence of just two of these things is all it takes to refute you. But I provided 20 that makes it a landslide of a case against what you believe. But you cannot see it because you do not want to see it. The only way you are able to see if you repent and accept Jesus Christ as your Savior by God's Word. So I would encourage that you do this right away so you can see where I am coming from.


...

 

[Subduction Zone]

It has nothing to do with the evidences whatsoever. You reject the evidences out of hand out right before you even start because of your world view.

Projection again, furthermore you do not understand what is and what is not evidence.

The evidence of just two of these things is all it takes to refute you. But I provided 20 that makes it a landslide of a case against what you believe. But you cannot see it because you do not want to see it. The only way you are able to see if you repent and accept Jesus Christ as your Savior by God's Word. So I would encourage that you do this right away so you can see where I am coming from.


...

No, you provided a list of PRATT's. You did not provide any evidence. I explained to you why your "seashells on mountaintops" was pure ignorance.

You really should learn what evidence is. The concept will make you a better debater.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I am more concerned about Christians who promote an egregious right-wing political agenda because they have been persuaded that it is "Biblical," Christians who tolerate the Klan and other such groups, who think that the Civil War is something the South should be proud of,

You will get no argument out of me (on this one). But it does not undo the other false beliefs that certain self professing Christians hold to that I have mentioned. They are just as equally wrong and should be equally condemned. Just because one group appears to be more prominent does not mean we should care less about others who are believing falsely.

Christians whose morality is largely based on perverted and inaccurate ideas about human sexuality...

Like what?


...

 

[Speedwell]

Like what?


...

Like that homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice." But we ought not to get into that issue in this particular forum.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Projection again, furthermore you do not understand what is and what is not evidence.

No, you provided a list of PRATT's. You did not provide any evidence. I explained to you why your "seashells on mountaintops" was pure ignorance.

You really should learn what evidence is. The concept will make you a better debater.

I am great at providing evidence when I think evidence will count and or matter. Most of my discussions are with Christians and not atheists. When I prove my case with Christians on various beliefs, I prove my case with lots and lots of Scriptural evidences (i.e. verses). In your case, it is not going to help you to provide evidences to back up God's Word. Your mind is already made up before any evidence is considered objectively. Oh, and yes. I have provided many evidences before that back up God's Word. Atheists have scoffed at this evidence many times. I am not expecting it to change your mind. Only those who are seeking God and His Word as being true will be open to such evidences. So I have learned that such an approach is not going to help you unless you are truly seeking the truth. The way to seek the truth is through Jesus Christ. So repent now and accept Him as your Savior.


...

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

There was no flood. That is the simplest answer. It is a morality tale at best.

Modern archaelogy has discovered down below the main soil strata in the Middle East there is a thick layer of clay. Pottery and other artifacts have been found above the layer, but nothing has been found below it. What has been suggested is that at some time in the history of the region, there was a catastrophic flood that swept everything away. Also, in Turkey, a large boatlike shape has been found that has the exact specifications as described for the Ark. Within the structure, fossilised wood has been discovered, stones with holes through them have been seen nearby that served as anchors. There is enough evidence at the site that shows that the structure was a large boat that was constructed of wood that fossilised over thousands of years. Also, sea shells have been discovered in mountainous places where no seas have ever reached, which suggests that at one stage in the world's history the region was flooded by sea water that contained the shells.

Researchers have studied the ancient Mandarin language which has never changed from Bible times, because China was isolated from the rest of the world. It is a picture language and upon close examination of the characters, many depict events that happened in early Bible times as far back as the tower of Babel. This means that the ancient Chinese, when they produced the first written version of their language, they based it on events that they knew and experienced from ancient Bible times.

More and more archaelogical discoveries are providing the ancient accounts of the Bible quite true. The latest one is the discovery of the site of Sodom and Gomorrah where the shapes on the landscape show that before subjected to great heat, were man-made structures. Also, the remains of chariot wheels were found at a location in the Gulf of Akabar that shows the destruction of the Egyptian army after the nation of Israel crossed the Red Sea after it parted. This shows that the "sea of reeds" where some believed that Israel passed over in 10 inches of water, is nonsense because there is no evidence of the Egyptian army being drowned there, and who in their right mind could believe that the whole Egyptian army drowned in 10 inches of water anyway? But the evidence in the Gulf of Akabar, and the site of a mountain with a blackened, burned top, and the remains of a large square tabernacle, and a fence which was erected to keep the children of Israel away from the mountain, plus a large split rock with the remains of a water course, where the rock was spit and water flowed out, is much more believable than the unsubstantiated dribble of those who explain Bible stories as just morality tales.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am great at providing evidence when I think evidence will count and or matter. Most of my discussions are with Christians and not atheists. When I prove my case with Christians on various beliefs, I prove my case with lots and lots of Scriptural evidences (i.e. verses). In your case, it is not going to help you to provide evidences to back up God's Word. Your mind is already made up before any evidence is considered objectively. Oh, and yes. I have provided many evidences before that back up God's Word. Atheists have scoffed at this evidence many times. I am not expecting it to change your mind. Only those who are seeking God and His Word as being true will be open to such evidences. So I have learned that such an approach is not going to help you unless you are truly seeking the truth. The way to seek the truth is through Jesus Christ. So repent now and accept Him as your Savior.


...

No, as I said you simply do not know what evidence is. By the way, not knowing the plural of evidence is a bit of a clue.

When I point out your errors it has nothing do with whether or not I am an atheist. That is just a weak excuse of yours. If you want to claim that the Bible is "God's Word" you need a lot more than verse that do not even indicate that they are talking about the Bible. Once again, you should learn the history of the Bible. What you call "God's word" was determined to be so by the early Catholic church. What makes Luke "God's word" but not Thomas?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Modern archaelogy has discovered down below the main soil strata in the Middle East there is a thick layer of clay. Pottery and other artifacts have been found above the layer, but nothing has been found below it. What has been suggested is that at some time in the history of the region, there was a catastrophic flood that swept everything away. Also, in Turkey, a large boatlike shape has been found that has the exact specifications as described for the Ark. Within the structure, fossilised wood has been discovered, stones with holes through them have been seen nearby that served as anchors. There is enough evidence at the site that shows that the structure was a large boat that was constructed of wood that fossilised over thousands of years. Also, sea shells have been discovered in mountainous places where no seas have ever reached, which suggests that at one stage in the world's history the region was flooded by sea water that contained the shells.

Researchers have studied the ancient Mandarin language which has never changed from Bible times, because China was isolated from the rest of the world. It is a picture language and upon close examination of the characters, many depict events that happened in early Bible times as far back as the tower of Babel. This means that the ancient Chinese, when they produced the first written version of their language, they based it on events that they knew and experienced from ancient Bible times.

More and more archaelogical discoveries are providing the ancient accounts of the Bible quite true. The latest one is the discovery of the site of Sodom and Gomorrah where the shapes on the landscape show that before subjected to great heat, were man-made structures. Also, the remains of chariot wheels were found at a location in the Gulf of Akabar that shows the destruction of the Egyptian army after the nation of Israel crossed the Red Sea after it parted. This shows that the "sea of reeds" where some believed that Israel passed over in 10 inches of water, is nonsense because there is no evidence of the Egyptian army being drowned there, and who in their right mind could believe that the whole Egyptian army drowned in 10 inches of water anyway? But the evidence in the Gulf of Akabar, and the site of a mountain with a blackened, burned top, and the remains of a large square tabernacle, and a fence which was erected to keep the children of Israel away from the mountain, plus a large split rock with the remains of a water course, where the rock was spit and water flowed out, is much more believable than the unsubstantiated dribble of those who explain Bible stories as just morality tales.

I stopped reading this unsubstantiated babble when I came to the joke about finding the Ark in Turkey.

Try again.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

That is surely not a nice thing to say. I do not have these failings as you imply.

It was you that implied them:

"Atheists swear, view porn, hate, murder, celebrate in sinful things with no remorse. I used to be an atheist, and there were many sins I had to repent of."​

But it is common for atheists to see no harm in these things because there is no such thing as Absolute Morality in their world view.

'Absolute Morality' has been a problem since before the The Euthyphro dilemma, over 400 years BC.

Not having 'Absolute Morality' doesn't mean no morality. There are universal fundamentals of morality (some shared even by other animals), because they promote social flourishing, cooperation, and survival; i.e. they have a selective advantage in evolutionary terms.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I stopped reading this unsubstantiated babble when I came to the joke about finding the Ark in Turkey.

Try again.

Have a good, open minded, look at the website and consider the evidence produced. You might not believe it after that, and I would respect that. It just so happens that I do believe it. You can use Google to find the website.

There is an increasing number of modern scientists who are making discovery after discovery that the Biblical history is true. Scores of scientists are now showing that evolution is just a theory and will always remain a theory which has been adopted as a "religion" by those who don't want to accept the Biblical account. It actually takes more blind faith to believe in evolution that it takes to believe the Biblical Genesis account.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Have a good, open minded, look at the website and consider the evidence produced. You might not believe it after that, and I would respect that. It just so happens that I do believe it. You can use Google to find the website.

You provided no link. And please, when people claim that a fairy tale is true they have no grounds to complain when people laugh at their bogus sources. If your links site Ron Wyatt at all please note, even other Christians know that that man is a fraud.

ETA: Do not bother. I found far too many claims that came straight from the fraud Ron Wyatt. Seriously dude, when some uneducated bozo claims to have found countless finds that real archaeologists could not find in hundreds of years of professional searching it should give you pause.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

You provided no link. And please, when people claim that a fairy tale is true they have no grounds to complain when people laugh at their bogus sources. If your links site Ron Wyatt at all please note, even other Christians know that that man is a fraud.

ETA: Do not bother. I found far too many claims that came straight from the fraud Ron Wyatt. Seriously dude, when some uneducated bozo claims to have found countless finds that real archaeologists could not find in hundreds of years of professional searching it should give you pause.

NOAH’S ARK | Wyatt Archaeological Research

I know that some accuse Wyatt of being a fraud, but I have studied his website and he does provide evidence as good as any others. It would be easier from some religious historians to accuse Wyatt of being a fraud than to have to rewrite their history books. I have seen absolutely no proof given by those who accuse him of being a fraud that the evidence he produces is fake.