The Flood

[Contracelsus]

I also believe Satan might have been trying to destroy the line of Seth through angelic/demonic possession/intermarriage. It might even be that prior to the FLOOD such interbreeding was possible. Evolutionists are simply out of the Biblical loop and really do not care to be included. Creationists will simply proceed to do their own investigations and may develope their own theories. At least wonder and investigation will not be dead.

"Wonder and investigation"? How do you do that when talking about angels and demons?

What you have posted here looks just strange. You have developed an entire "fantasy science", with minimal input from any source except some people's possible interpretation of some unknown set of authors' work describing, in terms that look and read just like any myth story in human history, the earliest days of human society.

That isn't "investigation" that's blue-sky conjecture.

It isn't bad per se, but it simply is just your own fantasy hypothesis.

Let's just go with one point of your hypothesis: demon-human intermarriage.

Please describe demons, show us some hard data on demons and their various attributes (other than in myth stories), then explain how demon-human intermarriage could destroy the line of Seth.

Then please provide data in support of the Global Flood.

Then show us how the demon-human intermarriages predate this event.

Then, finally, explain why demon-human interbreeding was not possible after this event, and provide data in support of the likelihood that it is no longer possible.

Investigation is more than just coming up with some wild guesses as to why this or that happened.

Wonder is clearly not dead so long as people have rich fantasy lives to explain their myths.

 

[FishFace]

Don't count on it.

Who's in the minority here ---

or

?

You might thing we yanks don't teach this stuff, but then you have a big pond to cross.

Ho-hoo, so it's racism now, is it? Who'dathunkit!

Anyway, the country isn't relevant here. The last time I checked, approximately 1/3 of the world's population is Christian. The biggest single religion, but a minority overall. You're already losing on the popularity front.

 

[FishFace]

And I'm curious about when King James became the ultimate arbiter of truth and accuracy?

Don't you remember? It fulfills its own prophecies! Although AV doesn't like to say why this is a good thing.

 

[FishFace]

Oh-oh --- are we going to start repeating ourselves? That's an invitation for me to checkmark this thread into cyberspace.

I know the Bible to be true because It was preserved throughout the millennia by Its Author.

And because it fulfills its own prophecies! I mean, if a book predicts something, and then says that that prediction came true, we know the book is accurate, right?
I'm not sure how we know its author preserved it, though... did you ask him?

 

[Vene]

And because it fulfills its own prophecies! I mean, if a book predicts something, and then says that that prediction came true, we know the book is accurate, right?
I'm not sure how we know its author preserved it, though... did you ask him?

In that sense the Lord of the Rings is even more accurate. In the Fellowship Tolkien prophecies that Aragorn will be the king. In the Return of the King it indeed is fulfilled. Amazing how that works. And we know it's true because it was first mentioned at the beginning of the first book and it wasn't until the third book that it actually occurred.

Yes, this is exactly what the mention of Biblical prophecies looks like to a non-believer.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

What is Satan's angelic name?

President Zaphod Beeblebrox I.

 

[Servant222]

If you believe in God, then you view science as simply a way of explaining what God has done; the Universe that God has made.

If this is the case, there should be no conflict between science and religion, and any conflict that does occur is there because of people's folly- either in misinterpreting the Bible or in conducting poor science.

Personally, I find my scientific knowledge helps me to confirm my religious beliefs. I don't have all the answers- either because I don't know enough about the Bible, or I don't understand the science, or I simply don't understand. Just because we don't yet understand something doesn't mean it might not be real.

So it is with the story of the Biblical flood. I agree that there are some very serious problems if one takes a literal interpretation of the flood in Genesis and tries to reconcile it with our scientific knowledge of relevant topics like boat building, geography, and biology.

For example, in Genesis 4 it says:

"Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made."

So a scientist would look skeptically at this and say:

1. Well, there were mountains around, so if they were all covered world-wide, that is an awful lot of water which had to come from somewhere, and then be removed to the same place at the end of the flood.

2. If God wiped out "every living creature", did fish and every other creature that lives in the sea die; sea-living mammals like seals, sea birds, etc. etc.

3. And what about the people that were on boats- fishermen, etc.- were they killed?

4. There would have been huge masses of floating debris- trees, etc. around- would all the living organisms in them- the squirrels, bugs, microorganisms, bacteria, etc. also have died?

So some fundamentalist Christians will go to incredible lengths to try and explain these issues away- just like they did for thousands of years when they believed, based on their interpretation of the Bible, that the earth was the centre of the Universe.

I take a different approach. I look at 2 Peter and say "well, maybe the Biblical flood was more localized- maybe it was something caused by first closing, and then re-opening of the Straits at Gibraltar, something we didn't even comprehend until the 1960's when plate tectonics was understood. That would certainly have created a massive flood that would have inundated the entire Mediterranean Basin, the cradle of civilization at that time.

I'm not saying this is the answer- maybe there are other plausible explanations- the notion that the flood happened when the earth was flatter, before plate tectonic had made much headway in terms of mountain building.

What I am confident of is that once we have all the answers, if that ever happens and we really still want to know, there will be no conflict between the Biblical descriptions of the flood, and what really happened.

 

[Contracelsus]

What I am confident of is that once we have all the answers, if that ever happens and we really still want to know, there will be no conflict between the Biblical descriptions of the flood, and what really happened.

You have a very rational and reasonable approach to the issue.

However, I have to ask why the Bible need even be predicted to align perfectly with the science?

The only reason it would need to be in total agreement with the science is if it is somehow necessary that it be literally true.

I know that goes against what you posted, but unless one needs some "literal truth" to all the bible stories, even if it is derivative or "on a technicality" of some subtle language shift or some such, then there is no reason to assume the stories like the Flood have any reality.

The spiritual message is apparently the important part, right? But even that is confusing in the philosophy it brings up (can God "repent" of creation? Can God be surprised by the actions of Creation? etc.)

It seems to me that, at least in the case of the Noah Flood, that the reasons Fundamentalists cling to its literal truth is because Jesus appears to have believed it in Matthew 24:39.

The problems that come in are:

If Jesus believed the Flood, then was Jesus mistaken?
If the Flood was real why didn't it leave any data?

Of course a rational path would be to assume Jesus was speaking using a literary device, much as someone might refer to a Dostoyevski novel in a discussion on right and wrong. Doesn't necessarily mean the novel was truth, but just a good story to represent the important points.

I don't know as it would be necessary for the science to line up with the Bible on all points in order to gain something of spiritual value from the stories.

And I personally don't think it would be necessary to predict that at some future time we'll find out the way the stories were actually written really does line up with what the data says. That puts undue pressure on the Bible to be perfectly accurate in all ways. No wiggle room means no room for any errors, no matter how small.

And to predict that eventuality means that the Bible will always be beyond any questioning until all the facts are in (a virtual impossibility owing to the nature of reality). So does the Bible have to prove itself? Or do we just give it a pass and assume it will be true at some later time?

That second choice is what is hard for atheists to get their heads around.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

But I did give you an answer, did I not?

You responded to my query, that much is true. But was it an answer? That we must discuss.

Evil is there in our psyche, just like everyone- atheist or believer- has a sense of right and wrong, which to me is powerful evidence of the presence of God.

I agree with you in that I think all people have a moral code, but I don't think this can be considered as evidence for deities (yours or otherwise) because:

1. Moral codes differ from person to person.
2. Evolutionary theory explains preciesly why common ethical phenomena exist in humans (altruism, caring for the young, patriotism/nationalism, etc).

I am convinced that within all males lurks a murderer and an adulterer. For most of the us, we can control these urges, or society provides inhibitions on their expression.

But when the constraints are removed- for example, when order in a society breaks down because of revolution, then those who have less control over these evil urges- that is, do not have the Holy Spirit to keep them from doing evil, come out of the closet and rape and kill.

With all due respect, this simply isn't true. Consider that, in the US:

• Atheists make up 13.2% of the general population , and 0.209% of the prison population.
• Christians make up 76.5% of the general population, and 83.9% of the prison population.

If your hypothesis is correct, then why are those 'with the Holy Spirit' statistically more likely to commit crimes than those without?

So I believe that is why God allowed the flood to happen- He saw a group of people who had lost all sense of morality, and who rejected the guidance of the Holy Spirit to help them steer away from evil.

Why a Flood? Why not manifest as Jesus and save their sins, rather than brutally murder them all?

 

[Split Rock]

I also believe Satan might have been trying to destroy the line of Seth through angelic/demonic possession/intermarriage. It might even be that prior to the FLOOD such interbreeding was possible. Evolutionists are simply out of the Biblical loop and really do not care to be included. Creationists will simply proceed to do their own investigations and may develope their own theories. At least wonder and investigation will not be dead.

"Welcome to Fantasy Island!" -Mr. Roarke.

Hey LN... are you going to try to test your ideas by mating with a demon? I'll volunteer for the angel-mating.

 

[LittleNipper]

"Wonder and investigation"? How do you do that when talking about angels and demons?

What you have posted here looks just strange. You have developed an entire "fantasy science", with minimal input from any source except some people's possible interpretation of some unknown set of authors' work describing, in terms that look and read just like any myth story in human history, the earliest days of human society.

That isn't "investigation" that's blue-sky conjecture.

It isn't bad per se, but it simply is just your own fantasy hypothesis.

Let's just go with one point of your hypothesis: demon-human intermarriage.

Please describe demons, show us some hard data on demons and their various attributes (other than in myth stories), then explain how demon-human intermarriage could destroy the line of Seth.

Then please provide data in support of the Global Flood.

Then show us how the demon-human intermarriages predate this event.

Then, finally, explain why demon-human interbreeding was not possible after this event, and provide data in support of the likelihood that it is no longer possible.

Investigation is more than just coming up with some wild guesses as to why this or that happened.

Wonder is clearly not dead so long as people have rich fantasy lives to explain their myths.

Actually, evolution is secular fantasy science. One must choose what side one is going to cling too... The Bible is real to me. Evolution is pretend science.

 

[LordTimothytheWise]

ahem.

Then please provide data in support of the Global Flood.

I second this.

 

[Split Rock]

Actually, evolution is secular fantasy science. One must choose what side one is going to cling too... The Bible is real to me. Evolution is pretend science.

"Hey boss... what is her fantasy?" - Tattoo

 

[Servant222]

I agree with you in that I think all people have a moral code, but I don't think this can be considered as evidence for deities (yours or otherwise) because:

1. Moral codes differ from person to person.
2. Evolutionary theory explains preciesly why common ethical phenomena exist in humans (altruism, caring for the young, patriotism/nationalism, etc).

Ah- and that is a problem for an atheist- their moral code is no more right or wrong than anyone elses. So if one atheist believes that ritual killings are O.K., far be it for another atheist to protest that this is wrong. I maintain that the moral code that the Holy Spirit has implanted in our brain provides a universal standard- killing is wrong, stealing is wrong, etc.

Evolutionary theory may explain why a species cares for its young- those that didn't, tended to die out. But as for other ethical phenomena, I'm not so sure- wouldn't the law of the jungle prevailed, for example?

With all due respect, this simply isn't true. Consider that, in the US:

• Atheists make up 13.2% of the general population , and 0.209% of the prison population.
• Christians make up 76.5% of the general population, and 83.9% of the prison population.

If your hypothesis is correct, then why are those 'with the Holy Spirit' statistically more likely to commit crimes than those without?

I would suggest these statistics are suspect- where did you get them anyway? Like, about 85-90% of human beings admit to believing in a Supreme Being- but only a small percentage are Christians that actually practice what they preach.

Why a Flood? Why not manifest as Jesus and save their sins, rather than brutally murder them all?

Good question- and I don't have an answer. I put that sort of question into the same bin as those concerning why children are killed in wars, die of cancer, etc. etc.

 

[LittleNipper]

"Welcome to Fantasy Island!" -Mr. Roarke.

Hey LN... are you going to try to test your ideas by mating with a demon? I'll volunteer for the angel-mating.

There are somethings that are very beyond mortal man. That is why GOD reveals bits and pieces and honestly those that choose to believe otherwise will----no matter what GOD had/has to say. GOD in HIS wisdom already knows this sad fact.

 

[Naraoia]

President Zaphod Beeblebrox I.

If I were drinking tea I would've spilled it right on the keyboard now

 

[Contracelsus]

Actually, evolution is secular fantasy science. One must choose what side one is going to cling too... The Bible is real to me. Evolution is pretend science.

But you missed the point. There is data in support of evolution. There is data in support of all the mechanisms of evolution (genetics and DNA etc.)

But there is no data in support of angel and demon interbreeding programs with humans.

Are they in the same species? Were they before the flood but not after? Doesn't that mean ONE Of them evolved into a different species and can therefore no longer interbreed as you propose they could before the Flood?

What data do you have for this?

 

[LittleNipper]

ahem.



I second this.

Fossils.

 

[Contracelsus]

There are somethings that are very beyond mortal man. That is why GOD reveals bits and pieces and honestly those that choose to believe otherwise will----no matter what GOD had/has to say. GOD in HIS wisdom already knows this sad fact.

Are you saying God knows that some will never come to him? And that is sad? I assume it is sad to God? Does God like being sad? Because God could remedy the situation very quickly and no one, not one soul, would ever have to suffer eternal torment.

Not one.

It's all in God's hands. Unless his hands are tied by something more powerful than God.

 

[LordTimothytheWise]

Fossils.

The fact that fossils exist supports absolutely nothing. it is how the fossils are organized that one must examine. Even AIG admits the simple to complex all the way up the geologic column.