Why did God create us

[Subduction Zone]

yes thats right. The bible account is factual and 100% believable. Gods Word is Truth as Jesus stated
John 17:17 Sanctify them by means of the truth;+ your word is truth

That appears to be just circular reasoning. The follower of the weakest religion in the world could make the same claim about their holy book and they would be just as justified as you are.

The fact is there are parts of the Bible that we know never happened.

 

[Bree]

That appears to be just circular reasoning. The follower of the weakest religion in the world could make the same claim about their holy book and they would be just as justified as you are.

The fact is there are parts of the Bible that we know never happened.

there is plenty of evidence for a worldwide flood

The continents were at one time just 1 land mass... now we have several continents that are split apart just as the account describes. Genesis 7:11 ...all the springs of the vast watery deep burst open

This bursting open of the springs under ground can easily account for the continents breaking apart. Its very plausible.
It certainly not unreasonable to believe the entire earth was covered in water if you accept that the earth was of one piece of land 4000 years ago.

 

[Subduction Zone]

there is plenty of evidence for a worldwide flood

The continents were at one time just 1 land mass... now we have several continents that are split apart just as the account describes. Genesis 7:11 ...all the springs of the vast watery deep burst open

This bursting open of the springs under ground can easily account for the continents breaking apart. Its very plausible.
It certainly not unreasonable to believe the entire earth was covered in water if you accept that the earth was of one piece of land 4000 years ago.

No. Random facts are not evidence. Especially in the world of science. You need to be able to form a testable hypothesis to even begin to have evidence.

For example, yes all of the continents were joined, about 200 million years ago and then they began to break up. Also they were separate before that. For example the Appalachians were formed in the collision of what eventually became North America and what became Africa. That was on the order of 400 million years ago. I would have to look it up to get an accurate date. Those well worn mountains used to be as tall as the Himalayas.

But a mere 4,000 years ago the continents were almost identical to what we see today. And do you know how we know that? Endless evidence that does not contradict itself. There is no scientific evidence for the Flood and endless evidence against it.

I often like to ask if God is a liar. Christians almost always answer "No". Then I like to point out how that negates the possibility of a flood since the Earth has the record of its history written in its rocks. And they tell us that it never happened.

 

[muhammad_isa]

That flood covered a very large area and Noah and family needed their farm animals to live so that they did not then have to walk 100 km with no food etc.
The other animals in the area also would help the land recuperate a lot faster and probably save some from extinction.
It certainly was not pointless for Noah to be there telling everyone what would happen and why..

I totally agree with you..
..but atheists will be atheists .. they just don't want to know.

 

[Bree]

No. Random facts are not evidence. Especially in the world of science. You need to be able to form a testable hypothesis to even begin to have evidence.

you dont need to perform an experiment to know if the flood happened.

You just need to look at the evidence and there is plenty of it.

For example, yes all of the continents were joined, about 200 million years ago and then they began to break up. Also they were separate before that. For example the Appalachians were formed in the collision of what eventually became North America and what became Africa. That was on the order of 400 million years ago. I would have to look it up to get an accurate date. Those well worn mountains used to be as tall as the Himalayas.

But a mere 4,000 years ago the continents were almost identical to what we see today. And do you know how we know that? Endless evidence that does not contradict itself. There is no scientific evidence for the Flood and endless evidence against it.

I often like to ask if God is a liar. Christians almost always answer "No". Then I like to point out how that negates the possibility of a flood since the Earth has the record of its history written in its rocks. And they tell us that it never happened.

science is not absolute and they are always coming up with theories and then someone comes along years later and changes those earlier theories.
Then there are the explanations they give for certain phenomenon, but those explanations could be wrong and are often proven wrong years later.

We have an eyewitness testimony to the flood event, Jesus Christ. He witnessed it from the heavens. He said: “In the days of Noah, . . . the flood arrived and destroyed them all.”—Lu 17:26, 27.
You cannot get any better then someone who actually saw it happen. The scientists of today can read the evidence however they like and put whatever spin on it they want, but they will never be eyewitnesses to the event.

 

[Brian2]

"17 For behold, I will bring a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life under heaven. Everything that is on the earth shall die."

A local flood you say? Your "interpretation" is pretty dubious. However let's keep looking at the narrative of the myth.

"And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. 20 Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground, according to its kind, two of every sort shall come in to you to keep them alive."

From a local flood, a bit OTT? Let's read on then.

"For in seven days I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the ground.”

Just locally though right? Again I'm dubious.

19 "And the waters prevailed so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered."

A typo then right, they meant a few local mountains, under some of heaven, surely?

"Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died. 23 He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens. They were blotted out from the earth."

This doesn't sound like they're talking locally to me?

"13 And God said to Noah, “I have determined to make an end of all flesh,"

With a small local flood, nothing to see here, be over before you know it...

17 For behold, I will bring a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life under the sky. Everything that is on the land shall die."

A local flood you say? Your "interpretation" is pretty dubious. However let's keep looking at the narrative of the myth.

"And of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ark to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. 20 Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground, according to its kind, two of every sort shall come in to you to keep them alive."

"For in seven days I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and every living thing that I have made I will blot out from the face of the land”

Just locally though right? Again I'm dubious.

19 "And the waters prevailed so mightily on the land that all the high hills under the sky were covered."

A typo then right, they meant a few local mountains, under some of heaven, surely?

"Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died. 23 He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens. They were blotted out from the earth."

As you can see with legitimate alternative translation the story was about a local flood, over the land there, the land that was under the sky that Noah could see, and it would cover high hills in that land, and animals and people in that land would be wiped out.

"13 And God said to Noah, “I have determined to make an end of all flesh,"

With a small local flood, nothing to see here, be over before you know it...

God was not speaking to Noah in Gen 6:7, God was mulling it over to Himself. But the next sentence shows that God, while mulling it over was at the same time looking at reasons to not kill all of His creation, and we know that this is what God in the end determined to do,,,,,,,,,,,,,, to not kill all of His creation, and it started with Noah.
Genesis 6:5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. 6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the land, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the land the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.
God goes on to speak to Noah about what He would do and by then He had was going to save Noah and his family.
Gen6:11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the land had become, for all the people on land had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the land is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the land. 14 So make yourself an ark of ...........

Actually if you look up "all" and it's uses in the OT you should be able to see that it did not necessarily mean "all".
But you will no doubt see what you want to see.

 

[Subduction Zone]

you dont need to perform an experiment to know if the flood happened.

You just need to look at the evidence and there is plenty of it.

No, there is not any evidence for it. You do not even understand the concept of evidence when one uses the sciences. Let me post you the definition of scientific evidence:

Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis,

Scientific evidence - Wikipedia.

science is not absolute and they are always coming up with theories and then someone comes along years later and changes those earlier theories.
Then there are the explanations they give for certain phenomenon, but those explanations could be wrong and are often proven wrong years later.

We have an eyewitness testimony to the flood event, Jesus Christ. He witnessed it from the heavens. He said: “In the days of Noah, . . . the flood arrived and destroyed them all.”—Lu 17:26, 27.
You cannot get any better then someone who actually saw it happen. The scientists of today can read the evidence however they like and put whatever spin on it they want, but they will never be eyewitnesses to the event.

Yes, science is always improving. It is always getting more accurate. That is a feature not a bug. There is no built in self correction in the Bible so its flaws are there forever, and it is loaded with them. That is a bug.

And no, Jesus was not an eyewitness, nor are any of the Gospels eyewitness testimony. Jesus only used an adage that was similar to saying "as old as the hills" in that story by an anonymous author. . If you want to claim that he believed in the Flood then you are claiming that he was just a man. And you may be right on that. Jesus was almost certainly just a man. But for him to be God and have all of his knowledge he would also have to know where the Bible is wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I totally agree with you..
..but atheists will be atheists .. they just don't want to know.

You have demonstrated that the opposite is true. What does the Quran say about making false claims about others? Atheists tend to be the ones that want to know no mater what. You on the other hand refuse to even learn the concept of evidence since you appear to be afraid that it would show you to be wrong.

 

[muhammad_isa]

You on the other hand refuse to even learn the concept of evidence..

Get a life .. I've already posted a link to the Cambridge dictionary for the word "evidence".
It is you who want to make everything about science .. your religion

 

[Subduction Zone]

Get a life .. I've already posted a link to the Cambridge dictionary for the word "evidence".
It is you who want to make everything about science .. your religion

Posting al ink does not mean that you know anything. I could post a better link to Wikipedia's in depth article about "scientific evidence". Just because I or you post a link does not mean that one understands the concept. I tried to explain to you what you need to have evidence and you ignored that.

Do you know what apologetics is? It is a dishonest tactic quite often used by the religious where they try to get things to say what they want them to say instead of what they actually say. I have seen that far too often in Christianity. So much so that it is rather obvious that any professional Christian "apologist" is just a Liar For Jesus. It appears that Islam may have the same problem. Try not to use apologetics and read what the sources that you use actually say.

You have been making ad hoc arguments. Since an ad hoc argument is not testable, one just makes lame excuses when parts of it are found to be wrong, it can not by definition have any evidence. This is a science based discussion that we are having about the myth, that is how we know that it did not happen, so you need to follow the scientific rules about evidence to have any. Can you understand that?

And no, science is not a religion. It is a problem solving method. You have a religion. A belief based upon the worst reason possible. Your beliefs are faith based. Mine are not. Mine are evidence based. If the evidence shows me to be wrong I will gladly accept it and change my beliefs accordingly. Your beliefs are based upon faith which means that you have to ignore or distort evidence when it shows you to be wrong.

I know that you do not like Pastafarianism, but you cannot seem to come up with any significant differences between that religion and yours.

 

[muhammad_isa]

This is a science based discussion that we are having about the myth, that is how we know that it did not happen..

You can't know by scientific observation, in the same way that you cannot say that Moses, peace be with him, did not exist with scientific evidence.
It is YOU who want to make everything about science.
You have a theory that the flood could not have happened, because we would have scientific evidence that happened in the past .. and of course, you want it to be the literal account of the Bible .. is there a detailed account in the New Testament?

I don't agree with your "scientific theory".
I don't believe it .. calling your theory a scientific fact is rubbish .. you are just using the concept of the scientific method to bully people.
You arrogantly think that only atheists like you understand.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can't know by scientific observation, in the same way that you cannot say that Moses, peace be with him, did not exist with scientific evidence.
It is YOU who want to make everything about science.
You have a theory that the flood could not have happened, because we would have scientific evidence that happened in the past .. and of course, you want it to be the literal account of the Bible .. is there a detailed account in the New Testament?

I don't agree with your "scientific theory".
I don't believe it .. calling your theory a scientific fact is rubbish .. you are just using the concept of the scientific method to bully people.
You arrogantly think that only atheists like you understand.

Actually you can.

Didn't I give you the example of the claim of a bomb blowing up downtown?

And it does not matter if you "believe" in reality or not. That there was no magical mystery tour of Noah can be demonstrated by using the scientific method again and again. Of course denying science only makes one hypocritical when they use the fruits of it. Such as computers, the internet, most of the food that one eats. The oil that makes one's car go. The list is endless.

And how is trying to have a discussion where one has to use reality "bullying"? That is a new one on me. I know, you want to have your own equivalence of a Quidditch tournament. Sorry, broomsticks don't fly. Noah is a myth.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..Of course denying science only makes one hypocritical when they use the fruits of it..

Like I said, you just assume that anybody who believes in God is somehow ignorant about science.

I studied BSc in Maths and Physics, and Issac Newton studied in Cambridge University.
We aren't all ignorant, you know..

 

[Subduction Zone]

Like I said, you just assume that anybody who believes in God is somehow ignorant about science.

I studied BSc in Maths and Physics, and Issac Newton studied in Cambridge University.
We aren't all ignorant, you know..

You appear to be ignorant about the concept of evidence. In this case it could just be cognitive dissonance. When a cherished belief is threatened all of sudden one cannot reason properly any longer.

 

[Bree]

No, there is not any evidence for it. You do not even understand the concept of evidence when one uses the sciences. Let me post you the definition of scientific evidence:

Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis,

Well there's your problem right there, the account about the flood is NOT a scientific theory. Its a historical account about a past event.

Yes, science is always improving. It is always getting more accurate. That is a feature not a bug. There is no built in self correction in the Bible so its flaws are there forever, and it is loaded with them. That is a bug.

What you call 'flaws' i call truth. Gods word was written as a factual account of human history. It will never change because Gods Word is truth and truth has no need to change.