Why we know that there was no global flood.

[Lyndon]

What makes you think it was named Mt Ararat when the Biblical story was written, and according to what I've read online it didn't say Mt Ararat but rather the region of Ararat. Its quite possible Mt Ararat was given its name BECAUSE of the biblical reference, not vice versa.

 

[David T]

.



You are making the same error that Lynden made. One does not need to be a Phd to show that others are in error. This seems to be some extremely strange and backwards appeal to authority. But then so far the flood believers have nothing but trolling.

If you do not understand a concept you should not oppose it. If you discuss the topic you might learn something. Trolling is not discussing.

If you want to play make believe be my guest creationists are good companions. I have stated the evidence that 12 to 15 thousand years ago massive flooding was Common due to the retreat of glaciers. I mean Massive beyond any scale we have today for flooding. These stories, and there are more than one, tell about massive flooding. The text is not remotely explainitory, so it's not even remotely a scientific text at all nor has it ever been. I have had the exact same response from creationists as you are giving me you deserve each other.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What makes you think it was named Mt Ararat when the Biblical story was written, and according to what I've read online it didn't say Mt Ararat but rather the region of Ararat. Its quite possible Mt Ararat was given its name BECAUSE of the biblical reference, not vice versa.

Please you are dodging again. Until you own up to your errors I will just refer you back to that fact that you will not admit your error in regards to Ararat.

By the way, even though you keep stating that you are not a 6,000 year creationist you keep showing that you are very close to being one.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you want to play make believe be my guest creationists are good companions. I have stated the evidence that 12 to 15 thousand years ago massive flooding was Common due to the retreat of glaciers. I mean Massive beyond any scale we have today for flooding. These stories, and there are more than one, tell about massive flooding. The text is not remotely explainitory, so it's not even remotely a scientific text at all nor has it ever been. I have had the exact same response from creationists as you are giving me you deserve each other.

Wait a second was that you that made that bogus claim? I thought that it was Lynden. I may owe him an apology in that regard.

And no, you showed no such thing. You merely made a will supposition that is not supported by the evidence. The average rate of sea level rise was about 1 meter per century. There were Meltwater Pulses when it was more rapid and even those were less than 5 meters per century,. I posted several links that supported that claim. I do not remember you posting any valid links that supported your claim.
And it is to be expected that civilizations along waterways that flood, and most do from time to time, will have some sort of flood myth. If you want to make a claim of evidence you need to do a lot better than that.

 

[Profound Realization]

That's a joke that you apparently like!!! In 1927 about all physicists "believed" that the observer was required to collapse the wave particle event. Today everyone knows that's stupid but it wasn't clear in 1927. So should I go around talking about that as if it's anything? . No.

I suppose if I have a Sunday school church level reading comprehension level of ancient texts then, HELL YES, I would most certainly an atheist and "believe" the text is nonsense. But that would at best be a church level reading of the text from what, a liberty University level? I wouldn't brag about that.

I have ran this by dozens if not hundreds of Christians. I have said" my father thought what was reasoned that the ark had only x amount of space we know factually that all of life could not fit into it due to y dimesions therefore, God does not exist".they laugh. They are not as stupid as the cherry picking that is going on here. I hate defending religion at all, it annoys me.

I suggest extreme caution relying on religion to understand its own texts that's rater impossible, in aggregate, due to morphology of langauge itself. Evolution ever heard of it?

So yea creationists are nuts how is that not "normal"? Anyone who believes the texts are explanatory are out to lunch anyway.. Not only are they not explanatory they were self aware to know that as well as they were told. Do you "believe" like the clearly fruitloop nut job creationists the text is explanatory?

Please explain how explanatory is remotely valid in application to the ancient texts? Since that's exactly how creationists understand it that its An ancient science text? Ha. Btw its 12k to 15k old liberty grad.

Some people think that they are highly intelligent, because they can refute myths.

As you also brought up, they claim that the texts are not literal, and then they refute them as if they are literal. Quite funny.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Some people think that they are highly intelligent, because they can refute myths.

As you also brought up, they claim that the texts are not literal, and then they refute them as if they are literal. Quite funny.

Some people can think logically, some can't and pretend that they can. Now that's funny.

 

[Thief]

Please, don't try to make a myth of your own God, it is bad enough for you already. Most Christians do not take the myth literally. They can see that it is a morality tale. My beef is with Bible literalitsts that try to claim that the Bible has to be true. The story was probably inspired by a real flood, but there was no "Ark". There was not only one family left, the entire Earth was never flooded, there was no need to bring animals on the Ark.

So once again, what is your version of the Ark myth? If you agree that the Bible version is totally unrealistic we can go our merry ways. Otherwise I can explain why your version is wrong.

It may be correct
the story was written at a time when explanation was not the drive
belief and faith were all they had

most of the stories are penned that way

I just saying....the value is not in the proving
and if you lack faith....the lack of proving won't help

I think the story points to a level of action God will take if He is moved to

kind of a fair warning senario

 

[Subduction Zone]

It may be correct
the story was written at a time when explanation was not the drive
belief and faith were all they had

most of the stories are penned that way

I just saying....the value is not in the proving
and if you lack faith....the lack of proving won't help

I think the story points to a level of action God will take if He is moved to

kind of a fair warning senario

"Faith" is not a road to truth. It is simply believing in what one wants to believe when one gets down to it. Now the story may be seen as a morality tale, but it is on the order of a story about Santa Claus. The problem is that in this world there are many Christians that abuse the Bible. They feel that if every word is not true then the Bible is worthless. I have not claimed that, but that does appear to be the beliefs of literalists. What is amazing is the false claims and defenses that people that claim not to be literalists will make up.

 

[Thief]

"Faith" is not a road to truth. It is simply believing in what one wants to believe when one gets down to it. Now the story may be seen as a morality tale, but it is on the order of a story about Santa Claus. The problem is that in this world there are many Christians that abuse the Bible. They feel that if every word is not true then the Bible is worthless. I have not claimed that, but that does appear to be the beliefs of literalists. What is amazing is the false claims and defenses that people that claim not to be literalists will make up.

many truths have no tangible point

for example.....Someone had to be First

 

[Subduction Zone]

many truths have no tangible point

for example.....Someone had to be First

What makes you think that?

 

[Thief]

What makes you think that?

it's a simple line of thought

when you hear a story.....the Flood...the Garden....the Crucifixion....
there may never be a 'point' of proving

it's the effect it has on you that matters

completely disregarding any story.....for lack of proof....
is likely a mistake

 

[Subduction Zone]

it's a simple line of thought

when you hear a story.....the Flood...the Garden....the Crucifixion....
there may never be a 'point' of proving

it's the effect it has on you that matters

completely disregarding any story.....for lack of proof....
is likely a mistake

Simple but wrong. And now you are like the other believers here. Why is it when shown to be wrong believers start making false claims about others.

Once again, what makes you think that someone had to be first?

 

[Thief]

Simple but wrong. And now you are like the other believers here. Why is it when shown to be wrong believers start making false claims about others.

Once again, what makes you think that someone had to be first?

it's a simple line of thought...

Someone had to be First

 

[Subduction Zone]

it's a simple line of thought...

Someone had to be First

Nope, you are just repeating your error now without an explanation. You do not seem to realize that life as we know it is due to the process of evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me help you with the concept. In Spain Latin slowly changed over the years to what we call Spanish today. Was there a first Spanish speaker? Did a Latin speaking mother give birth to a Spanish speaking child?

 

[Thief]

Nope, you are just repeating your error now without an explanation. You do not seem to realize that life as we know it is due to the process of evolution.

I believe in evolution.....
and I believe Man took a sudden redirection

on more than one occasion

and if that simple line of thought is over your head?.....what ever shall we do about this line of discussion?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe in evolution.....
and I believe Man took a sudden redirection on more than one occasion

and if that simple line of thought is over your head?.....what ever shall we do about this line of discussion?

Sorry but you merely posted more nonsense. And when you are the one that appears to be guilty of not being able to think you should never accuse others of having that problem. Let's try to not make this personal.

There is no reason to believe that there was a "sudden redirection" of any sort that I know of. What is your evidence for such a claim?

 

[Thief]

Sorry but you merely posted more nonsense. And when you are the one that appears to be guilty of not being able to think you should never accuse others of having that problem. Let's try to not make this personal.

There is no reason to believe that there was a "sudden redirection" of any sort that I know of. What is your evidence for such a claim?

grew up listening to science

you don't recall the problem of a missing link?

lots of observation of divergence......no bones to be found
and I don't think we will find that rib that Eve was made of

 

[Subduction Zone]

grew up listening to science

you don't recall the problem of a missing link?

lots of observation of divergence......no bones to be found
and I don't think we will find that rib that Eve was made of

There is no "problem of a missing link". That is a creationist concept. You may have grown up with science but it appears that you have not understood it.

I am still waiting for evidence for your claim. Not understanding science is not evidence. And the Adam and Eve story are pure myth so of course we won't find Eve's bones.

 

[David T]

Some people think that they are highly intelligent, because they can refute myths.

As you also brought up, they claim that the texts are not literal, and then they refute them as if they are literal. Quite funny.

Exactly. MYTH, as used and as understood today, is any story outside our story that is not our story, was first introduced into the cultural consciousness by RELIGION!!!!!. So I find the whole thing unaware of even that simple fact. If we are talking about people that unaware, then we are just talking to a creationist, who doesn't have Jesus. One is a doppelganger of the other. it's like two arguing hermit crabs arguing in a tidal pool totally convinced they understand anything beyond the tidal pool totally defining what they know by what they both reference, which is the tidal pool and that's it. talking hermit crabs that's it.