Why I don't believe the story of the Great Flood...

[_Themis]

I don't know who you are talking about, but most people willing to witness for the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior, still hold to the reality of the Flood and that Jesus arose from the dead.

Sure, but many of them don't hold to a global flood or young earth. Where is their bias that they would think a global flood never occurred or that the earth is billions of years old?

[_Themis]

After all we must follow the evidence.

We should, but many like you do not when it conflicts with what you want to believe. The evidence against a flood is astronomical. Perhaps that is why so many Christians, especially ones trained in the hard sciences, don't hold to a global flood or young earth. Maybe they think God creating new evidence and hiding a global flood is not something God would really do.

[_Franktalk]

So, based on your premise number one, the no evidence for the Book of Mormon people means....?

Oh how silly you are. Did you not understand what I was saying? I think there are many things done in the last week that we have no evidence they took place. We do have the memory of the events held by some people. Do we toss out those memories because we have no evidence? Do we toss out our own memories? What makes us keep those memories as true even though we retained no physical evidence of the events? Can this be a personal truth that we hold to?

[_SteelHead]

Frank,
are you really comparing last weeks rain to a global catastrophe that is described as killing all the the flesh of the earth, so 99.999999 of all terrestrial biota?

Really?

[_Drifting]

Magic and the supernatural are entirely different. Magic is by man . The supernatural is of God. Magic is explainable. The supernatural is not. Magic is slight of hand, trickery, illusion. The supernatural is very real and brings about change.

What very real change has happened over the last ten years, fifty years, 100 years even, that can be attributed to Gods supernatural power?

Bump for The Nipster...

[_LittleNipper]

I don't know who you are talking about, but most people willing to witness for the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior, still hold to the reality of the Flood and that Jesus arose from the dead.

Sure, but many of them don't hold to a global flood or young earth. Where is their bias that they would think a global flood never occurred or that the earth is billions of years old?

Let me ask you two related questions: How old was Adam when God created him? How old do you imagine Adam appeared when he was created?
I feel strongly that Christians who may be accepting of what you imagine as "scientific knowledge", have totally overlooked this simple revealing revelation. What goes concerning Adam would fit the logic for a perfect ecological system to support Adam and Eve.

[_Themis]

Let me ask you two related questions: How old was Adam when God created him? How old do you imagine Adam appeared when he was created?

He is a mythological figure. He never really existed. It is just one of the many stories Man created on why we are here. They wanted explanations for the world they saw around them. What is sad is that you want everyone to believe stories from women/men thousands of years ago rather then learn from women/men today who have better knowledge and evidence to back them up.

I feel strongly that Christians who may be accepting of what you imagine as "scientific knowledge", have totally overlooked this simple revealing revelation. What goes concerning Adam would fit the logic for a perfect ecological system to support Adam and Eve.

Perhaps you should talk to them and see what they believe and why.

[_bcuzbcuz]

One day a group of Italians wanted Italy in the history books. So they invented the Roman empire. They made up some scrolls and made coins and deposited artifacts all over Europe. It is the biggest lie in history. Or is it?

Last week it rained. I can find no evidence that it rained so now I believe it did not rain.

Last week I drove to the store. I can no evidence I drove to the store. I now believe I did not drive to the store.

After all we must follow the evidence.

Now you are truly rambling. Imaginary Roman Empire, imaginary rain, imaginary shopping? What are going on about?

[Guest]

...

[_subgenius]

a. that the earth forms were identical today as were then.

They mostly were during anytime Man has been around.

prove it...not theoretical...but actual proof...show me conclusive evidence of the date of oldest mountain and then show me conclusive evidence for the date of the first man (or woman if you prefer).

Tidal movements of water are not that much and where they are higher in some areas they are lower in other areas.

It has already been shown that a spherical concept of the earth is basically equal to thinking the earth is flat.
A tidal difference of over 17 meters is actually quite a bit, especially given the actual shape of the earth.

2. Science has already proven that given the amount of water we assume exists today that 98% of the earth would be under water.

Not the earth of the last few millions of years. Why don't you read the articles you want to quote.

the argued point is whether there was, in fact, enough water to even cover the earth, the calculations proposed by the poster did not propose any dates. Sine the poster has no knowledge, proof, or evidence of what formations existed or what behaviors occurred during the flood....well, that really just sums it up. Point is, it is more possible than not that there is sufficient water to cover the "actual" earth...as opposed to your hypothetical "sphere".

This arguably leaves the highest mountain peaks exposed which may be covered in ice, or were not present during flood, as is the case with volcanic activity.

Volcano's again. Most mountains are not formed from Volcanic activity, and many of those that are like the Hawaiian Islands have been around longer then Man.

Prove it/ Please, provide evidence that anything has been around longer than Man. (spoiler alert: you can not)

3. "Mechanism for drainage"? So, you could concede the power of God being able to flood the earth, but propose that this same power could not cause the same waters to recede?....please, explain rationale on that point because it escapes me.

If you are going to go with magic for everything you cannot explain, then go with it. Don't keep making stuff up like it is real science. The real problem is why would God use magic to hide a global flood. Why bring back all those people he supposedly killed.

Your glaring myopia is the only thing that considers it "hidden", you seem to forget that throughout history and across many cultures there is more evidence that way more people think a global flood is NOT hidden. The notion that God has "hidden" the global flood is a minority position.


People, like you suffer form the worst kind of arrogance...the unfounded type....you seemingly forget that your position on this subject, and many others, is actually the minority position. Your position is the one that lacks the most consideration, the most consensus, and quite frankly the least amount of substance. Now, i am not one to tout the merits of the common fallacy for "the bandwagon", but in this case it seems rather appropriate...mainly because history has shown us that people in your position typically end up meeting the same fate. History has not been kind to people such as yourself, and though no one has been burned at the stake for quite some time, we all know that it is not beyond human beings to go retro. So, while you may think yourself some sort of intellectual martyr and that you are embarked upon some grand and noble "crusade" (note the irony), you are actually not much different than most, barring one exception...you seem to be unaware.

But what am i telling you? You are in an obvious position of "knowing it all", which is why you are here...the great savior of all things reasonable and rational....
your posts, and those like them, remind of a saying that floated around the studio when i was studying art as an undergraduate (no, not "dumb as a painter") - it went something like this
"I am not a real art critic but i know what i hate"