The TRVE history of the Flood...

The "You only have today's rates to extrapolate from" is not simply factually wrong, willfully ignorant and dishonest, it's stupid as well. We have uranium halos; we have the properties of stars, we have fossils, we have the evidence in the rocks, we have genetics including human as well as plant and animal genetics from thousands of years before Adam.No honest person who is not willfully ignorant or totally delusional can deny we see stars at night, can see the composition of stars, can see the nuclear reactions of stars and thus check todays facts against past afacts. Also as Faith has been shown many times in the past there are things like Oklo and we can compare the waste produced there to waste in a modern nuclear reactor and see that today's reactions are the same as they were almost 2 billion years ago.We can look at the wear caused by constant 24/7/365 falling water at thousands of waterfalls to see wear and thus know with a very high degree of confidence that the puny little 40 day and 40 night rain of the Biblical Flood myths could never have created even enough sand to fill a beach volley ball court.

Again Faith, that is not a matter of opinion but rather your continued willful ignorance. All of the things I mentioned are direct witnesses of what happened in the past. Change leaves evidence but your mythology did not.Even the Bible itself is evidence that the Biblical Flood simply never happened.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

They are direct witnesses Faith. They are as good a witness as a hole in the target is a witness that the target was hit.In particular the twin evidence of Oklo and observations of nuclear reactions in stars confirm a time line of not less than 1.7 Billion years.

Granted your mind may be fallen but there is nothing in the Bible to support any fallen mind. That is a product and perversion of some fallen Christian Minds.There is no Fall of mankind in the Bible. First the past is neither undocumented or unwitnessed. Changes leave evidence and that evidence exists even today. In addition the findings that led to the total and complete discarding of Young Earth or the Biblical Flood fantasies are the result of scientist replicating the work of others and testing the results through a variety of methods.The Bible itself shows that the Flood story is myth since it includes two different and mutually exclusive versions.

Which is why it contains not one but two different and mutually exclusive creation and flood myths.So the Bible is the classic example of the witness that keeps contradicting what it just said.That is NOT the definition of a "good witness" but rather of an unreliable at best witness.

I agree Faith which is why I point out when you pervert and misrepresent what the Bible says or try to pretend it is inerrant and without error or not simply written by humans and reflect the beliefs of their time and culture.I try to defend the faith against those who try to make Christians look ignorant and Christianity look stupid.

What is the shape of a canyon without walls? It is a prairie. Not exactly the image of the Grand Canyon.

Exactly Faith. The shape seen at the Grand Canyon is a classic example of what a relatively slow moving river creates over long periods of time as opposed to what is created by either a flood or glacier.Changes leave evidence and that evidence is the witness to what happened in the past.The Grand canyon is simply yet more evidence there was never a Biblical Flood at least during the time the canyon existed.But of course the Bible itself is great evidence that neither of the Biblical Flood myths were ever to be taken as literal since there are two different mutually exclusive folktales as well as absurdities like the green olive branch or the idea that 40 days and 40 nights of rain could actually flood much of anything other than a plain.

Except of course, that is simply not true Faith. Not all the authors of the Bible stories agreed with each other or taught the same doctrine. The fact that there are at least two different flood myths and two different creation myths including two entirely different descriptions of the God Character are clear and compelling evidence that the authors certainly did not agree with each other.

Even when you post the actual text from the Bible it seems you are incapable of being honest about what it says and in fact continue to pervert the Bible.You quotemine taking verses out of context (but of course the men writing the New Testament did that all the time) and add crap in that is simply not there at all.

Please present the Declaration from 606AD that proclaimed the Pope as Antichrist.Faith, you really need to stop posting really silly falsehoods.

So once again you admit you are simply lying. There was no declaration of the Pope as Antichrist in 606AD and in fact it is only some modern Christian Cults that make such silly claims.And it was some guy named Jesus who created the Apostolic Succession which is followed by much of Christianity today whether Roman Catholic, Protestant or Orthodox.And you also again show your ignorance claiming Christianity itself is not and has not always been autocratic. You can't get more autocratic than claiming authority from God. Kinda the same thing King James tried to market as the Divine Right of Kings. You know, the guy that authorized the King James Version of the Bible.

You posted "The RCC is a deviation from the true Church, starting with the declaration of the Bishop of Rome as Universal Bishop (Pope/Antichrist) in 606 AD."You did not say anything about the part in parens being the rantings of nutjobs from over a thousand years later.

Of course. the point is that Christianity has NEVER been a monolithic power. It's been used politically by Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox to build a power base, a political stance, garner wealth and even rarely for humanitarian efforts.The important point is to get folk to stop claiming "this is Christianity" because there are almost no areas where Christians and Christianity are not represented on both sides.

If you had been clearer I would not have pointed out your misrepresentation.I'm sorry if you get your panties in a wad but the reality is that neither Protestant nor Romanist nor Orthodox nor Christian nor atheist have any grounds to claim some moral high ground.And the Biblical Flood still never happened.AbE: And I am not Jar but simply jar.Edited by jar, : see AbE