Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does The Flood Add up?
boolean
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 298 (296996)
03-21-2006 6:40 AM


quote:
--Posit
It seems that in coming up with a secular explanation, they're shooting themselves in the foot. After all, if the story is feasible without resorting to the supernatural, then one need not invoke the supernatural to explain it.
HA! Good point =)
This thread seems to be very quite from the Creationist side. Anyone care to have a swipe at some of the posts so far?

Posit
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 298 (296998)
03-21-2006 6:47 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Posit
03-21-2006 6:26 AM


Here's one rather glaring example where a Biblical quote seems to contradict the assumption immediately preceding it.
From http://www.carm.org/questions/noahsark.htm

Is there enough water to flood the entire earth? Absolutely! If the earth were perfectly spherical the oceans would cover all the land by more than a mile in depth. The biblical account is that it rained for 40 days and nights in which the floodgates of the heavens were opened up as well as the fountains from the earth (Gen. 7:11;8:2). There is a theory known as the canopy theory that states it had never rained on the earth up to the time of Noah and that a mist watered the plants (Gen. 2:6-6). The theory goes on to state that there may have been a heavy cloud or water vapor layer over the entire earth and that it was this canopy of water that became torrential rains during the flood period.
Did the flood cover all the earth? Yes it did. The depth of the flood waters is described in Gen. 7:19 as covering "all the high mountains under the entire heavens."
(text made bold by me)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Posit, posted 03-21-2006 6:26 AM Posit has not replied

boolean
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 298 (297000)
03-21-2006 6:55 AM


HAHA! So it's true. We have underwater Aborigines in Australia ^_^
I also like how that quote says the water was covering "all the high mountains under the entire heavens", and then in the next passage Genesis 7:20 it says
quote:
Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
Man, we must have had some small hills back then

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 298 (297021)
03-21-2006 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by boolean
03-21-2006 12:58 AM


A request, and a comment
First the request.
When you are replying to a message, please use the reply button at the bottom right of the message to which you are replying. That causes an email to be sent to the person to whom you are replying (if requested), and it links up the messages so that you can see to which message you are replying.
Now the comment:
I think part of the reason this thread is not getting much activity is because the thread title is quite broad.
The reason there is not much activity, is that the creationists are choosing to not respond to the arguments in this particular thread.
By the way, there is a peek, also at the bottom right. If you use it, you can see what I typed to produce that quote box.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by boolean, posted 03-21-2006 12:58 AM boolean has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-21-2006 10:15 PM AdminNWR has not replied
 Message 21 by LudoRephaim, posted 03-21-2006 10:27 PM AdminNWR has not replied

LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5084 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 20 of 298 (297152)
03-21-2006 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by AdminNWR
03-21-2006 9:07 AM


Re: A request, and a comment
Hello
I responded to some of the arguments, but these new ones just seem mostly odd. I guess they where replying to me or something? Dont know for sure.
I guess I didn't get any major counters becuase I am not young earth creationist or something LOL.
BTW: Still trying to figure out the quote system. I'll get to it soon though.
Peace.

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by AdminNWR, posted 03-21-2006 9:07 AM AdminNWR has not replied

LudoRephaim
Member (Idle past 5084 days)
Posts: 651
From: Jareth's labyrinth
Joined: 03-12-2006


Message 21 of 298 (297155)
03-21-2006 10:27 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by AdminNWR
03-21-2006 9:07 AM


Re: A request, and a comment
{quote}First the Request{/quote}
I think I got how da quotes work!
This message has been edited by LudoRephaim, 03-21-2006 10:28 PM

"The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by AdminNWR, posted 03-21-2006 9:07 AM AdminNWR has not replied

sinamatic
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 67
From: Traverse City, MI usa
Joined: 03-10-2006


Message 22 of 298 (297205)
03-22-2006 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Teggy
08-08-2005 6:18 AM


give it a rest
First of all if you can accept that God is capable of creating the universe and life itself, why is the story of the ark so impossible? Is turning water into wine any less of a miracle? How about rising from the dead? Gods ways are his own but if you really want to understand you have to first believe then look for answers. If God was proven to exist everyone would believe in him. How could you reward the faithful then?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Teggy, posted 08-08-2005 6:18 AM Teggy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by rgb, posted 03-22-2006 4:37 AM sinamatic has not replied
 Message 24 by ReverendDG, posted 03-22-2006 5:58 AM sinamatic has not replied
 Message 25 by boolean, posted 03-22-2006 7:01 AM sinamatic has replied
 Message 26 by jar, posted 03-22-2006 11:40 AM sinamatic has replied

rgb
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 298 (297211)
03-22-2006 4:37 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by sinamatic
03-22-2006 4:07 AM


Re: give it a rest
Brokenpride
quote:
First of all if you can accept that God is capable of creating the universe and life itself, why is the story of the ark so impossible?
Because 'goddunit' leads to no progress whatsoever. The thread starter are just calling the flood supporters on some unexplained details.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 4:07 AM sinamatic has not replied

ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4111 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 24 of 298 (297222)
03-22-2006 5:58 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by sinamatic
03-22-2006 4:07 AM


Re: give it a rest
if you want to claim that the flood accured using science and history you have to answer these hard questions, invokeing god doesn't fly with people who do not believe in bible stories
if we have to believe in god to investigate whats the point in investigating anything?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 4:07 AM sinamatic has not replied

boolean
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 298 (297230)
03-22-2006 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by sinamatic
03-22-2006 4:07 AM


Re: give it a rest
quote:
--Brokenpride
First of all if you can accept that God is capable of creating the universe and life itself, why is the story of the ark so impossible?
God creating the universe and Noah making the ark are two completely different matters. And is the ark impossible? According to the evidence put forth this in this thread, YES
quote:
--Brokenpride
Is turning water into wine any less of a miracle?
1) In some ways, it could be a miracle, as long as you can prove it happened outside the reason 'because the bible said so'
2) I can do this at home as a party trick
quote:
--Brokenpride
How about rising from the dead?
1) yes, it is a miracle, as long as you can prove it happened outside the reason 'because the bible said so'
quote:
--Brokenpride
Gods ways are his own but if you really want to understand you have to first believe then look for answers. If God was proven to exist everyone would believe in him. How could you reward the faithful then?
Well since you HAVE found him, then you must have answers, at least according to your theory. Care to debunk the evidence put forth in this thread then?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 4:07 AM sinamatic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 6:39 PM boolean has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 26 of 298 (297290)
03-22-2006 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by sinamatic
03-22-2006 4:07 AM


Re: give it a rest
First of all if you can accept that God is capable of creating the universe and life itself, why is the story of the ark so impossible?
The story isn't impossible, it's imaginable. But all of the evidence falsifies a world-wide flood at any time during the last 600,000 years at the very least.
Is turning water into wine any less of a miracle? How about rising from the dead?
Immaterial. We have no evidence that either of those incidents did not happen. We do have evidence that the flood didn't.
If God was proven to exist everyone would believe in him. How could you reward the faithful then?
And there is the heart of why so many Christians don't understand Christianity. Only a Bling-Bling Pimp Daddy of a god would want to reward the faithful.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 4:07 AM sinamatic has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 6:36 PM jar has replied

sinamatic
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 67
From: Traverse City, MI usa
Joined: 03-10-2006


Message 27 of 298 (297405)
03-22-2006 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by jar
03-22-2006 11:40 AM


Re: give it a rest
jar writes:
Immaterial. We have no evidence that either of those incidents did not happen. We do have evidence that the flood didn't.
Yes we do, all scientific laws and reasoning says it's impossible. You are proving my point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by jar, posted 03-22-2006 11:40 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 03-22-2006 6:55 PM sinamatic has not replied

sinamatic
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 67
From: Traverse City, MI usa
Joined: 03-10-2006


Message 28 of 298 (297406)
03-22-2006 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by boolean
03-22-2006 7:01 AM


Re: give it a rest
ell since you HAVE found him, then you must have answers, at least according to your theory. Care to debunk the evidence put forth in this thread then?
not really...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by boolean, posted 03-22-2006 7:01 AM boolean has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by boolean, posted 03-22-2006 9:54 PM sinamatic has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 29 of 298 (297410)
03-22-2006 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by sinamatic
03-22-2006 6:36 PM


You really don't understand, do you?
You brought up two specific incidents, turning water into wine and rising from the dead.
Yes, by all scientific knowledge today we can say that we know no way that either could happen.
BUT.. we have no proof that neither happened.
The Flood is entirely different. It's like Young Earth, the Conquest of Canaan, The Exodus, Joshua at Jerico. In each of those there is POSITIVE and overwhelming evidence that they did NOT happen.
There is always the possibility that the two incidents happened, that there is some explanation we do not yet understand. But the Flood, nope. It simply didn't happen and the only way one can assert that it did is by wilfully ignoring all of the evidence.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 6:36 PM sinamatic has not replied

boolean
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 298 (297449)
03-22-2006 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by sinamatic
03-22-2006 6:39 PM


Re: give it a rest
--Boolean
Well since you HAVE found him, then you must have answers, at least according to your theory. Care to debunk the evidence put forth in this thread then?
--Brokenpride
not really...
You mean you can't, or you don’t want to?
If you can't explain it, why is that?
If you don't want to explain, I suggest not posting in this thread unless you have something to contribute, lest it wander off topic.
----
So, back on topic - I looked up some information on how long Aborigines are to have lived in Australia, and even at the most conservative widely-accepted timeline found that the first arrival to Australia is between 40,000 - 50,000 years ago, with the average falling around near 30,000 years. Even assuming they got the facts wrong, and we divide that number in two, they were still most defiantly alive at the time of the flood. We can even assume that they were so horribly off the mark, that we divide that number in half again, giving us 7500 years, defiantly still around at the time of the flood.
The most important early sites in Australia are:
Nauwalabila (55,000 - 60,000 years old)
Malakanunja (45,000 - 61,000 years old)
Devil's Lair (45,000 years old)
Lake Mungo (61,000 or 40,000 years old)
Lake Mungo is the only site which has come under suggestions that the date may not be accurate; it is suggested that it should be 40,000 years old, not 61,000 years old. Hardly anywhere the suggestion that all sites would have to be a mere 4000 years old.
So how do flood supporters account for this?
I asked a Christian friend of mine today how he could account for the Aborigines living at the same time as the flood, and in fact before God was even supposed to have created man (but that’s another thread for another day), and he replied ”well we can’t be sure they were alive more than 4000 years ago’. I told him that these dates were achieved using Thermoluminescence, which despite only being around 15% accurate for a single sample, can be used as definite means to get an idea within a few thousand years of a date with enough samples. So far, even under the heaviest of criticism, the dates of the Aborigines migration to Australia lands absolutely no where near 4000 years.
At this point he said “yeah look, I have no idea”.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by sinamatic, posted 03-22-2006 6:39 PM sinamatic has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024