Evidence of the flood

I believe you, Faith. I may not agree with many of the literalist Biblical believers, but I wont go so far as to say that they are definitely wrong. One of the preachers whom I respect, Francis Chan, posted an interesting sermon which I shall share with you: Francis Chan: How to Make Yourself Immune to the Mark of the BeastI'm not sure if I can allow myself to believe this stuff, but I also wont insist that its all an illusion. If it is proven that the educated secular mindset in this country is wrong, the world surely will have gone mad. I want you to know that I dont disrespect you for what you believe concerning the Bible.I agree with Tangle, however, in that "You have to defend your belief to yourself using any rationalization you can find. Almost like you've not got the confidence to simply believe, you also have to find a way to prove to yourself that your belief is right despite all the evidence." I realize that your health is not all that great and that the cognitive dissonance at believing science and denying your faith and belief would be too great of a strain on you.And God only knows that you and my friend may be right in the final scheme of things. Many of my literalist Christian friends warn me to not try and change what the bible actually says. Perhaps I am wrong for being on the fence, but I cannot deny logic, reason, and reality.

I know she is not lying about what she and many others believe. I have mentioned the Christian Cult of Ignorance at least once before IIRC.That does not change the fact that it is a system based on lies; lies about the Bible, lies about God, lies about reality. If you want any evidence of Satanic influence you need look no further than the Christianity you describe.

What you're really referring to are Christians who accept science when it contradicts the Bible. But you don't consider it capitulation to science when they use a computer or a refrigerator or a solar cell or a TV or an MRI or eyeglasses, so why is it capitulation to science to accept the evidence that the same forces shaping our world today were shaping it in the past? The word you're looking for isn't guts, it's faith. Agreed. If you're not here to discuss the evidence behind scientific views, then you shouldn't be here.--Percy

It is hard for us to admit that we believe but we could be wrong.I still think that if there is another war, it will be caused by an economic collapse here in America. An end times tribulation type of event could ironically be a self-fulfilling prophecy supported by a large percentage of Biblical Literalist believersI trust that Jesus is alive and will get me through any cognitive dissonance concerning the future. I try and focus on my mental health at the moment---I'm not going to worry about the future, but I can honestly say that if my retirement money ever gets wiped out, I might go crazy. I have been influenced heavily by our conversations the past ten years, but I won't accept that the Bible could all be just a story created by humans---with the Jesus described being little more than a character.Getting back on topic, though. Science thrives on evidence. This logically makes sense. There is no evidence of a global flood. A global flood is either simply a parable or a belief. IF God actually caused such an event, the evidence has been hidden....but for what reason?Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

Yet what does the evidence show?George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and Henry VIII and James I&VI were all real people who really lived. But when we read about them we are not really reading about them but rather a caricature of them through the eyes of the author of the story.Jesus in the Bible stories is the same thing. We are not reading about Jesus but rather Jesus as a caricature reflecting the image the author of the story creates. The reality is that Jesus if Jesus existed was neither the Jesus of Paul, the Jesus of whoever wrote the Gospel of John, the Jesus of Mark or Matthew or the people who told tales to Luke.Jesus reality is a human, with human traits, as ignorant of reality as everyone else of his era, a Jew raised in the Jewish Traditions and mythos.And even if Jesus believed the flood actually happened, he was simply ignorant of what has been learned since then.AbE: Wrong question. We can never know a reason so the question is a waste of time.Right question: Why would or should anyone ever trust such a deceitful dishonest, genocidal God?Edited by jar, : see AbE:

Perhaps some people insist on believing in the flood---as well as a literal Bible in general--because they have cognitive dissonance regarding Gods intentions for humanity.I have been told (and taught) that it is vital to believe in an inerrant literal Bible.Due to many of the conversations here, as well as deductive reasoning, I have rejected that belief...though admit that I could be wrong. I have to go with logic, reason, and reality until it is proven wrong.

And that is a great example of lie based theology. What that says is "Ignore what the Bible actually says!". Believe what you are told not what honesty and reality confirm.

quote:

---

I have been told (and taught) that it is vital to believe in an inerrant literal Bible

---

Vital for what reason ? It's not something the Bible teaches. And you would think that any truly vital doctrine should be mentioned there.And the Bible itself gives us plenty of reason to suspect otherwise - such as the fact that the Flood story is two different accounts mashed together. Or Faith's rejection of Isaiah 7 in favour of her interpretation of Matthew 1:22-23 (aided and abetted by the silly Blue Letter Bible commentary she found online).This does not seem to be a doctrine that respects the Bible at all, more an excuse for men to put their words in God's mouth.

As you said, I'm talking about Christians who accept science that contradicts the Bible. None of those things contradict the Bible, in fact we consider them God's blessings; But the sciences of the unrecorded past, Evolution and an Old Earth, do. No, it's guts, guts to defend the faith. You can have faith and keep it to yourself, but when you stick with the Bible in the teeth of the kind of arguments, ridicule and insults one gets here for instance, that's guts. So dwise can argue for Christians capitulating to Old Earth science and I can't answer him that to do so is not merely to reject Creation Science but the Bible itself as Bible-believing Christians see it? Why is that? Seems to me that all the defense of "fundie" Christianity I post on this thread is in response to this sort of assertion. I'm not allowed to disagree? Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

There's plenty of evidence of the global Flood, Phat, as I keep saying: the strata and the abundance of fossils cannot reasonably be explained by anything else.

If what you say is true, why is it that 90% of scientists dont see the evidence that you see? Do you believe what my friend does---that there is a vast conspiracy coupled with massive denial?

I understand that it is persuasive but I think in the end it will be shown to be superficial and wrong, an illusion. Even so, I believe we are to hold onto what God has said no matter how much we are pulled toward such reasonings. "Let all men be liars but God be true" is scripture though I'd have to go look it up.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You'd do better asking why Faith believes it given the evidence she has to ignore. The Flod is so much worse than real geology at explaining the strata and the fossils that it isn't even funny.

I think most of it is just the effect of the influence of consensus: so many think this way I should think this way too. Or paradigm blindness: once you've learned to think in a certain pattern it is extremely hard to break it, and there is no motivation to break it: since such questions don't have much if any effect on the scientific work they do it isn't important to them to try to rethink it. And the reasoning does seem to be persuasive after all, even though I think if you spend time thinking it through it starts to break down logically.I suppose I'd also have to agree that there is the fundamental conspiracy of the devil against the human race that is always operating against the truth and keeping people blind, but except in the case of really hostile and diehard atheists I doubt it's a conscious motivation.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You fail to recognize that what you call the "real" geology of the strata and the fossils is what I've over and over pointed out is a screaming absurdity: the fossil contents made to represent things that once lived where that layer of sediment they are buried in now is, how impossible that is physically, how it's like reading tea leaves more than any kind of objective science. The evidence for sequential shallow seas is likewise open to better interpretations, a theory concocted out of a few circumstantial facts. And none of this can be tested to be confirmed or disconfirmed.