Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-19-2019 3:32 PM
23 online now:
AZPaul3, caffeine, Chiroptera, DrJones*, dwise1, PaulK, ringo, xongsmith (8 members, 15 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,152 Year: 9,188/19,786 Month: 1,610/2,119 Week: 370/576 Day: 45/128 Hour: 1/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1234
5
67Next
Author Topic:   The Impossibility Of The Flood
onifre
Member (Idle past 1117 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 61 of 100 (561106)
05-18-2010 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by ICANT
05-18-2010 9:22 PM


Re: Flood
Hi ICANT,

Only if there are no miracles.

Right. But that was the point, or my point; it would take a miracle for such a tale to have happened. And yet planets, and black holes, and super massive black holes, and supernova (real massive things) happen naturally.

Yet a flood on a single planet, something that just needs a lot of rain, requires the supernatural, a god, and a miraculous event.

I believe in miracles I am one.

That sounds poetic and I get what you mean, but I'm sure you were born by natural means and conceived naturally too.

But that you feel it took a miracle of god for you to be alive today shows the arrogance of belief.

- Oni


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by ICANT, posted 05-18-2010 9:22 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by ICANT, posted 05-19-2010 2:35 AM onifre has responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 100 (561117)
05-18-2010 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Dr Adequate
05-18-2010 12:02 AM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
Dr Adequate writes:

Here we have dear old dotty old Buzsaw attributing Noah's Flood to the meteor strike which in reality we associate with the KT boundary.

Now apart from everything else that's wrong with that, here we have another case of what this thread is about. He's looking for a naturalistic explanation for something that the Bible just attributes to the will of God.

When it comes to explaining some real thing, such as the diversity of species, then creationists are quite happy to attribute it to God doing magic. But when it comes to an imaginary thing that didn't happen, such as the Flood, they go looking for materialistic explanations to shore it up.

Dr Adequate, According to the Biblical record, often God effects his purposes via what we regard as natural events. When he wanted to punish Israel, his nation for idolitry etc, he didn't usually zap them directly himself. He raised up enemy nations for that specific purpose on occasion. Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon was an example Syria and Egypt were others.

Germany was a "natural" agent in effecting the return of Israel to their homeland in order to fulfill the end time prophecies of the prophecied messianic kingdom in Israel.

As for the flood, the natural effect of a meteor hit the magnitude of the K T event strike would (naturally) cool the atmosphere. We know there was this meteor event at some time. You can fault me for my reasons of rejecting the dating of the event but you can't fault me for applying the event to triggering an alleged flood by an alleged condensing of an alleged warm vapor canopy.

What I'm saying is that you can call the canopy and the flood a myth, but you can't deny that such a meteor strike would not naturally cause the warm vapor to condense and rain to earth.

According to the Biblical record which depicts a flood and warmer climate, God is an intelligent designer being who brings famine, rain, tornadoes, earthquakes, and all sorts of natural disasters to effect his purposes and manage the planet. Again you can call it all myth, but you can't separate what you call nature from him if he exists as the majority of people believe he does.

We ID creationists must apply the same observed events, fossil record, historical record, etc to argue for our premises and theses that evolutionists apply to theirs, though our methodologies in application and interpretation may differ from theirs.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-18-2010 12:02 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-18-2010 11:51 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 64 by Coyote, posted 05-18-2010 11:52 PM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 66 by subbie, posted 05-19-2010 12:51 AM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 70 by PaulK, posted 05-19-2010 2:37 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16097
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 63 of 100 (561119)
05-18-2010 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
05-18-2010 11:36 PM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
Dr Adequate, According to the Biblical record, often God effects his purposes via what we regard as natural events. When he wanted to punish Israel, his nation for idolitry etc, he didn't usually zap them directly himself. He raised up enemy nations for that specific purpose on occasion. Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon was an example Syria and Egypt were others.

Germany was a "natural" agent in effecting the return of Israel to their homeland in order to fulfill the end time prophecies of the prophecied messianic kingdom in Israel.

Yeah, yeah. God hides.

Why does God hide?

As for the flood, the natural effect of a meteor hit the magnitude of the K T event strike would (naturally) cool the atmosphere.

Why?

We know there was this meteor event at some time. You can fault me for my reasons of rejecting the dating of the event but you can't fault me for applying the event to triggering an alleged flood by an alleged condensing of an alleged warm vapor canopy.

What I'm saying is that you can call the canopy and the flood a myth, but you can't deny that such a meteor strike would not naturally cause the warm vapor to condense and rain to earth.

Until you show your working, I have every reason to doubt it.

Incidentally, why doesn't the Bible mention the meteor strike>

According to the Biblical record which depicts a flood and warmer climate ...

The Bible says nothing about a warmer climate.

We ID creationists must apply the same observed events, fossil record, historical record, etc to argue for our premises and theses that evolutionists apply to theirs ...

Well, you should, but obviously you don't. Hence, for example, your ability to pretend that dinosaurs are the only extinct reptiles, a feat of blindness to the fossil record so total that I'm at a loss to see how you can manage it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2010 11:36 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Coyote
Member (Idle past 272 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 64 of 100 (561120)
05-18-2010 11:52 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
05-18-2010 11:36 PM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
As for the flood, the natural effect of a meteor hit the magnitude of the K T event strike would (naturally) cool the atmosphere. We know there was this meteor event at some time. You can fault me for my reasons of rejecting the dating of the event...

You are off by about 63 million years. Yes, that is something we can fault you for.

You are cherry picking from billions of years, looking for events that you can attribute to this flood.

But your story doesn't form a consistent whole. You have to ignore too much data, and manipulate too many events in your efforts to support the flood story.

The "minor" problem of a 63 million year difference in dating is one example.

Sorry, it just doesn't fly.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2010 11:36 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Buzsaw, posted 05-19-2010 10:08 AM Coyote has not yet responded

ZenMonkey
Member (Idle past 2676 days)
Posts: 428
From: Portland, OR USA
Joined: 09-25-2009


(1)
Message 65 of 100 (561121)
05-18-2010 11:55 PM


Christian Flood Believer Logic
I went over the original posts in this thread, but not in enough detail to see if they attempted to look at the original syllogism as I now see it. So if not, let's see if this reconfiguration makes more sense.

It's not hard to see that the main claim of biblical inerrancy is circular. Here's how we start:

If God exists, then the Bible is true.
God exists.
Therefore the Bible is true.

However, there's a problem in the orignal premise. By God they have to mean the God Described in the Bible and No Other God. Affirming that Brahman exists does nothing for their argument. So what we really have once we are more explicit with our sufficient condition is:

If the God Described in the Bible and No Other God (GDBNOG) exists, then the Bible is true.
GDBNOG exists, etc.

Of course, here's where the circularity comes in:

GDBNOG exists.
How do you know?
Because the Bible says so, and the Bible is True and Accurate in All Particulars.
How do you know BTAAP?
Because GDBNOG exists.

As I see it, what fundamentalist Christians tend to do, seeing as they've got perfect circularity to work with, is to reverse sufficient and necessary conditions in the first step.

If BTAAP, then GDBNOG exists.
BTAAP.
Therefore GDBNOG exists.

What most Christians do in forming a flood argument (and in forming a lot of other apologetic arguments) is to begin with the premise BTAAP. After all if you ask them why they believe the Flood story is true, the response is almost always that BTAAP. Thus:

If BTAAP, then the Flood Story is Literally True.

So combining our two statements, we get:

If BTAAP, then GDBANOG exists and FSLT.

And the contrapositive:

If FSLT - not! or GDBNOG exists - not!, then BTAAP - not!

In other words, in the contrapositive the negation of either statement is sufficient to negate the consequent. Or, in much clearer words:

If the Flood story is not literally true, then the God of the Bible does not exist.

That seems to me to be the tree that these folks are hanging their hat on. Their whole belief in God really does depend on belief in the Flood story.

Now, bringing this all around to Dr A's original post, my thought is that since it's easy to demonstrate convincingly that that indeed the Flood as described never happened, Christians are faced with two choices. Once choice is to deny the science outright , and/or try to force science through a nuclear firestorm of misrepresentation, fuzzy thinking and denial of the obvious in order to claim that science actually supports their position. That seems to be Buz's approach. Or they can choose door number two, following ICANT's example, and just shrug away the evidence and claim a miracle. Dismissing facts by calling on miracles has become quite more and more unpopular and unsatisfying ever since we stopped living in mud huts and drowning cats to ward off the plague. Thus, the ever-entertaining spectacle of Christian Fundie's bug-eyed crazy attempts at "scientific" explanations of what science clearly denies ever happened.

Whew. Let's see how many mistakes I made in that argument.


I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die.
-John Lydon

What's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.
-Steven Dutch


subbie
Member
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 66 of 100 (561129)
05-19-2010 12:51 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
05-18-2010 11:36 PM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
Germany was a "natural" agent in effecting the return of Israel to their homeland in order to fulfill the end time prophecies of the prophecied messianic kingdom in Israel.

So, Germany was an agent of a loving, just god when it slaughtered 6 million jews.

What kind of a sick fuck does it take to not only believe is such an asshole but to actually worship it? Buz, you are lower than vermin vomit.


Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2010 11:36 PM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Otto Tellick, posted 05-19-2010 1:53 AM subbie has not yet responded
 Message 72 by PaulK, posted 05-19-2010 2:39 AM subbie has not yet responded
 Message 75 by Buzsaw, posted 05-19-2010 10:43 AM subbie has responded

Otto Tellick
Member (Idle past 496 days)
Posts: 288
From: PA, USA
Joined: 02-17-2008


Message 67 of 100 (561132)
05-19-2010 1:40 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Dr Adequate
05-18-2010 12:09 AM


Dr. Adequate writes:

When it comes to things that really exist and have a well-evidenced naturalistic explanation, they insist that the naturalistic explanation is bogus and that God did it by magic. But when it comes to this miraculous flood that the Bible attributes to the will of God, they try to write God out of the picture and seek a purely naturalistic explanation.

It strikes me that this apparent dichotomy is really a thoroughly self-consistent pattern, if you accept a view that the fundie position is essentially nothing more than a denial of science. In effect, the sole point of all fundie assertions is to say that science is wrong, no matter what science happens to be saying.

So when science says, "Based on the evidence, the global flood didn't happen; countless supernatural interventions, contravening all sorts of unbreakable physical laws, would be required in order for the biblical flood story to be an event that actually occurred," the fundie has to respond, "No, we can explain how the flood happened without all that supernatural stuff, without breaking physical laws."

And when science describes the diversity of life, the basic structures of organisms, or any other directly observable aspect of reality in terms that provide a concise account for its provenance through purely natural processes, requiring no purposive supernatural intervention, the fundie must respond, "No, these things could not have come to be the way they are purely by themselves / by chance / by accident, ..." and so on.

This also seems to fit in with the general property that religious belief is founded on various negations: the notion of God serves to explain things that cannot be explained, answer questions that cannot be answered, do things that cannot be done (like take care of you after you're dead, know you before you are born, etc). It all ends up being sort of oxymoronic.


autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-18-2010 12:09 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Otto Tellick
Member (Idle past 496 days)
Posts: 288
From: PA, USA
Joined: 02-17-2008


Message 68 of 100 (561134)
05-19-2010 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by subbie
05-19-2010 12:51 AM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
subbie writes:

So, Germany was an agent of a loving, just god when it slaughtered 6 million jews.

But what's really scary is: that's not even the worst of it, when you follow through on the implications of this sort of "End Times" world-view. If I recall/understand it correctly, I think there's also this part about expecting a global nuclear holocaust -- and even welcoming it -- because that fits some imaginative interpretation of how the bible describes the Second Coming of Christ.

That's got to be the acme for sickness. If these people were just suicidal, that would be sad, but to be looking forward to global annihilation -- that's truly, unspeakably insane.


autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by subbie, posted 05-19-2010 12:51 AM subbie has not yet responded

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 69 of 100 (561143)
05-19-2010 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by onifre
05-18-2010 9:44 PM


Re: Flood
Hi onifre,

onifre writes:

But that you feel it took a miracle of god for you to be alive today shows the arrogance of belief.

No, human birth is a natural birth that is controled by laws.

But according to the doctors I was dead for 3 hours and 20 minutes. When I spoke and a whole lot of activity began to take place 61 days later I walked out of the hospital.

You call it whatever you want to call it.

I call it a miracle. BTW the doctor did too.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by onifre, posted 05-18-2010 9:44 PM onifre has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by onifre, posted 05-19-2010 12:59 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 91 by lyx2no, posted 05-19-2010 6:52 PM ICANT has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15047
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 70 of 100 (561145)
05-19-2010 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Buzsaw
05-18-2010 11:36 PM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
quote:

We ID creationists must apply the same observed events, fossil record, historical record, etc to argue for our premises and theses that evolutionists apply to theirs, though our methodologies in application and interpretation may differ from theirs.

No, you don't. You ignore evidence that you don't like altogether. Some other evidence you reject by making up crazy excuses. Hell, you even make up implausible excuses to "explain" why your main supporting evidence doesn't support your claims and STILL expect to be taken seriously.

The best that you can say is that you make a feeble pretense at rationality. And then childishly whine about how unfair and biased your opponent are for looking at the real evidence, for rejecting your obvious fabrications, for catching you in your misrepresentations


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Buzsaw, posted 05-18-2010 11:36 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3883
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 71 of 100 (561146)
05-19-2010 2:37 AM


Topic abandonment alert!
Where are we going here? Should we be going there?

Adminnemooseus


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Report a problem etc. type topics:
Report discussion problems here: No.2
Thread Reopen Requests 2
Topic Proposal Issues

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines

Admin writes:

It really helps moderators figure out if a topic is disintegrating because of general misbehavior versus someone in particular if the originally non-misbehaving members kept it that way. When everyone is prickly and argumentative and off-topic and personal then it's just too difficult to tell. We have neither infinite time to untie the Gordian knot, nor the wisdom of Solomon.

There used to be a comedian who presented his ideas for a better world, and one of them was to arm everyone on the highway with little rubber dart guns. Every time you see a driver doing something stupid, you fire a little dart at his car. When a state trooper sees someone driving down the highway with a bunch of darts all over his car he pulls him over for being an idiot.

Please make it easy to tell you apart from the idiots. Message 150


  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15047
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 72 of 100 (561147)
05-19-2010 2:39 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by subbie
05-19-2010 12:51 AM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
quote:

So, Germany was an agent of a loving, just god when it slaughtered 6 million jews.

While Buz sometimes manage to say decent things don't forget that he's the guy who twists Ezekiel 35 into a prophecy that GOd will massacre the Palestinian Arabs And then says that it should be counted as a fulfilled prophecy because he likes it so much. Can't get much sicker than that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by subbie, posted 05-19-2010 12:51 AM subbie has not yet responded

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 100 (561185)
05-19-2010 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Coyote
05-18-2010 11:52 PM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
Coyote writes:

You are off by about 63 million years. Yes, that is something we can fault you for.

You are cherry picking from billions of years, looking for events that you can attribute to this flood.

But your story doesn't form a consistent whole. You have to ignore too much data, and manipulate too many events in your efforts to support the flood story.

The "minor" problem of a 63 million year difference in dating is one example.

Sorry, it just doesn't fly.

An event the magnitude of a ww flood triggered by an event the magnitude of such a meteor strike atributed to the K T event implies a major sudden change in the makeup of the planet and it's atmoshere, not calculated by dating methodology.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Coyote, posted 05-18-2010 11:52 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by DrJones*, posted 05-19-2010 10:19 AM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 79 by Coragyps, posted 05-19-2010 11:33 AM Buzsaw has responded

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1867
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 74 of 100 (561188)
05-19-2010 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Buzsaw
05-19-2010 10:08 AM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
major sudden change in the makeup of the planet and it's atmoshere, not calculated by dating methodology.

How do a meteor strike and a flood affect the various dating methods such that they are all wrong and yet still agree with each other? Show your math.


It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Buzsaw, posted 05-19-2010 10:08 AM Buzsaw has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Buzsaw, posted 05-19-2010 10:49 AM DrJones* has responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 100 (561192)
05-19-2010 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by subbie
05-19-2010 12:51 AM


Re: Application Of Natural Events
subbie writes:

What kind of a sick fuck does it take to not only believe is such an asshole but to actually worship it? Buz, you are lower than vermin vomit.

You haven't a clue regarding Jehovah, god of a ww flood who wiped out the world's population and who establishes ultimate justice upon earth, Subbie. Yah, he's a god of love, but as well a god of justice and wrath upon evil.

No sane person would deny the presence of evil upon earth. It's an observed phenomena and evidence of what to you?

It behooves Jehovah, the god of the universe, if he be true, who established certain laws for his earth creatures, to do what's best suits his purposes for the ultimate good of both planet earth and the universe at large, factoring in the freedom of choice of creatures like Satan and the rebellious angels which oppose the kingdom of Jehovah on earth.

It was the forces of evil which first deceived mankind in the garden and deceived the people who ultimately caused Jehovah to wipe out the world's population in the flood and to allow Satan's agent, Hitler, to effect the restoration of his nation for the prophesied coming messianic kingdom on earth which will extablish final millenial peace upon the planet.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by subbie, posted 05-19-2010 12:51 AM subbie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by subbie, posted 05-19-2010 11:13 AM Buzsaw has acknowledged this reply

Prev1234
5
67Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019