Vinnie

There is Biblical evidence for Noah's Flood. See the book of Genesis and Jesus referred to Noah as well which is more evidence. Not to mention the hundreds of other flood accounts. Clearly there is an ancient and geographically spread memory of a huge flood long past.

The New Testament calls Noah a Preacher of Righteousness. The efforts of a middle aged man to build such a huge vessel for no apparent reason would have attracted large crowds. Noah, as the NT tells us, preached to them. God was giving the people an appropriate amount of time to repent of their evil ways. Had they repented he (presumably) would have withheld his judgment. That is why God had Noah build an ark rather than vaporize them. Though they deserved it not, He was giving them an oppurtunity to repent of their wicked ways out of his compassion and love for them.

Vinnie

Kosh

"If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! "
--- Time Bandits

Vinnie

What if a butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil could spawn a tornado in Texas?

Vinnie

SecularFuture

Vinnie
Your bible is just text, and that text could have been written by anyone with a little spare time and imagination. Unlike real history books that refer to events within a real world, your bible tries to justify the existence of a supernatural world that can only be believed, and not seen. Your faith in supernatural concepts came before the evidence.

And without complete knowledge of the natural world, you are not in the position to categorize something (like our existence) as having a supernatural origin. Once upon a time people thought that earthquakes were caused by supernatural forces. Why? Because, like you, they jumped to conclusions without having complete knowledge, or some understanding of the natural world around them.

"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence."
-- Richard Dawkins

Vinnie

It must be tautology time. Of course the Bible is a text. But it is a living and breathing text.

And the means and purpose to write a text. You have fallen victim to anachronism. You could'nt just grab a pencil and a few loose sheets of paper in antiquity. So there was certainly a purpose and meaning to this text.

Like I said, not even counting the Bible and Jesus' testimony, there is a very widespread view on a large flood throughout the whole world. Hundreds of texts I believe all attesting to the great flood! Critical thinkers wouldn't label such evidence as coincidence or casually dismiss it. An honest investigator would at least investigate it..


Incorrect comparison. The Bible is not predominately a history book so it is incorrect for you to compare it "real history" books. And what part of "God made rain fall upon the earth" does not refer to events within the real world? Naturally, if it happened it happened in the "real world".

I'm not sure you've read the Bible. The Bible assumes the existence of the Biblical God from cover to cover. I've never seen much argumentation or justification on this point. It is above arguing for the existence of God.

My worldview is not strict materialism. What makes you think it is okay to critique my worldview with the assumptions of your worldview?

God is the beginner, the first cause, the ground of being. Scientists are also discovering a lot of new ideas and the field seems to be switching to a more recent earth. I find that to be very exiciting in light of. A teacher came to my church last week and taugh on this. It was someone named Hovind. You should look him up.

Demonic ones mainly. God would not cause such things but his free will beings that went bad did (demons). Spiritual warfare explains natural evils.

What evidence do you have that there is not a spiritual reality behind the material reality that is capable of effecting the natural world?

Strict materialism is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to hold oneself accountable to God. Strict materialism is belief which reads the evidencee with a wooden literalism.

Vinnie

Llyricist

Isn't "Biblical evidence" along the lines of "military intelligence" or "jumbo shrimp"??

edited for spelling

Mageth

Like I said, not even counting the Bible and Jesus' testimony, there is a very widespread view on a large flood throughout the whole world. Hundreds of texts I believe all attesting to the great flood!

Umm, many myths attesting to floods. And none of them exactly the same myth, although there are similarities among some of them. That makes sense, because local floods are a global phenomenon. And the myths were intended by the writers as myths, not as actual histories. As myths, they're intended to poetically describe and illuminate aspects of the human condition, of life. They're meant to teach life lessons, not to record actual history.

Critical thinkers wouldn't label such evidence as coincidence or casually dismiss it. An honest investigator would at least investigate it..

And would discover there's absolutely no evidence for a global flood. Indicating all the myths are mythicised accounts of local floods, or modified copies of such myths adapted from other mythologies. The Flood is one of many common motifs in the world's mythologies.

Incorrect comparison. The Bible is not predominately a history book so it is incorrect for you to compare it "real history" books.

Then it's incorrect for you to assume or interpret obviously poetical and mythical parts of the bible (e.g. the Flood) as history.

And what part of "God made rain fall upon the earth" does not refer to events within the real world?

The part about it raining for forty days and forty nights worldwide, and the fountains of the deep opening up, and all the mountains of the earth being covered, and all life on earth except a few humans and animals in a wooden boat being wiped out. That part does not refer to events within the real world. It's a myth. Read it as such and try to understand the meanings behind the myth if you want to get any real value from it.

Naturally, if it happened it happened in the "real world".

Well, obviously it (Noah's Flood) didn't happen.

ex_libres

Will you people please stop trying to asume to know the mind of God e.g. his reasons and motivations for doing what he does. You can't even know my mind. For instance, "Why did I have corn flakes for brekfast instead of eggs?" Do I need more fiber or is my cholesterol high? Do I dislike eggs or was my frig. empty this morniing etc., etc., etc. The most you can know of my mind, God's mind, or anyones mind is what I, he, or you choose to tell them.

Have you ever tried to understand how the Noah story can be possible.

Here is some of what I found out through researching the subject:
1. The arc was the size of about three football fields (Measurements can be found in the bible) More than enough room for animals, suppplies and Noah's family.
2. Noah did not have to take every type of animal (Parrot and sparrow, and hawk, and etc.) he only needed their KIND. Biology tells us that a DNA strand carries all the information nessasary for variations to occur within a kind. We see this everyday with selective breeding. Also, in the time since the flood their has been enough time to attribute for the variety we see today.
3. Forget about the Epic of Gilgamesh, which people say the flood story originated from. It is much more likely that the Gilgamesh Epic and the Noah Flood were derived from the same event. The Summarians, probably thru oral transmission, most likely modified the original account (found in the bible) by intermingling their mythology into the story. The reason I think this is because of the numerous flood myths from around the world. Are they all a version of the Gilgamesh epic or more plausible narratives of a single event passed on throughout the ages until the stories hardly resemble eachother. Ever play the Telephone game?

Vinnie

The similarities given the large number of them, may in fact point to a historical core.

I find it amazing that you know the intents and motivations of an author thousands of years ago of whom we know virtually nothing about. What proof can you offer for your statement that the Genesis flood or any other flood account was meant, by its originator to be taken as myth rather than history?

What can't a myth have a historical core? M-W defines a myth as " a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon". I do not see how this negates the possible historicity of the traditional story. The mythical story could be true.

But there isgrowing evidence for a yound earth which confirms the Genesis cosmology directly and the flood account indirectly (canonical dimension). Dr. Hovind had soime interesting things to say about the alleged reliability of calcium dating and other methods. I would also state that you have no evidence against a global flood. At best you can lack belief in the event but you cannot say the biblical event did not happen.

The problem is your assumption about the author(s) original understanding of his/her/their work. How do you know that the person or persons responsible for the flood account did not think it to be literal history?

If the earth's surface topology was different the water problem would be easily resolved. This is simple geophysics.

You have not demonstrated that it is a myth. You have supernaturally read the minds of ancient writers and presumed to dictate what their thoughts actually were without any good evidence. Hermeneutic of faith, anyone?

Do you actually have any positive evidence which demonstrates that the genesis flood did not happen?

Vinnie

openeyes

This guy is well known to most evolutionists on this board. I belatedly became familiar first hand with his views a couple weeks ago. Don't you think there is a reason he has to talk so fast, so that people don't have time to evaluate the things he says? He is not a scientist. He presents old information, bits out of context, and unsubstantiated claims for starters.

I'm not much a debator, but I have to say that I thought the parents who brought their kids to hear this guy speak and uncritically accepted what he said were doing a major disservice to the education of their children. The vast majority of scientists accept that the earth is in the 4.5 billion year old range and that the flood depicted in the bible is only a myth.