Demigawd

It's quite funny, however, that when the "wisdom of men" attempts to prove Magus55's religion, he's all for it and trumpets it out as evidence. But when the "wisdom of men" doesn't, he disparages the whole concept.

<Church Lady>How convenient!</Church Lady>

winstonjen

Come to think of it, where are all the remains of those killed in the flood?

Magus55

I don't consider the wisdom of man to be completely useless. I just don't hold it higher than God. If God and man disagree, i'll trust God first.

JCS

Then why do those door to door preachers refer to this as eternity? Is not eternity a measure of time? What exactly is fullfillment and how does this fullfillment work with individuals that find differing things fullfilling such as perhaps counting days and marking time? Further more if the epitome of fullfillment is dying to get into heaven, why the boat? Seems rather counter to the stated goal.

winstonjen

Strange how god wants you to hold the words in a book as higher than physical evidence. Since he created the world, shouldn't you look to his creation for evidence?

Mageth

Well, what's in disagreement here is not God and man, it's a (mythical) story recorded in the scriptures by a man (who borrowed and adapted the story from earlier myths, BTW) and the actual, physical evidence that clearly indicates that such an event never took place, and indeed could not occur in the way depicted in the myth.

Ellis14

You are missing the point! God could have created me five minutes ago, ok so what? He could have created the world? Ok, so what. He could have made the ark? Ok, so what?

Did Noah enter the ark 7 days before the flood began?
Gen 7:7-10
or did Noah enter the ark the same day as the flood?
Gen 7: 11- 13.

Did the flood last 40 days?
Gen 7:17
or did it last 150 days?
Gen 7:24 and Gen 8:3

How long was the ark afloat? 7 months...
Gen 8:4
or was it at least ten months??
Gen 8:5

These are but 3 small examples of the ark story contradicting itself.

This is without even getting into the facts about air pressure, volume of water, source and removal of water etc, the transportation of animals, the lack of evidence, historical or geological about a global flood etc.

You are missing the entire point Maguss55, you are making good points, but they are NOT the ones I am asking you to make. Please address the above if you will!

I don't think you're stupid but I see myself in you because there was a time I would have believed the flood myth no matter what. Sometimes faith can blind you to reason. There is no need to turn this into a God vs science dabate. The issue is, is there any evidence of the flood? No. Could it have logically happened? No. Is the story self-consistent? No. Therefore the myth is untrue.

Science isn't saying that. You are missing the point. The bible account of a global flood is erroneous and absurd. If this conflicts with science (and common sense for that matter), then so be it; God, if he exists, is irrelevant to this discussion because the bible account is flawed whether God exists or not.

True, but if someone told me that human beings could fly just by flapping their arms, I would not believe them. There is a difference between the relatively-technologically impossible and the physical impossible based on laws of logic. e.g.: a circle can NEVER be a square, even if God says so.

This is completely wrong. This is either a blatant lie or an error. If science presents some evidence that just so happens to contradict the bible, and theists reject it, does this make the bible right? No. Moreoever it is the theists who are deluding themselves. They can try and ignore the evidence all they want but you are only kidding yourself. The idea that any physical science supports the bible as completely truthful is completely wrong.

Maguss55, even if this were right you have no right to cite it as evidence of anything because you will just as happily ignore science when it contradicts your beliefs anyway; how do you pick and choose what you want to accept as "proof" or not?
The bible is unscientific. These are the facts. Why would God write an unscientific, illogical book that contradicts itself and told absurd stories?

In any event, whenever a scientific theory has been proved wrong, it has been proved wrong by another scientific theory done by scientists doing scientific research. It has never been proved wrong by fundamentalist theistic apologists spouting dogma to refute attacks on what they think is God's word.

ps: - Please address my issues, if you will.

Magus55

Scriptures were inspired by God. Noah wouldn't know about the flood without God telling Him about it. And incidently, please prove that Noah borrowed the flood idea from other cultures, and not the other way around. Sure there are hundreds of flood myths in all cultures, but to me that just proves that the original came from Noah, and through His subsequent generations, it got changed slightly each generation. I think that there are so many flood stories from all over the world is an indicator that there was in a fact a massive flood.

And the physical evidence may now conclude the event didn't take place ( which is debatable depending upon which assumptions and presuppositions you start with), but you don't know that in the future, new evidence won't replace the current findings and show that it did happen. Isn't that the great thing about science, it always changes? Nothing in science is fact. Not the age of the Earth, not evolution, not the Big bang. Its just the current conclusion based on the current available evidence. 20 years ago, the Earth was only 1-3 billion years old. So science was apparently wrong 20 years ago when the evidence told them it was 1 billion years old, but it has to be right now when it says the Earth is 5 billion years old? In 20 years, we'll probably conclude its 8 billion years old.

Demigawd

In other words, Magus55 holds up the bible, points at it, and shouts "you will respect my ah-thar-row-tay!"

Demigawd, I remind you to keep it civil

Ellis14

Surely not the Argument from Ignorance?

Magus55, no matter what scientific methods or theories we use, this will not change the fact that the flood myth as described in the bible is impossible.

Also, science doesn't start with presuppositions about what did and didn't happen. Science analyses the facts and draws conclusions. If the obvious conclusion to new evidence is that the flood occured, then science will hold this as its new theory. However this is no such evidence to date, and since the story is impossible anyway, it is unlikely that there ever will be such evidence.

But don't forget to reply to my earlier post, in case you forgot.