Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ofro · 08-09-2007, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffevnz

My advice: get out of there when you turn 18. Don't let your family change your mind through peer pressure, guilt, threats, etc. Keep your thoughts to yourself if you need to.

I agree in general. Inform yourself continually. Look up pro- and anti-creationist websites and literature so you get a general picture of the conflict and eventually can make up your own mind. It will become obvious very quickly how bad the creationist arguments are, but you need to convince yourself through your own thinking process.

Very important: when you leave for college, go to a state school and stay away from a (fundamentalist) religiously oriented school, no matter what the pressure from home might be.

But above all don't forget: they are your family and you love them. There is no need to hide your own opinions, but there also is no need get into a fight that will separate you from your family.

hyzer · 08-09-2007, 02:03 PM

Just remember, it was Christians in England in the 1800's that began to look, really look at the evidence in the soil strata and fossils therein that figured out that if you follow the evidence, one must conclude that there was no global flood of the bible.

08-09-2007, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KittyKatBlack

Has the biblical flood ever been disproven? My mom's making me do this question in my history book, 'Why did God send the flood? Tell your view and why you hold it.'. I want to say it was a natural disaster, but I don't know what evidence there is against it.

Damn. You're in a pickle. Well as the others have pointed out there is masses of evidence against the Flood. You could easily write a book twice the size of the bible just on this evidence. So no, it never happened.

Personally I'd be inclined to go with the suggestion that you simply state you have no idea why god sent the flood as he could have made the evil people just drop dead, or magicked them straight to hell (simliar to the "rapture") or whatever.
They can't really mark you down for it because they themselves have no answer to it apart from "god moves in mysterious ways", which is just an admission that they don't know. In fact you could append something like this to your answer.

Best of luck and as the others said keep reading up on this stuff.
I predict that our currently resident fundy ( afdave ) will spot this thread and start pontificating about the flood again.
Stand by for comedy gold.

PS. Be careful though. If your mum hears you pissing yourself laughing and finds out what you're reading she won't be happy.

08-09-2007, 02:25 PM

Oh yeah, just thought of something. That debate Eric Murphy linked to over at the Richard Dawkins Forum is a ripper, but the thread commenting on the debate contains some of the funniest stuff you'll ever read, as well as masses more evidence than the debate itself.

Dave's response to my question about the spider tracks in the Coconino sandstone was a classic.

Monad · 08-09-2007, 02:47 PM

Hi Kitty. I was about your age when I finally stopped believing in god. One of the things that had led me to that point was questioning the flood but for me it wasn't so much whether it happened or not but what it said about a person who wants to believe in a god who can do such awful and frankly evil things. Think about it. The flood (leaving to one side for a moment whether it happened or not) killed every single person and land animal (and probably plant) on the face of the Earth apart from one "chosen" family. Isn't that unspeakably monstrous? I mean even if they were as bad as the bible makes out do you really think they all deserved to die - even the children, the little babies, the animals? How many millions died in those first few hours of the flood? I had to ask myself what sort of a deity would do that? And it's not for the first time either - the bible is chock full of God and his chosen people doing hideous things to others - often just because they wouldn't worship him. How arrogant and vain of a being who could kill others just because they don't bow down to him? I began to think if someone can turn a blind eye to all those horrible things just in order to get into heaven then doesn't that make them selfish ultimately? - the deaths etc don't matter, all that matters is getting a reward at the end of it all. No wonder some religious people can justify acts like blowing up the Twin Towers or burning witches at the stake. It's all so they can get into heaven, get their reward, or not end up being punished in hell (and what sort of a "loving" god would send people to a hell to be tortured for eternity?). Reading and thinking about The Flood led me to question what it means to really be good - to do things not for the reward or through fear of punishment but because they helped others. I decided I didn't need some god who I could never worship, never respect, who was capable of the most evil crimes and in the end I just gave up on the whole idea of god or gods - we don't need him, we are better than that.

Faid · 08-09-2007, 02:52 PM

And, of course, if it is not our place to question God's actions, why should we try to logically explain his motives in the first place?

Under this logic, the answer to the question "Why did God send the Flood"? should be "Who knows? God works in mysterious ways".

08-09-2007, 02:59 PM

Tha's wot I sed. Christians love to use that line when bamboozled, so it's the perfect line to use back at them if you're an honest agnostic.
Reckon we should give her some links to some of the prime evidence supplied by Dave and the responses to it? :devil1:
Or do you think he'll rock up here and save us the trouble.

deadman_932 · 08-09-2007, 03:07 PM

When I was young and they packed me off to school
and taught me how not to play the game,
I didn't mind if they groomed me for success,
or if they said that I was a fool.
So I left there in the morning
with their God tucked underneath my arm --
their half-assed smiles and the book of rules.
So I asked this God a question
and by way of firm reply,
He said -- I'm not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays.
So to my old headmaster (and to anyone who cares):
before I'm through I'd like to say my prayers --
I don't believe you:
you had the whole damn thing all wrong --
He's not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays

LINK

RED DAVE · 08-09-2007, 08:26 PM

TalkOrigins.org

This is a link not only to immense amounts of argument against the Flood, but is also the best site on evolution.

RED DAVE

Jo · 08-10-2007, 02:19 AM

A way around that without usurping your mother (and her beliefs) is to take a historical piece of literature and critique it. That's keeping within the context of the "history" part. The flood myth IS a historical retelling (but not of factual events).

I'm also curious that your mother can set your topic questions, even from home schooling. In my country, home schooled children have a set criterian for their level. Parents merely oversee that the work is done, not actually say what word SHOULD be done - but do correct me if I am wrong.

My concern isn't so much in proving mum wrong, but in the repercussions of doing so. A person can hold a particular idea as being true and factual, not once relinquishing that idea, and write contrary to it - you'll encounter this being done in University - such as philosophy, psychology or social science (where I have encountered that).

It's just about your safety.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-09-2007, 02:03 PM	#52
hyzer Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: philadelphia Posts: 1,844	Just remember, it was Christians in England in the 1800's that began to look, really look at the evidence in the soil strata and fossils therein that figured out that if you follow the evidence, one must conclude that there was no global flood of the bible.

08-09-2007, 02:25 PM	#54
mung bean Guest Posts: n/a	Oh yeah, just thought of something. That debate Eric Murphy linked to over at the Richard Dawkins Forum is a ripper, but the thread commenting on the debate contains some of the funniest stuff you'll ever read, as well as masses more evidence than the debate itself. Dave's response to my question about the spider tracks in the Coconino sandstone was a classic.

08-09-2007, 02:47 PM	#55
Monad Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: UK Posts: 2,127	Hi Kitty. I was about your age when I finally stopped believing in god. One of the things that had led me to that point was questioning the flood but for me it wasn't so much whether it happened or not but what it said about a person who wants to believe in a god who can do such awful and frankly evil things. Think about it. The flood (leaving to one side for a moment whether it happened or not) killed every single person and land animal (and probably plant) on the face of the Earth apart from one "chosen" family. Isn't that unspeakably monstrous? I mean even if they were as bad as the bible makes out do you really think they all deserved to die - even the children, the little babies, the animals? How many millions died in those first few hours of the flood? I had to ask myself what sort of a deity would do that? And it's not for the first time either - the bible is chock full of God and his chosen people doing hideous things to others - often just because they wouldn't worship him. How arrogant and vain of a being who could kill others just because they don't bow down to him? I began to think if someone can turn a blind eye to all those horrible things just in order to get into heaven then doesn't that make them selfish ultimately? - the deaths etc don't matter, all that matters is getting a reward at the end of it all. No wonder some religious people can justify acts like blowing up the Twin Towers or burning witches at the stake. It's all so they can get into heaven, get their reward, or not end up being punished in hell (and what sort of a "loving" god would send people to a hell to be tortured for eternity?). Reading and thinking about The Flood led me to question what it means to really be good - to do things not for the reward or through fear of punishment but because they helped others. I decided I didn't need some god who I could never worship, never respect, who was capable of the most evil crimes and in the end I just gave up on the whole idea of god or gods - we don't need him, we are better than that.

08-09-2007, 02:52 PM	#56
Faid Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Athens, Greece Posts: 1,057	And, of course, if it is not our place to question God's actions, why should we try to logically explain his motives in the first place? Under this logic, the answer to the question "Why did God send the Flood"? should be "Who knows? God works in mysterious ways".

08-09-2007, 02:59 PM	#57
mung bean Guest Posts: n/a	Tha's wot I sed. Christians love to use that line when bamboozled, so it's the perfect line to use back at them if you're an honest agnostic. Reckon we should give her some links to some of the prime evidence supplied by Dave and the responses to it? :devil1: Or do you think he'll rock up here and save us the trouble.

08-09-2007, 03:07 PM	#58
deadman_932 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Altadena, California Posts: 3,271	When I was young and they packed me off to school and taught me how not to play the game, I didn't mind if they groomed me for success, or if they said that I was a fool. So I left there in the morning with their God tucked underneath my arm -- their half-assed smiles and the book of rules. So I asked this God a question and by way of firm reply, He said -- I'm not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays. So to my old headmaster (and to anyone who cares): before I'm through I'd like to say my prayers -- I don't believe you: you had the whole damn thing all wrong -- He's not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays LINK

08-09-2007, 08:26 PM	#59
RED DAVE Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 10,532	TalkOrigins.org This is a link not only to immense amounts of argument against the Flood, but is also the best site on evolution. RED DAVE

08-10-2007, 02:19 AM	#60
Jo System Overlord Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: New Zealand twitter.com/Alcyonian Posts: 23,659	A way around that without usurping your mother (and her beliefs) is to take a historical piece of literature and critique it. That's keeping within the context of the "history" part. The flood myth IS a historical retelling (but not of factual events). I'm also curious that your mother can set your topic questions, even from home schooling. In my country, home schooled children have a set criterian for their level. Parents merely oversee that the work is done, not actually say what word SHOULD be done - but do correct me if I am wrong. My concern isn't so much in proving mum wrong, but in the repercussions of doing so. A person can hold a particular idea as being true and factual, not once relinquishing that idea, and write contrary to it - you'll encounter this being done in University - such as philosophy, psychology or social science (where I have encountered that). It's just about your safety.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.