capnkirk

All theosophical/theological thought processes begin with the initial premise "I KNOW", then proceeds to seek evidences that might support the premise. Because the initial premise is "I know", there is powerful impetus to ignore or 'spin' any evidence that runs counter to the initial premise. Conversely, scientific methodology begins with the premise "I DON'T KNOW", and much more readily accepts evidence both 'for' and 'against'. This is not to say that scientists never fall in love with their premises and thereby blind themselves...only that when they do, that they have abandoned scientific methodology for theosophical methodology. Now, you tell me...which method speaks of arrogance??? Remove the beam from thine own eye!!

Quote:

I have a little research work you can do...See if you can find evidence of meteor impacts in the sedimentary layers of our world. If they took several millions of years to deposit we should at least see the remains of some nickel or iron from these cosmic projectiles from the past.

I'll take that challenge. In fact, I have already done extensive research, and been exposed to a lot more (my father was a geologist). Conclusion? You simply haven't done the research you propose (or you rely solely on creationist websites). How 'bout let's start with the HUGE crater scar (complete with iridium trace layer) along the coast of Yucatan about 65mm years ago. Oh, sorry, that doesn't qualify...that wasn't a meteor, it was a comet. Guess you must be right after all!

capnkirk

Sven...

Great post, my friend!!

:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

Stephen T-B

Evangelical Fundamentalist Creationist inerrantists (?) are on the increase in the UK, representing the same flight from reason as we see in the growing support for New Age pseudo-science waffle.
It’s a subject for sociologists to study and try to explain, but I think that it shows that in most populations there’s a percentage of people who opt for fantasy rather than reality on account of it being - well, less real.

I think what helped to clarify things for me was the fact that Biblical stories were taught to us in Scripture lessons, not History lessons. From a relatively young age (around ten, I think) I put the history I was taught into a box marked “Real” - because it was believable - whereas the Biblical stories went into a box right beside the Greek Myths in the Fairy Tale section of my brain. I did, though believe in God and why shouldn’t I since all the significant adults in my life said there was one?
Only much later did I discover I was surrounded by a conspiracy of pretence.

Llyricist

heh.. I grew up in an agnostic family though I never actually believed in "God".

We had a Children's Bible..... and a book of Aesop's Fables, I catagorized them in the same place in my head.... I think they were in the same place on the shelf as well

capnkirk

I would like to expand a little on your "but I think..." analysis.

I can't speak for the UK but in the US, a majority of public schools have deemphasized "science and math" for over a generation now, resulting in a whole generation that don't have the foundational knowledge base (or the appreciation of the power of "scientific methodology" to discover hidden physical truths) necessary to feel confident and competent in the present increasingly technological age.

Hence, they don't understand modern technology and fear its impact on contemporary society. The historical response to this dilemma is the instinctive "fight or flight" choice. Some "fight" by attaching themselves to pseudo-science movements; others "flee" to more secure age-old world-views. Both are "flight from reality". This phenomena is characteristic of any social society composed of >80% followers, which includes all human societies...because a surplus of leaders tends to make a society unstable.

Stephen T-B

If Jim Larmore is still around, I've a couple of questions for him (or any other "Floodist" who's looking in.)

1. What, I wonder, was the Flood supposed to have resolved? If it was intended to wipe the slate clean, did God not know that human beings would very rapidly mess it up again - human nature being human nature? Doesn't this make the mass drowning a bit pointless?

2. If Noah and his wife were Jewish and they and their children were the only humans left alive, we must all be Jewish.
But this doesn't seem to be the case.
mtDNA is something we inherit through the motherline, and when a sample of mine was analysed it showed that I belong to something called " haplogroup V," whose ancestor settled in the Basque country in Northern Spain, her motherline leading back to an ancestor in Africa.
When the last Ice Age was coming to an end, about 10,000 years ago, members of haplogroup V, along with several others, migrated into central and northern Europe, following the retreating ice sheet. My direct motherline found its way to Britain.

All the haplogroups have their origin in Africa, not the Middle East.

Am I to believe that this is all myth - made up by scientists so as to undermine the Bible?

Doctor X

Yes . . . because the Earth is only 10,000 years old . . . and the platypii teleported back to Australia. . . .

--J.D.

Stephen T-B

As old as that?
I thought there was a view that it had all begun just 6,000 years ago.

JGreen

Seems to me that a vast flood which occurred in antiquity doesn't have to be the work of God. There could be a germ of truth to the story, which gradually got expanded as it was passed on. The epic of Gilgamesh tells of a flood as well, and it dates to 2700 BCE. From a logical standpoint, the idea of a "great flood" and the nonexistence of a magical, invisible, omnipotent being are not mutually exclusive.

I concede that scientific analysis may conclude that there was no such flood, since I'm not familiar with the relevant literature.

Sven

Nobody has a problem with "vast" or "great" etc. floods. But with a global flood. And scientific analysis has already concluded that there wasn't a global one.