mg01

Or, as a much more reasonable explaination, the stories of Gen 1-11 are written as one particular Bible authors method of "Hebrewizing" stories already well known to contemporary cultures by recasting YHWH as the primary deity responsibile. The flood story was known for over 1800 years before any Hebrew writer wrote their version, even the Chinese have a flood story. The confusion of the languages at Babel ("gate of god") is a pun on the Hebrew verb "balal", "to confuse". (Genesis is replete with linguistic and etiological puns of this nature.) It's also another recasting of an older them relating to the creation of languages from one initial languages by Enki in Sumerian.

BAC-ISBG

Yes like a totally made up story with no basis in truth.

ksen

Which one are you sticking to?

1) God told the writer what happened, or

2) The writer invented his own solution.

Darklighter

I believe those two choices are one and the same.

Johnny Skeptic

I thought that you were intelligent enough to understand that "God told him" meant that "he believed that God told him." I was obviously mistaken.

Do you believe that God caused a global flood to occur? If so, in your opinion, does God require that all Christians believe that he caused a global flood to occur?

ksen

Your passive-aggressiveness aside, maybe you should say what you actually mean instead of leaving it open for interpretation.

Yes.

No.

Johnny Skeptic

Would you like to debate inerrancy?

Then there is nothing else for us to discuss for purposes of this thread since if you do not believe that God requires Christians to believe that a global flood occured, you would also have the same opinion about the Tower of Babel story.

It doesn't make any difference since you said that it doesn't make any difference whether or not anyone believes that God created a global flood, which also means that it doesn't make any difference to you whether or not anyone believes the Tower of Babel story, in which case why did you make a post in this thread? Do you believe that a Christian has to believe any of the Old Testament? If so, which parts?

Darklighter

I got what he meant.

Even though such a flood would have left very predictable and verifiable and easily found evidence, none of which has been found?

To be Christian means to believe Christ, and Christ treated the flood as an actual event. Therefore if one disagrees with Jesus about whether or not the flood occured, he is essentially denying Christs divinity. You either believe Jesus or you don't. So, I think you should clarify that "No" a bit more.

ksen

Maybe after you accept ~M~'s invitation to debate.

That is correct.

I made a post in this thread because:

1) It's a free board and users are allowed to participate in any thread they care to as long as it's not a formal debate thread.

2) You posted contradictory statements in your OP so I decided to ask you to clarify.

3) After responding to my request for clarification you asked me some more questions which I then proceeded to answer.

4) You responded to my post answering you and have appeneded more questions which I will now answer.

Are those good enough reasons for posting on this thread?

Define what you mean by "has to."

Are you asking if God has threatened some sort of retribution for not believing some things may have happened or not as written in the OT?

ksen

Congrats!

You mean like the Grand Canyon?

Yes.

Wrong, to be Christian means to be reborn by God.

One of the evidences of being reborn by God is having faith in Christ. The NT does not say one word about Christians being required to believe there was a global flood. There is no passage that says, in effect, "believe there was a global flood or you will not be saved."