Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mageth · 10-09-2003, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Devilnaut
Mageth:

"Any others?"

Allegory! The bible makes a big deal of associating water with the soul (the "celestial sea"). The reason is because A. it is blue (represents form as opposed to content... cold as opposed to heat which would be red like oh I don't know, fire or blood ) and B. It is shapeless. In other words, not only is it "form", but it is "perfect form" because it is actually boundless (Catholics make a big deal out of Mary's being a "perfect vessel" for God and this gives you a clue as to why that's important). Notice that Jesus was born of Mary and that the beast in revelations (the first one) emerges from the sea.

Anyways that information would probably help in decoding the flood story.

Yes, that's possible. Further, the Flood that Wipes Out the World also may symbolize death and rebirth, or the cleansing of the world to start anew. Many mythologies carry such metaphors; i.e. the Hindu cycle of endlessly recurring epochs.

keyser_soze · 10-09-2003, 06:05 AM

How freaking hard is it to understand that flood stories are common because people tend to build communities near water sources? The nile flooded every damn year for millenia before they dammed it up! Jeez, a flood story coming from an area that floods occasionally! Wow! Color me surprised. There is absolutely no evidence, nor any possible logical support for a world wide flood. Ever. The people that posit this ridiculous assertion rely on "supernatural" explanations for evidence. Which is pretty damned thin.

Mageth · 10-09-2003, 06:29 AM

How freaking hard is it to understand that flood stories are common because people tend to build communities near water sources?

I agree that is a highly probable explanation and should be an added "+" to my third possibility above or added by itself as its own possibility

Spenser · 10-09-2003, 12:32 PM

This one pretty much says it all.

and some time lines

and more

and more

and there is plenty more but I'm sure you have the ability to use a search engine now don't you???

Hugo Holbling · 10-09-2003, 01:11 PM

We don't need the bickering, dear participants, so i propose we stay on topic.

Cross Examiner · 10-09-2003, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spenser
This one pretty much says it all.

and some time lines

and more

and more

and there is plenty more but I'm sure you have the ability to use a search engine now don't you???

Thanks Spenser. Here's a rebuttal to your first link. Even though a a link-throwing contest interests me greatly, I'll pass on it for the present. You apparently don't want to respond directly to this, which is certainly understandable. No problem though, it's your thread, and if you don't particularly care about it why would anyone else? I'm going to go work out now. Take care amigo

"Surely what a man does when he is taken off his guard is the best evidence for what sort of man he is..."

-- C.S. Lewis Mere Christianity

Regards,
BGic

Mageth · 10-09-2003, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Billy Graham is cool
Thanks Spenser. Here's a rebuttal to your first link.

Well, I read most of that, skimmed the rest, and found most if not all of it quite laughable, really. A bunch of "coulda's" and wild speculations. It coulda done this. It coulda done that. Not very convincing, and not very scientific.

Were there any particular arguments there you found quite strong?

And I found this statement quite interesting:

But they realise that rank atheism is repugnant to many, so they publish articles claiming that you can believe in God and evolution.

Well, of course you can. There are many theists who do just that.

gregor · 10-09-2003, 01:30 PM

That true.origins link is a rebuttal in the same way that "so's your mother" is a rebuttal to a supreme court brief.

Spenser · 10-09-2003, 01:50 PM

To tell you the truth BGiC, I don't particularly enjoy debating with you. I seem to receive nothing more than strings of unsubstantiated assertions and now links to places with nothing more than unsubstantiated assertions. The first link I gave you was full of references and done in a very scientific manner. The others were time lines of civilizations and there written records. It is a scientific FACT that a world wide flood having occurred is impossible; it would have left a mark, not just a story. Also, it is a historical FACT that civilizations were in existence and flourishing during the so called time frame of the flood. I opened this post here because I would rather spend my time debating the topic I was debating in the first place and I figured any one here more interested in the topic could easily provide your answers for you.

You may think you have caught me off guard but I do not wish to dwell in a world of reiterating historical facts that I find to be common knowledge (especially when considering the amount of time that would be required to get into this). I'm sorry if this insults you or any one else.

On a side note I challenge you or any one else to find non-religious universities that gives any credence to a world wide flood or suggests Egyptian or any other ancient civilizations recorded history as bogus!

Strangely enough in the fields of science and history the concept of a world wide flood is laughable. Now other people here seem more than willing to debate you on this so why are you avoiding them???

Cross Examiner · 10-09-2003, 03:13 PM

Spenser,
You, personally, don't want to discuss this. OK. No problem. Out of respect for you, and in response to this 'bait' you set, I came to this thread. I wouldn't normally care to discuss this sort of thing either. It doesn't interest me. In fact, in a certain sense, I am quite comfortable at summing up the OT (i.e. The Law and the Prophets) as Jesus did (Matthew 22:34-40) and leave it at that. I might even categorize myself as a theistic evolutionist, if I cared to research the matter diligently, who simply lacks the credulity of the materialist to believe in abiogenesis and the eternality of matter (better-studied with regards to these latter two). My view on Genesis, in particular, tracks along the lines of what one may read in C.S. Lewis' works (whom I've been quoting a lot lately, can you tell I dig?). Which is not to say that the OT is not inspired or is inaccurate with regards to scope of intent, rather, I prefer to focus on the NT (and NT philosophy/theology), it being of significantly closer relation to that of the modern Western mind, and in which I am particularly confident. With that, then, adieu mon ami.

Regards,
BGic

10-09-2003, 12:32 PM	#24
Spenser Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Don't you wish your boy friend got drunk like me, Posts: 7,808	Some Answers for BGiC This one pretty much says it all. and some time lines and more and more and there is plenty more but I'm sure you have the ability to use a search engine now don't you???

10-09-2003, 01:11 PM	#25
Hugo Holbling Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Self-banned in 2005 Posts: 1,344	A word from your moderator... We don't need the bickering, dear participants, so i propose we stay on topic.

10-09-2003, 01:50 PM	#29
Spenser Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Don't you wish your boy friend got drunk like me, Posts: 7,808	Next To tell you the truth BGiC, I don't particularly enjoy debating with you. I seem to receive nothing more than strings of unsubstantiated assertions and now links to places with nothing more than unsubstantiated assertions. The first link I gave you was full of references and done in a very scientific manner. The others were time lines of civilizations and there written records. It is a scientific FACT that a world wide flood having occurred is impossible; it would have left a mark, not just a story. Also, it is a historical FACT that civilizations were in existence and flourishing during the so called time frame of the flood. I opened this post here because I would rather spend my time debating the topic I was debating in the first place and I figured any one here more interested in the topic could easily provide your answers for you. You may think you have caught me off guard but I do not wish to dwell in a world of reiterating historical facts that I find to be common knowledge (especially when considering the amount of time that would be required to get into this). I'm sorry if this insults you or any one else. On a side note I challenge you or any one else to find non-religious universities that gives any credence to a world wide flood or suggests Egyptian or any other ancient civilizations recorded history as bogus! Strangely enough in the fields of science and history the concept of a world wide flood is laughable. Now other people here seem more than willing to debate you on this so why are you avoiding them???

10-09-2003, 03:13 PM	#30
Cross Examiner Veteran Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Carlsbad, CA Posts: 1,881	wait, I'm supposed to be the one who cares about this now? Spenser, You, personally, don't want to discuss this. OK. No problem. Out of respect for you, and in response to this 'bait' you set, I came to this thread. I wouldn't normally care to discuss this sort of thing either. It doesn't interest me. In fact, in a certain sense, I am quite comfortable at summing up the OT (i.e. The Law and the Prophets) as Jesus did (Matthew 22:34-40) and leave it at that. I might even categorize myself as a theistic evolutionist, if I cared to research the matter diligently, who simply lacks the credulity of the materialist to believe in abiogenesis and the eternality of matter (better-studied with regards to these latter two). My view on Genesis, in particular, tracks along the lines of what one may read in C.S. Lewis' works (whom I've been quoting a lot lately, can you tell I dig?). Which is not to say that the OT is not inspired or is inaccurate with regards to scope of intent, rather, I prefer to focus on the NT (and NT philosophy/theology), it being of significantly closer relation to that of the modern Western mind, and in which I am particularly confident. With that, then, adieu mon ami. Regards, BGic

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

10-09-2003, 06:05 AM	#22
keyser_soze Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: god's judge (pariah) Posts: 1,281	How freaking hard is it to understand that flood stories are common because people tend to build communities near water sources? The nile flooded every damn year for millenia before they dammed it up! Jeez, a flood story coming from an area that floods occasionally! Wow! Color me surprised. There is absolutely no evidence, nor any possible logical support for a world wide flood. Ever. The people that posit this ridiculous assertion rely on "supernatural" explanations for evidence. Which is pretty damned thin.

10-09-2003, 06:29 AM	#23
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	How freaking hard is it to understand that flood stories are common because people tend to build communities near water sources? I agree that is a highly probable explanation and should be an added "+" to my third possibility above or added by itself as its own possibility

10-09-2003, 01:30 PM	#28
gregor Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 932	That true.origins link is a rebuttal in the same way that "so's your mother" is a rebuttal to a supreme court brief.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.