Flynn McKerrow

Care to show me where it says that Methusela was found to be only 1500 years old? I must have missed that part.

From here:
If the flood was 4400 years ago, the tree started growing nearly 400 years before the flood even started! Not only are you bad at science, you are bad at math!




**edited for formatting**

Biff the unclean

The question is still "did the sky darken."
Are the Christians going with "it was a cloudy day"?
What about the rest of the impossible things that happened in the dark?
Please try to stay on topic 55

Amos

For sure not. The Gospels take place in the conscious mind of one man (who can be any-man), and the darkness came upon the personifications of the forces that motivate us within the conscious mind. We can say that when our faculty of reason leaves the conscious mind to enter into the subconscious mind it is obvious that reason did not prevail in the conscious mind and therefore the sky darkened.

Mageth

Magus:

Lol Mageth, frustrated much? Now you know how we feel trying to debate the Bible and theological concepts with people who have no desire whatsoever to ever accept it. Its like talking to a brick wall ( or some cases, an 8 ft steel wall ).

No, I'm not frustrated much. I'm frustrated a bit that people can sometimes be so willingly ignorant about science and evidence. Puzzled that people can accept a 2000+ year old obviously mythical tale recorded in a religious book as factual while rejecting out-of-hand real-world, tangible, touchable evidence that clearly indicates the tale is mythical. Frustrated a bit that those same people take evidence such as the geologic column, sedimentary layers, fossils, archaeology, etc. and attempt to twist the evidence to fit a freakin' myth that for some reason they think they have to believe as true. And frustrated a bit that they sometimes try to pass off what they're doing as science.

IMO, there's a big difference in someone arguing against solid scientific evidence as you are doing in this case and someone arguing against the mythical, magical acts of an invisible, evidence-less being that apparently sees nothing wrong with drowning the world in a global flood.

Face it, Magus, the flood is mythical. You can accept it as a myth and still believe in your God - many Christians successfully do just that. And you'd be better off for it, as you wouldn't have to waste your time trying to defend it - a hopeless cause in the long run.

...people who have no desire whatsoever to ever accept it...

The more I think about this, and the attitude behind it, the more puzzled I become. Are you really this blind? Have you not listened to one word I've said to you on this board?

Magus, I was a theist, a bible-believing theist, for most of my life. I too accepted the tales of the bible. Early on, I was a literalist like you appear to be, accepting what I was told as factual. As I got older, I started to question some of what's in the Bible that was passed off as factual accounts - e.g. the Creation account and the Flood account. That's my "curse", I guess; I have an inquisitive, skeptical mind.

Serious examination of the evidence led me to conclude that they were myths and not intended to be actual history, perhaps even when recorded. They had to be myths because the evidence against them was overwhelming. To believe them true in spite of the evidence would be intellectually dishonest, though I did look for ways to accept them as true accounts in spite of the evidence (which ended up being an impossible task). But I still believed the rest of the Bible, still believed in God, Christ, the resurrection, and our need for redemtion.

Still "cursed" by an inquisitive mind, however, over the years the veracity of the rest of the bible eroded away as I examined more and more evidence, until finally the Jesus account was revealed as mythical as well. With the fall of this belief, I still believed in god. So I turned my attention to the existence of god(s), and concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support belief in any god. Thus, now I lack belief in god(s) - I am an atheist.

It's not that I have no desire to believe, Magus, it's that there's nothing there to believe. You have said nothing on this board that I have not already carefully examined and ultimately rejected. So the "brick wall" or steel wall you are talking to is not one of stubbornness nor lack of desire, but one of reason, years of thought and study, much effort, and careful consideration. I don't take these things lightly.

And I've said to you before, Magus, my family is almost entirely fundamentalist, literalist Christian. They all believe the myths are factual as well. This includes my wife, my parents, all but one of my siblings, their spouses, my aunts and uncles, cousins, nieces and nephews. Trust me, it would be much easier if I believed as you do. If I could, I would; it would make my life much easier (my unbelief has driven a wedge in my marriage). But I know too much, understand too much to blindly believe. I can no longer choose to believe, as I did for the last few years of my faith. Call it a "curse" of an inquisitive, skeptical mind if you wish. Fall back on your bible and claim that God has blinded me if you wish. But just don't ignorantly claim that I have no freakin' desire to believe.

Come to think of it, your desire claim says more about you than it does about me. You apparently have a desire (or a need) to believe the myths, therefore whatever evidence we present to you, you are forced to try to interpret in a way to fit your belief. If you ever did otherwise, you would perhaps have to critically examine your beliefs as I did. Trust me, that's a dangerous place to go, but it is the only intellectually honest way to live one's life, in my opinion.

As I said on another thread, think, Magus; think!

winstonjen

And inbred, no less, which is condemned later on in the bible. So much for consistent morality.

lpetrich

(deleted because I had repeated myself)