DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[possibletarian]

I believe the Bible in many circumstances is literally true.  Of course there are parables and stories built in and some books and verses on prophecy are highly symbolic but much of the Bible is not.

So given that if you had lived a few hundred years ago you would likely have included the flood and a earth just a few thousand years old in that, how do you go about deciding what is true or not ?

[Pat Mustard]

Well, since we're talking about debated origins. Are there any flat earthers present?

Flat Earth theory is ridiculous.

So the bible is wrong then. Why, if so, do you persist in believing its equally wrong flood myth?

---

If you're a Biblical literalist, an analysis of the Noachide flood makes it into an absurd, improbable event.

Rain would have to fall at the rate of 30 feet per hour for 40 days in order to reach the top of the highest mountain, which is five miles above sea level.  Imagine a fire hose, hitting wooden decks that are only sealed with pitch, for 960 hours straight.  It would not take long to breach the hull, flood the entire ship, and kill everyone on board.

Perhaps you should take a less literal approach to scripture.

Astreja, I've never thought of it in this way before

I mean, I know the flood is bullshit on the idea of "the entire world flooded" but to really breakdown why it would pretty much fail, from a construction basis, is another level of logic I hadn't entertained 

You should see some of the conjectures they use to explain where the water went. NSFW kind of

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I believe the Bible in many circumstances is literally true.  Of course there are parables and stories built in and some books and verses on prophecy are highly symbolic but much of the Bible is not.

So given that if you had lived a few hundred years  ago you would likely have included the flood and a earth just a few thousand years old in that, how do you go about deciding what is true or not ?

Careful, you might force him into critical thinking. Then we'd have to bury him.

[Anomalocaris]

So given that if you had lived a few hundred years  ago you would likely have included the flood and a earth just a few thousand years old in that, how do you go about deciding what is true or not ?

Careful, you might force him into critical thinking. Then we'd have to bury him.

I believe he subscribes to the better dead than understand school of Christian Science.

[Joods]

If you're a Biblical literalist, an analysis of the Noachide flood makes it into an absurd, improbable event.

Rain would have to fall at the rate of 30 feet per hour for 40 days in order to reach the top of the highest mountain, which is five miles above sea level.  Imagine a fire hose, hitting wooden decks that are only sealed with pitch, for 960 hours straight.  It would not take long to breach the hull, flood the entire ship, and kill everyone on board.

Perhaps you should take a less literal approach to scripture.

I believe the Bible in many circumstances is literally true.  Of course there are parables and stories built in and some books and verses on prophecy are highly symbolic but much of the Bible is not.

Wrong. According to your religion, the Bible is the inerrant word of god.

But please, continue to cherry pick it apart in order to meet your goals. Whatever those might be.

[CDF47]

I believe the Bible in many circumstances is literally true.  Of course there are parables and stories built in and some books and verses on prophecy are highly symbolic but much of the Bible is not.

So given that if you had lived a few hundred years  ago you would likely have included the flood and a earth just a few thousand years old in that, how do you go about deciding what is true or not ?

It's all true.  There just are parables and symbols in some of the text.

---

Flat Earth theory is ridiculous.

So the bible is wrong then.  Why, if so, do you persist in believing its equally wrong flood myth?

---

Astreja, I've never thought of it in this way before

I mean, I know the flood is bullshit on the idea of "the entire world flooded" but to really breakdown why it would pretty much fail, from a construction basis, is another level of logic I hadn't entertained 

You should see some of the conjectures they use to explain where the water went. NSFW kind of

The Bible is correct.  There was a massive flood.

---

I believe the Bible in many circumstances is literally true.  Of course there are parables and stories built in and some books and verses on prophecy are highly symbolic but much of the Bible is not.

Wrong. According to your religion, the Bible is the inerrant word of god.

But please, continue to cherry pick it apart in order to meet your goals. Whatever those might be.

It is the inerrant word of God.  It just happens to include parables and prophecies.  The prophecies are highly symbolic.  It also includes figures of speech which need to be interpreted at times as well.

---

By the way, thanks again to the moderators for allowing me to speak in this forum! I was banned from another atheist forum in the past so it is good to be allowed to discuss these things with atheists here.

[Bucky Ball]

There was a massive flood. 

---

There was not. 
There is not a shred of evidence there ever was a flood which wiped out virtually all of humanity. 
It's nothing but delusional crap. 
Asserting falsehoods does not make them true.
There is no massive silt layer. All floods have silt layers. Not even a relatively small silt layer exists common to the Near East.

The interesting thing about this, is the extent of "compartmentalization" necessary for fundy believers to buy into this shit.

[Anomalocaris]

Moron must moron.

[CDF47]

There was a massive flood. 

---

There was not. 
There is not a shred of evidence there ever was a flood which wiped out virtually all of humanity. 
It's nothing but delusional crap. 
Asserting falsehoods does not make them true.
There is no massive silt layer. All floods have silt layers. Not even a relatively small silt layer exists common to the Near East.

The interesting thing about this, is the extent of "compartmentalization" necessary for fundy believers to buy into this shit.

Other civilizations have massive flood stories.  Christianity is not the only one.

[possibletarian]

It's all true.  There just are parables and symbols in some of the text.

So how do you tell the difference between something that happened, and something that is a symbol or parable ?