More Questions for Christians

[polar bear]

Genesis 7:17-24

That's the claim. Evidence must be independent of the claim.

Wow, are we really going to have to go this basic with you?

C'mon man...his story is peer reviewed. He read it and reviewed it that settles it! Who needs anymore than that?

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

Noah's flood is simply a war story. It tells how he evaded the invading enemy army that swept through the area destroying and pillaging everything it encountered. The story uses number of war and peace words to show that it was just a war story.

BTW, have you forgotten how Ethiopia, Assyria, Persia, and Arabia were just down the road from the Garden of Eden where Adam & Ever were and how those places and all their people were just fine after the "flood"? So where's the record that those places were ever flooded to their highest mountain?

And remember, the stories about how the Egyptians periodically swept through the land as well as the Ethiopian Emperor and his million man army.

Basically only idiots think that an extra layer of water six miles deep covered the world, disappeared in a month or so, and left all of the fresh water lakes and rivers undisturbed and intact olive trees covered the land.

Please use your 21st Century intellect and stop believing in silly fairy tales concocted by con men over four thousand years ago.

---

Even to someone who may not be a partisan in this discussion, they should at least be able to comprehend your purposefully slanted, and erroneous depiction of history. But what is amazing is that the Bible also addresses your suppression of the truth:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools...For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen." The letter of St. Paul to the Romans, chapter 1.

Paul couldn't remember his own lies so he's not the most credible person.

1 Corinthians 1:16 (GNT) = (16 Oh yes, I also baptized Stephanas and his family; but I can't remember whether I baptized anyone else.)

[Ryantology]

You talk to a Christian (at least, the clearly insane ones we frequently attract), and it can't cease to astound. They not only reject reality. They seem to honestly believe that reality is a deliberate insult to their fantasy.

One day, psychologists won't have to pretend that religious belief isn't a cognitive defect. This thread alone makes that case indisputable.

[Chas]

2. Do you believe jonah really was able to live in a fish and survive?

Who said he was alive those three days, it is a Christ example of being in the grave for three days.

Two days, not three. Friday mid-day to Sunday morning makes not quite two days. Do you guys even math?

---

By the way, fossils of sea critters are found on mountains and whale bones are discovered in a dessert.
How did they get there? And why do you not know about it?

We know all about it and how they got there. You have a fable.

---

Even if there was a worldwide flood...why does that automatically signify the existence of a deity?

What it signifies is the book that confirms a deity is and has been right while 'science' lets us down yet again.

You once again display your utterly simplistic thinking and childish need for certainty, even when that certainty is demonstrably wrong.

[Harry37]

Genesis 7:17-24

That's the claim. Evidence must be independent of the claim.

Wow, are we really going to have to go this basic with you?

Your Claim: The flood was not worldwide. You've provided no evidence.
Then you asked for evidence that there was a worldwide flood. I did. Take it or leave it.

[FatAndFaithless]

Good lord...

Harry, you have a claim that there was a worldwide flood. We say that there is no evidence for a worldwide flood, so it is unreasonable to believe that there was one. When asked for evidence, you just provided the claim again.

The bible is not evidence for the bible. I trust even you can see how circular that is, quoting scripture to justify scripture.

[Harry37]

---

---

Even to someone who may not be a partisan in this discussion, they should at least be able to comprehend your purposefully slanted, and erroneous depiction of history. But what is amazing is that the Bible also addresses your suppression of the truth:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools...For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen." The letter of St. Paul to the Romans, chapter 1.

Paul couldn't remember his own lies so he's not the most credible person.

1 Corinthians 1:16 (GNT) = (16 Oh yes, I also baptized Stephanas and his family; but I can't remember whether I baptized anyone else.)

Although the subject of who Paul baptized is a tangent, it points out your exegetical weakness. You need to read the context: verses 10 - 17.

[The Grand Nudger]

Your Claim: The flood was not worldwide. You've provided no evidence.
Then you asked for evidence that there was a worldwide flood. I did. Take it or leave it.

That the deluge narrative is physically impossible, in it's entirety...... to every tiny fucking detail- would be the evidence. Where would you like to begin? Set a point, a rock from which you will not slither, and I'll chip it to gravel for you.
(the flood story is actually one of my legitimate favorites - as a story, btw. I'm a fan.)

[Harry37]

Good lord...

Harry, you have a claim that there was a worldwide flood. We say that there is no evidence for a worldwide flood, so it is unreasonable to believe that there was one. When asked for evidence, you just provided the claim again.

The bible is not evidence for the bible. I trust even you can see how circular that is, quoting scripture to justify scripture.

Rather than clog up the message with my response, you might consider the following site as "evidence" for the global flood:

http://www.apologeticspress.org/APConten...ticle=1791

blessings,
Harry

[The Grand Nudger]

I won't accept your lazy ass link as evidence. State the strongest point you feel comfortable discussing from your source. Make the case, do work - if you expect it from others.