Literal belief in the flood story

[RobbyPants]

Prove there were children at the time of the flood.

Prove there was gravity at the time of the flood. Prove there was a sun at the time of the flood.

I've already stated that I agree with you that the Bible does not establish 'no children as normal'.

Then why do you insist on asserting unreasonable assumptions as reasonable third options?

---

I'll try to clarify one more time: I'm not arguing that because the Bible didn't specifically say there are children that there were none. I am stating that among the survivors there were no children so that leaves open the possibility that there were no children at the time of the flood. And again, the burden of proof is not on me to prove that there were no children, but rather on you to prove that there were.

Your argument is: Because I(you) have always observed that the earth's population includes children therefore there were children at the time of the flood.

That is a faith based statement. It's not proof, it's an assumption. Furthermore remaining consistent in your thinking: I have always observed that the earth has never undergone a worldwide flood that wiped humanity off the face of the earth with the exception of 8 people therefore the flood never occurred.

You grant an 'exception to the rule' in one case but not another.

---

You can call it faith-based, but that doesn't mean that it's unreasonable induction. Your stance is to assert a really weird, admittedly not normal assumption to prove a "possible" third way.

The possible fourth way is unicorns. The possible fifth way is leprechauns. I don't care about infinity other "possibilities". If you can't prove leprechauns, I'm not going to assume leprechauns. If you can't prove the not-normal situation of no kids, I'm not going to assume it.