Do you believe their was a worldwide flood?

And so we go around in circles again...
You believe it because a book says so. But as I have already said, the rationality used by that is the same as saying that Gandalf exists because a book talks about him. No one has provided any reason why that book should be trusted as a reliable source for information on something so HUGE.

So all we have, is a book which we have no reason to rely upon saying something which is impossible. I guess you are right, we should just leave it there.

 

We have faith in the Book and that is the only thing you need. If you don't believe in it, that is fine. Don't post negative things about it though.

 

Or what? Will your god strike me dead?

 

Why do you have faith in it?

I'm just saying it is fictional. That isn't negative.

Lord of the Rings is fictional. Doesn't mean I think any less of it as a book.

 

It's amusing how many people have said some things are "impossible". Like, splitting an atom, walking on the moon, E=MC2 being wrong etc..

From what I have learned in the amount I have endured on this earth, is that nothing is impossible. That idea of "impossibility" is flawed thinking on our part. It just means we have not thought of a way to do it, or find out about it. IMO of course.

Col

 

Apples and Oranges. Saying that something is impossible to be acheived is entirely different from something is impossible to have happened given evidence that it didn't.

For example, to say "It is impossible for John To Kill his neighbour" is obvisouly flawed thinking. But to say "It is impossible that John did kill his neighbour because John was in a conference in China with 50 people and Johns Neighbour was at killed at home in London"...it is an entirely different grade of impossible.

Of course, impossible is still an imperfect word. Just like perfect. Nothing is perfect, nothing is necessarily impossible. They are too absolute. So, I use them in a practical sense. "Impossible" so far as it is worth saying.

You may dismiss the idea of impossible, but you still can't deny the fact that it is, in fact, as impossible as is worth mentioning for a flood to have occured given the evidence.

 

The confusion about where all the water went comes from thinking that the earth has always looked the way it does now.

 

I am sorry. I lost you when you said "Apples and Oranges". It got way too convoluted from then on.

Col

 

You mean I actually addressed your concern. Whatever. Cover your ears, Lalala. *If I can't hear you, it can't be true.*

There is no confusion there. The 'confusion' as you call it, still remains that the flood story fails on every possible account.

Not just the water (which has been covered), and not just the geology (which is related to the water, as if the earth was flater, then yes, flooding would be easier), but also the biology, the population statistics, the evidence of recorded societies going back further than the flood, the lack of evidences of such an upheaval in the fossil records. The fact that there are fossil records, and that they are non-uniform. The measurable mutation rates of Cytochrome C in all organisms which gives no indication of a biological bottleneck anytime in the last million years...

Seriously people, pull your heads out. There is a world of competing evidence against such a ludicrous phenomenon, and yet you continue to cover your ears, lock down your brain and focus on "The Bible tells me...blah blah blah, therefore it happened"

And still no one can answer the simple question: Why do you have faith in it?

 

No. That's not what I meant. It's your philosophical tone that loses me. You talk similarly to how discrete maths works. 1 + 1 = 2 or 3 (depends on how you arrive at the result).

Col

 

Sorry for systematically working through a problem, revealing every step of my logic along the way. Most people find this is a good method for finding solutions... (or even a good way of identifying faults in the logic)

 

This may be the problem though. Your logic may not be the same as other people's logic. That's why it pays to respect other people's logic. Because, one day, most likely, you are going to be proved wrong. I wonder if Einstein ever thought his E=MC2 theory would ever be proved wrong??

I can only go by what I see, hear and feel, and of course learn. Many have tried to prove the Bible to be wrong, contradictory, rubbish etc.. However, I see it from a different angle. When I see an organization nearly 7 million strong living in harmony with what the Bible teaches and no matter what creed, race, background they come from, they all live peaceably. Then that's the kind of organization I want to be part of.

Why? Because this world (society) we live in is very very sick and it's not going to get better. God's organization offers people to live in a way that pleases God and also to benefit themselves. The way it is done has been proven time and time again to work very very well indeed.

As I said before. You will know this feeling or knowledge I have of this organization. Most likely because you think yourself too clever. I am not trying to mean here. I used to be this way too. I thought I could explain everything just like you do now. I lived that way for decades. Until I learned the truth and experienced a much happier life. It's not a blind faith I have. I don't have the "blinders" on either. It's rock solid because I can not find fault with how it all runs. No man or men can run the organization the way it runs. Only God can and that's why it works wonderfully well.

Please, continue to enjoy your philosophical views about life or the meaning of it. Your views though (which are shared by many) will not change the way people are. However, God's views most likely will because people are sick of being trodden on or trampled all over by man.

Col

 

I yearn to be proven wrong. There is nothing shameful in being wrong. I am not scared of it. If I was scared of it, I wouldn't so strongly state my position. I would hide behind non-statements and pretend interest and comments like "you believe what you want, and I'll believe what I want." No, that is no way for me to lead my life. I want the truth, and the only way to get to the truth is to find out where you are wrong.

So please, prove me wrong.

As for my logic being different to other peoples logic...we aren't talking about tastes in music here. We aren't talking value judgements. We are talking about the absolute of logic. Logic is logical, or it isn't. And while people can come to different conclusions from teh same facts, it isn't because they are using two different forms of equally valid logic, it is because one of them is using bad logic, or they are overlooking some detail or both.

So, instead of meta-talking, instead of telling me what might happen, or what someone might do, tell me what I have said which is wrong. Man up and face the actual words i have spoken rather than hiding behind half statements and total denial.

Fine, be part of it. I still don't care about you or your organisation. There was no flood, and there is no evidence the Bible is anything but fiction. That is what this thread was started about, and that is what i am talking about.

And no matter how 'good' the world gets, there will always be people claiming it is very sick. We work on 'relationships'. If you were brought up in the Hilton family for instance, you might find it intolerable that you should be denied some luxury item. Yet if you were brought up in a third world country, you would feel intense pleasure by mearly being given the bare essentials.

We adapt to our environment. Even if the whole world was to become this organisation you live in now, people within that global structure would still remark at the impurity in the world. In fact they would form little groups within that organisation, and they would label those who 'do not take their shoes off when they enter buildings' as being evil.

Everyone makes value judgements, but those judgements are always scewed by experience and prejudice.

I still stand by what I said earlier. The world you look at today, while not being perfect (it never will be) is far and away the BEST world that has ever existed. RE Humanity.

And there is your biggest logical failing. "I don't know how to make something run as well as this does, therefore God does it". That is what they call in the business, a Non-Sequitor. It doesn't follow. there is no connection there. There is no absolute connection between the operation of a group of people and the existence of a god, even if that organisation does refer to that supposed god all of the time.

Using that sort of logic, we can prove that Scientology is true. Or that the greek Gods were true because greece was a dominant world power which celebrated freedom, logic and democracy.

Go ahead and continue believing it if you must, but you should at least know that it is invalid. (at least, as stated there)

I'm not trying to change people. I'm happy letting them change themselves.

And if God was real, i would rather be trodden on by man than be trodden on by the God in the Bible. And if you actually read that book, that is all God does throughout the whole damn thing. Repress, demand and kick people while they are down. There is nothing Good about the biblical God.

 

See the problem is that you're making assumptions about what evidence would indicate or fail to indicate a world wide flood. You're also making assumptions about the accuracy of various dating methods. You're assuming that all records of prior life would be wiped out by the flood.

There's no issue with where all the water went. People go swimming in it every day. You're making an assumption that the water of the flood was added to all the existing water already on the earth which you assume was all where it is now.

I just can't imagine what would happen if unimaginable quantities of water would suddenly erupt from under the ground.

I must have been reading a different Bible than you.

 

I have no desire to prove you wrong. There's no need to.

Now there's a lovely comment. "I don't care about you". Exactly what this world is suffering from.

We will have to agree to disagree on that one.

I can't see how I have failed....LOL I am the happiest I have ever been in my entire life. I know the truth. I have a 7 million strong close family (and increasing). I know where I am going. I teach people what I know so they can help themselves just I have helped myself. This is the thing I am talking about and you may or may not experience this for yourself one day in the near future. You will never understand it unless you go see for yourself. I never did either until I saw for myself. No one told me I had to. I wanted to know. I looked for flaws in it for years. Found none. Still can't find any.

That's because you don't know enough about him. If you studied the Bible completely (and I mean ALL of it, not just select verses or select chapters), you would understand his purposes. Until you do, you will continue to have this undervalued opinion of him.

Col

 

Well, yeah. If the flood happened as described in the Bible, then yes, all records of life would be essentially wiped out. maybe not stone tablets, maybe not cave paintings, but yes, every person was killed. Thus we should expect to see a complete bottleneck of human civilisation at the time of the flood. We should expect to see biological evidence in human genetics that we all came from a single gene pool a few thousand years ago (which we don't). We should expect to see only a few thousand years worth of cultural diversity (which we don't). We should expect to see a population throughout human history which indicates a growth from near zero at the point of the flood, but instead we have millions of people all over the world from the africas to china to australia all documented from around the time of the supposed flood.

Of course I am making assumptions, i am assuming that the reality we see around us today is just as real as the reality that existed in teh past. Thats all. Based on the evidence available today, there are many self-agreeing facts which all independently prove that a global flood is impossible. And don't just write them all of as 'Well your dating methods are wrong'. I don't care how popular that argument is for creationists, it is not the only one, and it is still completely accepted as true by everyone except creationists.

Dating methods include 1. recorded history, 2. radiometric dating 3. Mitochondrial DNA mutation rate 4. cytochrome c mutation rate 5. cultural diversification 6. geological erosion and that is just the first few off the top of my head. Scientists don't make stuff up for the fun of it then decree it truth. That is left up to the clergy.

 

I guess i will continue believing I am right.

Context. try to keep things in context.

Hooray for non-confrontation! Maintaining the status quo for millenia.

I don't believe you are looking. See your own previous 3 comments for evidence of this.

You know, Hitler was a great guy too. It's a shame people always concentrate on one or two select things that he did...but if you studied his whole life, then you would understand how loving and caring he was, and that he had a great plan which would unite all of 'his' people in a solid loving, prosperous group.

 

Now you are being funny. I am actually laughing here....LOL

Col

 

I try.

I am also being serious. I would like to think that something that I say actually means something to you.

 

What you say does mean something to me. Problem is you don't think what I say about the organization I am in has any validity in regards to living in harmony with God's purposes. Not just that, it appears you even refuse to go see for yourself.

Col