0"1"23456789

[ayin jade]

Anyway, the Flood never happened. It's a fact. So the Bible is not inerrant.

There is plenty of evidence that the Flood happened.

You have heard about the ancient city of Troy. Have you ever heard about how it was discovered? An archaeologist decided to take the greek stories as a true event, instead of the myth everyone claimed they were. He took the physical descriptions of the city and looked for it. Big surprise, he found it. It was a huge shock to the world at that time. Up until then, the world didnt think Troy existed.

There is much science doesnt know about our world. That doesnt negate the flood, especially given the evidence for it.

[nebula]

It isn't simpler or more complex. It implies the existence of a superior entity that is omnimax and outside of reality/nature/whatever who created the universe, created all lifeforms... etc etc so it's not complex in the sense that it's difficult to understand, it's less parsimonious than any other theory we have about most things. That's what Ockham's razor deals with, parsimony - it's called principle of parsimony, too. To explain the existence of the universe with "God did it" is much less parsimoniuos then actually studying all we can study about the universe and try to see where the evidence leads. Even if the laws of physics are much more complex than "God did it" they are more parsimonious because they don't require belief in something for which we have no evidence whatsoever.

What's with the SAT words?

Anyway, just so you know, I am a science major, so I'm not about "God did it" and let it go. Far from it! I'm fascinated by understanding the method. Our Scriptures actually encourage us to dig out truth and know the unkown. The Lord created us this way. I can show you the passages if you are interested.

What you are missing in this, which we keep looking back to is cause. Science has yet to determine the cause of the Big Bang, the cause of universal formation, the cause of life. Even amoeba "understand" the need to consume food and avoid predation. Where does that come from?

Is science capable of even touching this one?

[nebula]

What's the meaning of SAT?

Oh, you must not be an American.

SAT is an annoying test we all had to take before graduating high school that colleges use as a guideline for acceptance.

The English section tests us by using words no one ever uses or has heard of to see if we can figure out the meaning by the way the question was put together.

Great As a science major you should know that the principle of causality is outdated metaphysics. Not everything has a cause and since we know that then it's best to just assume the universe came into being uncaused, at least until we have a better theory.

Oh come on - don't scientists want to know what was before the Big Bang and why it happened? Why did the singularity go "Boom!"?

The need of an amoeba to avoid predation and search for food comes from the fact that all the amoeba that didn't search for food and didn't avoid predation are DEAD.

But why? What makes it that way? It doesn't have a nervous system!

Why don't you bring this questions to the science thread? I'm not sure what the topic of this thread is but I'm fairly sure we're off-topic.

No more off-topic than the Flood, I don't think.

[redeemed098]

Au Contraire Mon Frere!

We do have evidence that God exists. It is the Universe and the Creation itself. Which is far less Parsimonious than the exacting chipping away that Science has tried to do for years and still has come to no conclussion other than conjecture.

The universe is evidence for the existence of the universe.

You cannot use Okhams to discredit God when the originator of such thought ruled it out from such use. He himself saw that there was nothing more simple than, "I AM".

That's as simple as it gets and overules logic in the case of Okhams, period.

"I am" is a way of accepting axiomatically that I exist. It isn't a self-evident truth, but I have to accept it as true because I can't prove it and nothing else would have any sense if I didn't accept it. How you can link this "I am" with God is beyond me.

I didn't use Ockam's razor to discredit God and if you read again you can see that what I did was not disprove God but show that the OP idea is flawed, i.e. it relies on too many assumptions. However you're welcome to show what's about the principle of parsimony that makes it unfit to be applied to everything. You have to find something in the principle itself, though, because the assertion "it just can't be used that way" is just an assertion no matter if it comes from you, Ockham himself or a flying krapac from the planet kepral.

Lepaca,

I wonder what God would say if you presented the principle of parsimony to him....

Can you please explain to me how it is possible for a blind man to believe in God.....? What evidence did HE see...!! I am quite intrigued by how you can so blatantly and confidently say there was no flood and state it as fact......That lepaca is calling God a Liar..Are you aware of that...??

I listened to an atheist dialogue on a radio station called "Hell Bound Allee" (Interesting title for an atheist isn't it..?) You know what the extent of their argument about man having a spirit was...?? It took all of 5 seconds for them to single handedly come up with the answer to a question man has been asking for thousands of years.....You ready for it.....????? "Oh ...well regarding the spirit, there is no such thing as a spirit so i guess we can move on now."

WoW......They smart or what...? Every single time you label something in scripture as nonsense you are calling God a Liar......Every time Lepaca....You're not calling Christians Liars...You're calling God himself a Liar...!!!

I almost forgot......Regarding the reference to the Link between God and "I AM", This is the answer God gave to Moses when he asked God "When I go into Egypt and speak to the Israelites, when they ask me who the God of my fathers is who has sent me what shall I say..? " God answered him and said, " I Am who I Am.

Jesus also made reference to I AM a number of times in his ministry. "Before Abraham was I AM." "I AM the way the truth and the Life." I AM the bread from heaven that you shall eat and LIVE." I AM the True shepherd. I AM the Gate, I AM the door, I AM. You see even though Jesus was seen as a prophet by many, he neglected to say, "Thus saith the Lord". You see he didnt have to....He WAS the LORD...He was I AM.

"Who are you o man to talk back to God..?? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, why did you make me like this."

"Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge...? Brace yourself like a man, I shall question you and you shall answer me. Where were YOU when I laid the foundations of the earth. Tell me if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions??? Surely YOU know...?? Who stretched a measuring line across it..??on what were its footings set..??or who laid its cornerstone- while the morning stars sang together and all the angels sang for joy. Who shut up the sea behind the doors when it burst forth from the womb when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness, when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place, when I said this far you may come but NO further, HERE is where your proud waves Halt. Have you ever given orders to the morning or shown the dawn its place, that it might take the earth by its edges and shake the wicked out of it." Shall I continue Lepaca...?? Makes you feel kind of insignificant doesnt it....??

"Where is the wise man ? Where is the scholar ? Where is the philosopher of this age ? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world ? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its WISDOM did NOT know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what is PREACHED to save those who believe.. The Jews demand miraculous signs and the Greeks LOOK FOR WISDOM, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and FOOLISHNESS to gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and gentiles, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."

Lepaca, I know a philosopher that was saved after reading that last scripture. Maybe you will be too....!!

Regards,

Ben.

Edited June 19, 2006 by redeemed098

[redeemed098]

I am quite intrigued by how you can so blatantly and confidently say there was no flood and state it as fact

Did you even read through the link I provided for the mass amount of evidence that a global flood did NOT occur? Or are you simply ignoring the evidence so you can continue believing your "infallible holy book"? Since you obviously passed over the link last time, I will post it again...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Edit:

You're calling God himself a Liar...!!!

I think you would have to prove the existence of God before ANYONE can call him a liar. Besides, the scientific evidence against the occurence of a global flood stands in opposition to religious dogma.

JMW,

Now the earth was corrupt in Gods sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people of the earth had corrupted their ways. So God said to Noah, "I AM going to put an end to all people for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I AM going to bring floodwaters on the earth and destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish. But I will establish my covenant with you and you wil enter the ark- you and your sons and your wife and your sons wives with you." Genesis 6:9-21

Have a listen to this bit...Awesome..!!

And God said, "this is the sign of the covenant I AM making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come.

I have set my RAINBOW in the clouds and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the Rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. NEVER again will the waters become a flood to destroy ALL life. Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth. God said to Noah " this is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and the earth."

Think about that next time you see a rainbow in the clouds.

To say that there was NOT a flood is biblically incorrect. To do so is to call God a Liar.

Lets continue on now to the New Testament and see what else God has to say about the flood...

2 Peter: They will say, "where is this coming he promised.?? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation". BUT they DELIBERATELY forget that Long ago by Gods word the heavens existed and and the earth was formed OUT of WATER and BY WATER. By these WATERS also the world of that time was DELUGED and DESTROYED. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgement and destructin of ungodly men.

Not a flood this time as God promised. This time the earth will be refined by fire. The elements will be destroyed by fire and the earth and every thing in it will be laid bare.

Once again, this is Gods Word. Your opinion on that wont alter a thing. To say these things did not happen and will not happen in the future is to call God a Liar.

I would NOT want to be in your shoes on judgment day.

Regards,

Ben.

Edited June 19, 2006 by redeemed098

[CellShade]

I am quite intrigued by how you can so blatantly and confidently say there was no flood and state it as fact

Did you even read through the link I provided for the mass amount of evidence that a global flood did NOT occur? Or are you simply ignoring the evidence so you can continue believing your "infallible holy book"? Since you obviously passed over the link last time, I will post it again...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Edit:

You're calling God himself a Liar...!!!

I think you would have to prove the existence of God before ANYONE can call him a liar. Besides, the scientific evidence against the occurence of a global flood stands in opposition to religious dogma.

Read your link, have those read those things before, that's just assumptions atheist and scientist are making, no real facts, what I mean is the funny thing if you cared enought to look for the truth you would also find lots of pages which answer all those points in that page, also when refering to The Bible, refer to It with respect.

I find the Idea of us decendin from some monkeys rather a joke , as so with the theory of a ''big bang'' .

Fact, 66 chapters or so of The Bible, maybe = some 1,000 pages in certain Bibles, will explain everything perfectly better then, millions of scientist and atheist trying to find out the truth, writing some millions of pages filled with junk and wrongful documentation, thousands of hours spended to finally not being able to answer the question, of how the earth was created and how we the people were created, and the only thing they can try to do is disproof 66 chapters of truth which has being documented in history, if you would just do more search, and perphaps give God a chance, you would know He is there, waiting for you to give your life to Christ.

History has documented most of The Bibles events and truth, the fact that you are still wondering wether Christ lived or not is just humanly impossible since the history, that you trust so much, documented the events when Christ rose again in the third day, like it or not, it happened , your choice if you want to accept it or not, God will always be waiting for you, but time is running out in this world, your choice.

God Bless You All

Edited June 19, 2006 by CellShade

[CellShade]

To add, many Boatship engineers and scientist, even non christian, have agree that the form and the size and everything of how the arc was created was in perfect size, that it was a perfect ship, that it had the perfect measures on it and the perfect materials along with measures.

[nebula]

What we want to know is how but as far as I know there is no way to explain the coming into being of the universe,

So we give up trying?

Science is about knowing the unknown, is it not? What if scientists thought there was no way we could understand light and gave up on the research to figure it out?

So, why give up on understanding more of this "singularity" from which the Big Bang came from?

so we have to resort to Ockham's razor and the scientific method in general to select the best theories.

So, we pick and chose what we deem best out of what we think we know.

Why call this "truth"?

As far as I know the theory that says it came into being uncaused is the most parsimonious . . .

OK - that's what I meant by the SAT (Scholastic Assessment Test) word. "Parsimonious." I looked it up and still had difficulty figuring out what it was you were attempting to convince me of.

But why? What makes it that way? It doesn't have a nervous system!

O_O You mean God is telling plants how to reach for sunrays and water? I don't see how a nervous system is needed for an organism to feed etc.

Did I say anything about plants?

I was asking how the amoeba "knows" to search for food and consume it. Honestly, it's a valid scientific question.

[CellShade]

Read your link, have those read those things before, that's just assumptions atheist and scientist are making, no real facts

HAHA! Then I guess the following are not facts;

How do you explain the relative ages of mountains? For example, why weren't the Sierra Nevadas eroded as much as the Appalachians during the Flood?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers. [Johnsen et al, 1992,; Alley et al, 1993] A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up?

How are the polar ice caps even possible? Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to float the polar caps off their beds and break them up. They wouldn't regrow quickly. In fact, the Greenland ice cap would not regrow under modern (last 10 ky) climatic conditions.

Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by (1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus, (2) different grain size distributions in the sediment, (3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater), (4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters. Why do none of these show up?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time. [becker & Kromer, 1993; Becker et al, 1991; Stuiver et al, 1986]

Your ignorance of objective, observed science amuses me.

Oh, and you can't use the Bible to prove the Bible. That is called Circular Reasoning. Check it up on Wikipedia sometime;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

No, I am not using The Bible to proof The Bible, I am using Historic events that have been registered, do internet searches and you will find a lot of the Bible events happening, and this told and acknowledged by non christians.

Also your Circular Reasoning theory is incorrect, since that applies to science aswell doesn' it, after all, science looks for proof of it's theory in it's own science.

Looks to me that it's circular reasoning depending to which source it is reasoning of; Example: The Bible, no circular reasoning, since many of it's proof are in historic registed events, and the earth itself is a proof of it's events.

While science is Pure circular reasoning since it lies in scientific methods, which means it lies in it's own science.

So basically your theory got messed up by your owns words and thinking.

God Bless You All

[Observer of dreams]

The heaviness depends on the light in order to exist, for if there were no light there can be no heavy.

Without evil there is only good, but good by itself is not good it is only being.

There must be evil to have good, Likewise there must be failure to have success.

If there is no good or evil than there is morality, if there is no immoral there is no moral.

If we have no posessions than there can be no theives as there is nothing to steal.

If there were no God there would be no atheist as we would all hold this understanding and be alike.

In order to have atheist there must be God or atheism becomes common knowledge and would not be labeled as disbelief.

Christ is the unfolded appearing as an elegant poem awaiting to be read by all.

God is the folded and incomprehensible, Jesus unfolds and tells what he can, but our understanding is limited to our nature, and our nature is imperfect.

Yet if all of man is imperfect then we are perfect in our imperfection and fallable to the unfolding story of the universe.

A mans' question is the source of his wisdom. A mans' answer is the source of his stupidity. My answers are stupid as the words do not match the wisdom. What I say is "leaf" when I mean "tree." The leaf is trampled on easily, though the tree stands firm

A loaded question is the fools answer to the unquestionable

A loaded answer is the fools question to the unanswerable

I have started threads in the past for debate. This thread was a spontaneous generation. Basically I just felt like typing it. It seems out of everything contained in this topic what is focused on most is this line;

If there were no God there would be no atheist as we would all hold this understanding and be alike.

In order to have atheist there must be God or atheism becomes common knowledge and would not be labeled as disbelief.

I do not state this in vain. If there was never a God, man would have no knowledge of God ever existing. Even the name God wouldn't exist so therefore there would be no God to have a denial of meaning there would be no atheist. There would be no belief or disbelief in god.