I have read your post, it employs the very same derogatory tone as the others.
As RD said, when you come onto a Christian Forum spouting irrational beliefs, don't expect us to be very
nice.
In fact, I'm kind of surprised Sherman hasn't banned you already for being a troll, since she's a bit stricter than I am when it comes to keeping trolls off the site.
I'm wondering if you are all schooled in how to respond?
People like myself and
@Right Divider, and others, don't find it necessary to be nice to people who come onto our home turf and disparage our beliefs and claim to be a know-it-all.
Try growing thicker skin and actually dealing with our challenges to your position.
The Flood isn't a myth like the stories you find in Greek Mythology. It actually happened.
Now, that's not to say that Greek Mythology doesn't have some basis in reality, but that's a different topic for another thread.
there are 3 Flood epics from Sumerian and Babylonian that predate the Flood of Noah.
Just because the records of the Flood in the Bible do not predate other records of a catastrophic event in other cultures does not mean that the stories themselves originated before the Flood happened.
Don't confuse the records of events with the events themselves.
Also, the fact that other cultures have a record of a flood event at all, despite being separate from the record found in the Bible, is VERY strong evidence that a flood did, in fact, occur. As
@Idolater pointed out, what you have is corroborating evidence for a flood, not evidence against it.
Gilgamesh and the more ancient poem of Gilgamesh and the epic of Atrahasis within which we get the complete foundation for the Noah Flood story.
You have it backwards.
The flood came first. The story of the flood was passed down through a few generations, and then the story of Tower of Babel occurred, where God confused the languages of the people, and so the story was passed down to their descendants, but not quite as accurately as it should have been. Extrapolate that by a few centuries, and you get stories like the epic of Gilgamesh, among others, and if you go even further out from the flood, and go around the world. to each culture, almost every single culture has a flood story of some kind, though most have been distorted by time and exaggeration.
The Bible contains the accurate record of the Flood, or at least, the most accurate record, even if it's not perfect. This is because God Himself, who was present at the flood, was able to preserve the story as a part of His nation's history, by having Moses record it.
Ecclesiastics is also lifted from the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Ecclesiastes was written by King Solomon, after his rebellion against God. It has nothing to do with the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Interestingly there is evidence that the Black Sea formed via a catastrophic collapse that allowed the sea to pour in likely catching farming communities by surprise.
Pour in from where? What amount of water could form the Black Sea by simply "pouring into" where the Black Sea exists?
Perhaps a flood of some sort? Hmmm.
It is believed that the roar of waters flooding in would have been so unimaginable that it would have been audible up to 100 kilometres away. This occurred around 7,600 years ago
False.
Creation was about 7500 years ago. Anything happening before 5300 years ago, and your dates are wrong, or at the very least, your dating mechanism is in need of serious calibration, since that's when the flood occurred, and any sort of ruins of any civilization would have been utterly destroyed by the flood.
and is a likely candidate for the Bibles Flood myth.
Nope. you don't get "water covered the mountains by 15 cubits (the length from the tip of the middle finger to the elbow)" by 'water pouring into the Black Sea."
There is also evidence of major devastating floods in this Biblical region, anyone of which could have been the basis of the story.
There's evidence of major devastating floods all over the earth, sir.
There's seashells on the tops of mountains, above the treelines. You don't get that by "local flooding."
As for evidence of a global Flood, none exists.
Except for all the evidence you just stated that you want to assert doesn't actually support a global flood.
There is evidence in the sediments of huge regional floods,
Missing the forest for the trees.
but, there simply is not enough water in the planetary system to produce a flood even remotely similar the the Flood of Noah
Yes, there is.
You're apparently forgetting that if the earth was a smooth ball, the surface of the earth would be covered by about 8,810 feet of water.
But the earth isn't a smooth round ball. It's a lumpy mass that has denser parts and less dense parts, where sea-level varies by about 600 feet, depending on where you're at (due to gravity).
and for over 200 years now real geologists, some I might add were wonderful Christian scholars, back in the day when Christianity had the courage of its conviction to allow the evidence to determine what was real and what was myth, the entire body of geologists have not found anything to suggest that a global flood occurred.
The Hydroplate Theory hasn't been around for "200 years." It's been around for less than 70 years, and there has been much opposition to it simply because it's not held by the already established position that doesn't do a very good job of explaining the evidence.
The rocks simply do not lie.
You're right, they don't.
We're not saying the rocks lie. We're saying the rocks aren't saying what you insist they say.
As for a massive regional flood, this seems to be the basis of the story.
It's not.
There are many myths from the Mesopotamian region speaking of a catastrophic deluge,
More corroborating evidence.
they do happen and it is likely that the Bible authors used such an event as the basis of a story concerning the protective power of God, rather than a literal story of a boat and saving animals.
Again, you have it backwards. You're starting with the assumption that the global flood didn't happen and so have to explain that somehow by saying that it was just a local myth of a flood that has been blown out of proportion, when in reality, the flood is what inspired those stories.
I guess that in the age of the Flood their world was very small and any flood seemed global.
Conjecture won't get you anywhere.
Facts and evidence will have no effect on rusted on belief.
So clean the dust off your beliefs then. We'll wait.
There is an endless abundance of studies, research and proof that contradicts literal Genesis,
No, there aren't.
We have collections of every coin that was used in the Bible.
We have discovered the locations of cities named in the Bible (particularly relevant to this discussion, places like Sodom, Avaris)
We know the regions in which the stories of the Bible took place, and archaologists have time and time again confirmed what the Bible says.
The Bible is true. Literally.
but it does not contradict a symbolic, allegoric, spiritual reading of Genesis,
Genesis contradicts itself if it is read in that manner. That's how we know your claim is false.
there are too many studies to mention by a multitude of sciences that are freely available and so very easy to access to anybody with a real desire for the truth.
Yet you won't link to them. Why?
You may not accept what I say, but I'm a Creationist too.
No, you're not.
I have never made a single unChristian claim on this site,
Liar.
Saying "the Bible shouldn't be taken literally, but only figuratively" IS 'unChristian,' because the Bible is internally consistent, and externally validated
I don't believe you.
I have no idea why you think your love for Christ renders my love for Christ as something second rate?
What Christ do you believe in? Some figurative person who doesn't actually exist?
This is why your position is wrong, because it undermines the rest of the Bible.
It may be a Christian forum, but is it only for a very specific kind of Christian?
This forum is for discussion of ideas, and the promotion of truth.
That said the OT is not a Christian Scripture,
So what? Christians uses it because the history contained within it is directly tied to their faith.
it's the Scripture of Judaism
And Christianity.
and is as different from the NT as the Koran is.
The problem with this claim (aside from the fact that the Koran has literally nothing to do with this discussion) is that roughly half of the New Testament is directed at the same people the Old Testament was written about, and that the the people written about and the authors considered Paul's writings to be scripture.
The whole Bible is the Scriptures. Not just the Old Testament.
Now if my presence is out of place,
It is. But that's ok. We don't kick people out just because they have a difference in opinion.
in that this was set up just for Creationist Christians
It wasn't.
to meet and have a bit of a chat,
That's what every forum is for.
well I will apologise for dropping in uninvited and leave you guys to it, just let me know.
Don't be so dramatic. Just grow thicker skin and engage in the discussion like a normal human being, and you'll be fine.