• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

The Flood is proof of the Creation

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Logic is binary. You despise binary thinking because you despise logic.
The jargon of formal logic studies is not what happens on TOL. We use the definitions of lay people. Sometimes we may interject a concept from logic theory, but we do not pretend we have been using it all along. Well, except you.
 

Skeeter

Well-known member
Banned
Fun fact: statements can vary in the degree to which they contradict each other. Look at five accounts of a gunman entering a classroom. The students statements might not align, there will be some consistencies. The verbiage will not pair up in neat binaries.

The man had two weapons.
The boy had a gun and a rifle and a knife.


Commonality: The male had at least two weapons.

There is a contradiction in the number of weapons and potentially the age of the male.
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
The jargon of formal logic studies is not what happens on TOL.

What (if anything) do you mean by that?

We use the definitions of lay people.

When you're not using language to affirm false propositions, you're using language in a cognitively meaningless way; far be it from me to assume that you must be speaking meaningfully, just because you say stuff. And so long as you're speaking meaninglessly, you're not engaging in definition.

Whom do you call "lay people"? I don't call anyone "lay people".


Sometimes we may interject a concept from logic theory,

Most of the time you interject strings of words you have cobbled together without thinking rationally about what you are doing.

What (if anything) do you mean by "concept"? What would it be to "interject a concept" into something? And into what would/could whatever it is you'd call a "concept" be interjected?


but we do not pretend we have been using it all along. Well, except you.

Wait, what are you saying I pretend to be using?
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
Fun fact: statements can vary in the degree to which they contradict each other.

What do you mean by "contradict each other," Professor Poser? Since you're dumb enough to tell us that a false proposition can contradict a false proposition, please tell us exactly what it would be for the false proposition, X, to contradict the false proposition, Y.

Perhaps you're also dumb enough to tell us that a true proposition can contradict a true proposition?

Look at five accounts of a gunman entering a classroom. The students statements might not align, there will be some consistencies. The verbiage will not pair up in neat binaries.

The man had two weapons.

The contradictory of the proposition, 'The man had two weapons,' is the proposition, 'The man did not have two weapons'. Two contradictories, one false, the other true, paired up in a neat binary.

The boy had a gun and a rifle and a knife.

The contradictory of 'The boy had a gun and a rifle and a knife' is 'The boy did not have a gun and a rifle and a knife.' Two contradictories, one false, the other true, paired up in a neat binary.

Commonality: The male had at least two weapons.

The contradictory of 'The male had at least two weapons' is 'The male did not have at least two weapons' ('The male had less than two weapons'). Two contradictories, one false, the other true, paired up in a neat binary.

There is a contradiction in the number of weapons and potentially the age of the male.

What (if anything) do you mean by this?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
There you go. Rehabilitates - so true - such a right word to use.

No, making the Bible mean nothing doesn't rehabilitate it. It utterly destroys any meaning it might have.

There's not a two universe system in which natural order drives the physical world with one set of laws and fundamentalist religion has another universe in which natural order gets overthrown and contradicted according to belief alone.

Straw man.

If God is the Creator, then natural order, natural laws, religious laws and realities all belong to a single truth.

Correct.

Natural law, natural order are best described by science, which I might add can only detail, examine and verify the attributes of natural order.

I don't have any initial disagreements with this statement.

Religion is about the essence of natural order which is abstract, esoteric, suggested by inference and includes the spiritual component of being human.

What, if anything, do you mean by "religion"? This is a Christian board. By "religion," do you mean Christianity? Or do you mean something like Islam? Buddhism? Hinduism? some other religion? Because I can tell you, one of those is not like the others.

The entire stage of events that unfold across the breadth of the Bible landscape do so while still adhering to the laws of natural order, a natural order Created by God,

Duh.

not science and as valid and immutable as any other aspect of Creation.

Does that include Satanism? Jainism? Taoism?

The Bible is a work by which to develop the human spiritual landscape,

If that were the case, you'd think more people would be willing to read it. But the reality is that most people have an irrational hatred for the Bible, yet tolerate or even promote other religions and their texts. I wonder why...

not contradict proven science.

The Bible doesn't contradict actual science.

Scientists may make claims that contradict the Bible, but that's because scientists are fallible men.

"Let God be true, and every man a liar."

Science and religion are one and the same.

No, they're not.

Belief in a literal global Flood beggars belief.

There is plenty of evidence for a global flood. Literally all you have to do is open your eyes to see it.

It is an utter impossibility on so many levels

It's not.

that it's staggering to think that such beliefs can still exist in 2022.

What's actually staggering is that you've managed to convince yourself of this nonsense.

You must think God incapable of writing a long-lasting book.

Jesus goes out of His way to restore the sight of a blind person, (spiritually blind, not literally blind)

Rather, He did, in fact, give sight to literally blind people.

and His Father destroys all of humanity except 8

Correct.

who interbreed us back to 8 billion in 3,500 years.

~5300 years, not 3500.

The Son is concerned about the health of a single human and His Father whom He obeys, whom He mirrors without question, destroyed humanity and all life.

God destroyed humanity (except 8 humans) because of how wicked they became. This is evidence that He is a just God.

Jesus, God the Son, healed people because, in addition to God being just, He is also merciful, and capable of bringing about His will.

This is why people are being inoculated against religion, because there is no greater, inflexible certainty than the certainty that is derived by ignorance.

Supra.
 

blueboy

Member
We are all encouraged to get on the Ark, that is, to find the inner spiritual truth within Bible stories. The OT is not Christian Scripture, it belongs to Judaism, though it does contain a great deal of valuable insight for Christians. Jesus said that God is spirit and we must worship in spirit, the worshipping of so called literal truths has done nothing but cause endless division and rendered religion a plaything for the ignorant.

There are Christians divided from other Christians because some see evolution as a Creative force, others see Creation and the stories of Genesis, such as the Flood of Noah as literal. Such literal worship, or belief also divides science from religion.

A loving God drowning a planet full of animals and humans makes no sense. This would suggest that God had both failed as a Creator and had a nature that was fickle and vengeful.

Imagine those poor little platypus and Kangaroos, koalas and emu having to swim and walk all the way to Israel and then back home from the mountains of Turkey through a devastated landscape all the way back to Australia. And imagine if one of the thousands of predators on board the Ark had eaten a living creature when they got off the Ark. That would have been the extinction of an entire species every time they ate.

Creationists are always throwing back a need for evidence, which of cause they are impervious to, otherwise they would not be confounded like they are. I would like to see a Creationist with the courage of their conviction, rather than playing the man, detail, with evidence, just how the Flood of Noah could possibly be literal and describe how a planet might bounce back after such a flood as if nothing happened.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
There are Christians divided from other Christians because some see evolution as a Creative force, others see Creation and the stories of Genesis, such as the Flood of Noah as literal. Such literal worship, or belief also divides science from religion.
Sounds like more platitudes.

A loving God drowning a planet full of animals and humans makes no sense.

This would suggest that God had both failed as a Creator and had a nature that was fickle and vengeful.

Or we could go with how the Bible describes Him.

Imagine those poor little platypus and Kangaroos, koalas and emu having to swim and walk all the way to Israel and then back home from the mountains of Turkey through a devastated landscape all the way back to Australia.

Sounds like you've spent exactly no time investigating what actually happened.

And imagine if one of the thousands of predators on board the Ark had eaten a living creature when they got off the Ark. That would have been the extinction of an entire species every time they ate.

Because the universe will implode if a species goes extinct.

Creationists are always throwing back a need for evidence, which of cause they are impervious to, otherwise they would not be confounded like they are. I would like to see a Creationist with the courage of their conviction, rather than playing the man, detail, with evidence, just how the Flood of Noah could possibly be literal and describe how a planet might bounce back after such a flood as if nothing happened.
For a start, the world and the solar system were radically altered by the flood.

How about you figure out what has been proposed rather than exposing your ignorance.
 

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
We are all encouraged to get on the Ark, that is, to find the inner spiritual truth within Bible stories.
You all are so dumb. You're 2000 years too late, Peter already said that the ark today is the Church (Christian faith), and while you all are just a man, Peter's interpretation is Apostolic.
The OT is not Christian Scripture
Vs. all of the Apostles saying otherwise, who included it in the Christian canon.
, it belongs to Judaism, though it does contain a great deal of valuable insight for Christians. Jesus said that God is spirit and we must worship in spirit, the worshipping of so called literal truths has done nothing but cause endless division and rendered religion a plaything for the ignorant.
How do you all explain the absence of endless division during the 15 centuries before the Reformation?
There are Christians divided from other Christians because some see evolution as a Creative force, others see Creation and the stories of Genesis, such as the Flood of Noah as literal. Such literal worship, or belief also divides science from religion.
Catholics for one don't divide over this. We're free to interpret Genesis literally or figuratively or metaphorically or allegorically or whatever, we have complete freedom to investigate and research and test and challenge.

You all really don't understand or grasp or appreciate or recognize Catholicism.
A loving God drowning a planet full of animals and humans makes no sense. This would suggest that God had both failed as a Creator and had a nature that was fickle and vengeful.
No it would not. And besides, many of them probably all got cooked from released supercritical super-mineral-saturated water before they all had a chance to drown anyway.
Imagine those poor little platypus and Kangaroos, koalas and emu having to swim and walk all the way to Israel and then back home from the mountains of Turkey through a devastated landscape all the way back to Australia. And imagine if one of the thousands of predators on board the Ark had eaten a living creature when they got off the Ark. That would have been the extinction of an entire species every time they ate.
Continents are still moving pretty swiftly from the momentum of the Flood's fountains of the great deep breaking open suddenly.
Creationists are always throwing back a need for evidence, which of cause they are impervious to, otherwise they would not be confounded like they are. I would like to see a Creationist with the courage of their conviction, rather than playing the man, detail, with evidence, just how the Flood of Noah could possibly be literal and describe how a planet might bounce back after such a flood as if nothing happened.
If there's anything this planet seems to do quite well, and fast, it's bounce back from catastrophe.

Also why don't you believe modern scientists who instead of saying there was one gigantic global Flood and extinction event that happened all at once, like the Bible does, say that there were many somewhat smaller but also gigantic floods and extinctions littered throughout the Earth's history?

You all are idiots. Let's see if you all can bounce back from the catastrophe of your apparent incorrigible stupidity like the Earth has done from the Flood.
 

Right Divider

Body part
We are all encouraged to get on the Ark, that is, to find the inner spiritual truth within Bible stories.
Non-Biblical nonsense.
The OT is not Christian Scripture,
Neither is much of the "NT", if you look at it that way.
it belongs to Judaism, though it does contain a great deal of valuable insight for Christians.
2Tim 3:16-17 (AKJV/PCE)
(3:16) All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (3:17) That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Jesus said that God is spirit and we must worship in spirit, the worshipping of so called literal truths has done nothing but cause endless division and rendered religion a plaything for the ignorant.
Nobody should "worship truth"; we should worship God.
Dividing truth from error is critical to worshiping God.
There are Christians divided from other Christians because some see evolution as a Creative force, others see Creation and the stories of Genesis, such as the Flood of Noah as literal. Such literal worship, or belief also divides science from religion.
Evolution (the non-Biblical/anti-Biblical kind) is non-sense. The Flood of Noah is literal history.
A loving God drowning a planet full of animals and humans makes no sense.
Again the fallacious argument (appeal to the stone). Make a real argument instead.
This would suggest that God had both failed as a Creator and had a nature that was fickle and vengeful.
No, it does not. You continue to compound your error.
Imagine those poor little platypus and Kangaroos, koalas and emu having to swim and walk all the way to Israel and then back home from the mountains of Turkey through a devastated landscape all the way back to Australia. And imagine if one of the thousands of predators on board the Ark had eaten a living creature when they got off the Ark. That would have been the extinction of an entire species every time they ate.
Your confusion is immense.
Creationists are always throwing back a need for evidence, which of cause they are impervious to, otherwise they would not be confounded like they are. I would like to see a Creationist with the courage of their conviction, rather than playing the man, detail, with evidence, just how the Flood of Noah could possibly be literal and describe how a planet might bounce back after such a flood as if nothing happened.
This book clearly explains it: https://hpt.rsr.org/onlinebook/HydroplateOverview2.html

P.S. Nobody is claiming that the "planet bounced back after the flood as if nothing happened". That is a STRAW-MAN of your own creation.
 
Last edited:

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Many of them probably all got cooked from released supercritical super-mineral-saturated water before they all had a chance to drown anyway.
Frozen. Not cooked. The venting water was below freezing temperature. But it wouldn't have been temperature extremes that took many lives.

If you lived anywhere near the vent, you likely died of the atmospheric shockwave, including by it launching you skyward. Farther away, you died in the first tsunami.
 

Gary K

New member
Banned
Frozen. Not cooked. The venting water was below freezing temperature. But it wouldn't have been temperature extremes that took many lives.

If you lived anywhere near the vent, you likely died of the atmospheric shockwave, including by it launching you skyward. Farther away, you died in the first tsunami.
When enough water goes through a massdive depressuriztion it will actuall freeze everything around it as the pressured rop creates a massive temperature drop. That's how snow is manufactured for ski areas when there is very little or no snow fall.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
We are all encouraged to get on the Ark,

No, we're not.

that is, to find the inner spiritual truth within Bible stories.

New-age nonsense.

Take scripture at its word, THEN you can go deeper.

The OT is not Christian Scripture, it belongs to Judaism, though it does contain a great deal of valuable insight for Christians.

RD addressed this sufficiently already.

Jesus said that God is spirit and we must worship in spirit,

Yes.

the worshipping of so called literal truths

That's called idolatry.

has done nothing but cause endless division and rendered religion a plaything for the ignorant.

Says the one saying the Bible shouldn't be taken literally...

There are Christians divided from other Christians because some see evolution as a Creative force, others see Creation and the stories of Genesis, such as the Flood of Noah as literal.

And the former are wrong in their beliefs.

Such literal worship,

No one is worshipping "literal-ness."

or belief also divides science from religion.

Says the one who wants everything to be allegorical and not able to be studied.

A loving God drowning a planet full of animals and humans makes no sense.

Sure it does.

This would suggest that God had both failed as a Creator

No, it wouldn't.

and had a nature that was fickle and vengeful.

Nope. But you won't be able to understand why not until you start taking the Bible literally.

Imagine those poor little platypus and Kangaroos, koalas and emu having to swim and walk all the way to Israel and then back home from the mountains of Turkey through a devastated landscape all the way back to Australia. And imagine if one of the thousands of predators on board the Ark had eaten a living creature when they got off the Ark. That would have been the extinction of an entire species every time they ate.

Mocking scripture based on nothing but conjecture is foolishness, sir.

Creationists are always throwing back a need for evidence,

Says the one who hasn't presented a lick of evidence so far.

which of cause they are impervious to,

False.

otherwise they would not be confounded like they are.

The only confounded one here is you, and Skeeter.

I would like to see a Creationist with the courage of their conviction,

Says the one who has yet to respond directly to a single post of mine where I thoroughly dismantle what you say.

rather than playing the man, detail, with evidence, just how the Flood of Noah could possibly be literal

RD linked you to an excellent resource. I recommend you read it.

Or, if you don't have time to read such a book, you can always watch this YouTube Playlist, in which Bryan Nickel explains very clearly, in an easy to understand way, not just WHAT happened, but why it happened.

and describe how a planet might bounce back

It didn't. We're still seeing the effects of the flood today.

after such a flood as if nothing happened.

Supra.
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
We are all encouraged to get on the Ark

blueboy, we all encourage you to get out of the Mystery Machine.

the-classic-mystery-machine-replica-van-built-by-jerry-news-photo-1587131341.jpg
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
When enough water goes through a massdive depressuriztion it will actuall freeze everything around it as the pressured rop creates a massive temperature drop. That's how snow is manufactured for ski areas when there is very little or no snow fall.
Yup. That would be the water jetting into the sky. The stuff that doesn't depressurize rapidly by necessity would not be part of the main fountains and would build up at somewhat normal temperatures at the surface.
 

blueboy

Member
Sounds like more platitudes.



Or we could go with how the Bible describes Him.



Sounds like you've spent exactly no time investigating what actually happened.



Because the universe will implode if a species goes extinct.


For a start, the world and the solar system were radically altered by the flood.

How about you figure out what has been proposed rather than exposing your ignorance.
"Sounds like you've spent exactly no time investigating what actually happened."

I am ready to listen to exactly what happened. Here is your chance to correct my errant understanding of the Flood epic and I will be grateful to read your reply.
 

blueboy

Member
blueboy, we all encourage you to get out of the Mystery Machine.

the-classic-mystery-machine-replica-van-built-by-jerry-news-photo-1587131341.jpg
Look, I'm just taking it in as I see it based on the advantages we have living in this scientific age.

Firstly the OT is not Christian Scripture, but Christians spend 90% of their time messing about in either the OT or Revelation, because that's where all the good stuff is. The end of the world, the flood, the talking snake, dragons and God smiting all those nasty humans. The stuff in the NT where Jesus speaks of love and charity, an equal distribution of food and resources, well, let's get back to the end of the world and the smiting.

Secondly, Genesis was not written for a Creationist in 2022. Genesis was written for late Bronze Age peasants, labourers and all those illiterate and uneducated peoples suffering the drudgery of short, difficult lives. Today we have science and a general global education system so that we might revisit the wondrous writings of the Bible and allow them to reveal the deeper truths that this age gifts us.

Thirdly, as every vibrating atom is part of Creation and natural order is the set of laws God has commanded physical reality to behave via, then anything in the Bible that contradicts natural order and science, (which is also a great and mighty gift from God, so that we might understand a fragment of His wondrous work), must then be superstition and dogma. It takes no stretch of understanding to realise the utter impossibility of a global flood as described in Genesis. On so many levels to accept this story in 2022 as literal is a crime against logic, science, common sense and Christianity itself.

So no Mystery Machine for me, just ordinary, garden variety common sense gleaned from a great deal of reading the works of others. Religion is always destroyed from within, even the might and power of Rome could not touch the Teachings of Christ and His reality, yet literalism in 2022 has rendered certain factions of Christianity religious backwaters that still conform to Bronze Age beliefs in an age of science.

It's a bit like those folk who reenact the Civil War and have battles dressed as knights.
 
Top