Chris Crocker

[Peter Parka]

Well I've read both sides and I've read a hell of a lot supporting both sides but at the end of the day none of it was hard evidence. I'll leave it there as this is getting off the original topic now and will get very deep and seeing its nearly 3 in the morning here, I'm too tired to think about it right now!

 

[GraceAbounds]

For me, the Bible is not a science book. It is a spiritual book. I seek spiritual wisdom from it, not scientific wisdom though it may give me glimpses into an infinite world that I can't comprehend in my finite mind.

And my science books are not spiritual books. Science satisfies my longing for wanting to know how things work, but it cannot fill that void inside my soul that seeks meaning and purpose.

Intellectual scientific reasoning and spiritual peace and balance: they are two separate areas of life, both equally important for wellness.

To me, science is the study of God's creation.

 

[All Else Failed]

For me, the Bible is not a science book. It is a spiritual book. I seek spiritual wisdom from it, not scientific wisdom though it may give me glimpses into an infinite world that I can't comprehend in my finite mind.

And my science books are not spiritual books. Science satisfies my longing for wanting to know how things work, but it cannot fill that void inside my soul that seeks meaning and purpose.

Intellectual scientific reasoning and spiritual peace and balance: they are two separate areas of life, both equally important for wellness.

To me, science is the study of God's creation.

Much of science goes against what the bible teaches though.

 

[GraceAbounds]

Much of science goes against what the bible teaches though.

I guess if you think the Bible is a science book then it would. But I don't.

 

[dt3]

Much of science goes against what the bible teaches though.

She didn't say science is always right. In fact, since I'm assuming she believes man is fallible, that would be the last thing she would suggest.

 

[All Else Failed]

I guess if you think the Bible is a science book then it would. But I don't.

So you're willing to accept that the great flood is a myth then?

 

[GraceAbounds]

I don't believe the flood is a myth.

 

[All Else Failed]

Even though there is absolutely no evidence of one?

 

[Maulds]

Much of science goes against what the bible teaches though.

You can have both if you are open-minded enough. My Anthropology professor was a life long Christian.

 

[All Else Failed]

You can have both if you are open-minded enough. My Anthropology professor was a life long Christian.

He was most likely a theistic evolutionist then.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

Adam and Eve prove one thing - women are evil.

 

[dt3]

Adam and Eve prove one thing - women are evil.

And men will do whatever a woman asks regardless of the consequences

 

[TheOriginalJames]

yep. They're trouble makers.

 

[Peter Parka]

Even though there is absolutely no evidence of one?

Actually there is evidence to suggest that a great flood may have happened.


CNN.com - Undersea explorer finds new evidence of great flood - September 13, 2000

This is one example.

 

[All Else Failed]

Its quite common that coastlines recede and expand due to tectonic shifts and the like. Look at Venice, the place is stinking, but not due to tectonic shifts.

"The saltwater shells date from the present back 6,500 years, while the freshwater shells all date to 7,000 years ago and older."


Both of those shells out date when the global flood was supposed to happen.


Now, there *ARE* massive REGIONAL floods. That would be more plausible as to what the bible explains, but still there are massive inconsistencies even with that. I don't see how you can look at a part of land that was previously above land, but now covered in water and say "WOAH EVIDENCE THAT THE EARTH WAS TOTALLY FLOODED!"


Um, they found pieces of wood. Humans have been working with wood and stone for thousands of years. Man has had boats and yachts for a longggggg time dating back to ancient Greece, Egypt and various other advanced civilizations. Those could easily be from one of them. If they really did find the ark, there would be MASSIVE amounts of physical data. Do you know how large it would have had to been to fit every single animal on it, and 2 of each kind?


Another thing is, that Turkey has an obsession with being known as the region where the mythical ark "landed". The boats about it and desperately want it to be them. They have had a long history of finding "relics" from the "ark" and touting them to be real, only to have them looked at by professionals and debunked as nothing special.

 

[Peter Parka]

Well there are arguments for and against. All I'm saying is it isn't true like you stated that there is no evidence whatsoever for the possibility of the flood described in the Bible.

 

[Thebest]

I personally believe that a global flood could have happened, but I don't believe that Noah somehow managed to get 2 of every animal on something like the Ark, mainly because the animals would have killed each other, or the humans that tried to get them, if they were carnivores or something. There's just no way 2 of every single animal would've lasted as long as the bible says they did without a battle royal starting.

 

[All Else Failed]

Well, show me evidence of a global flood then. What you posted wasn't proof.


Actually, a very simple way to dispell the flood myth is to look at China's History. The are one of the oldest civilizations on the planet, and they were around far before this supposed flood, yet they remained uninterupted as a civilization when the flood was supposed to have happened.

If you look at the geographical characteristics of the Earth, it does not support a global flood theory.

 

[Boomer]

Wow, this thread has totally evolved.

 

[Thebest]

Wow, this thread has totally evolved.

I find it strange that we've gone from talking about some artard to debating whether the Flood happened.