Atheists, if the Bible is fake, then why are the stories in it and its worldview so believable? (ancient, best)

[Padgett2]

One question:

Was the entire world the same as the entire world that we know about today?

OR was the "world" the KNOWN world that the people of the old testiment knew?

Did Noah and his familly know about all of the continents when they passed the story on, or were they just speaking of that little piece of earth that they knew about?

In fact, they probably thought the world was flat, the sun was small and revolved around the earth. They may have even thought that if you walked far enough, you could fall off the face of the earth.

The Times and Knowledge have changed since the Noah story was first told.

[dtango]

Originally Posted by Padgett2

One question:

Originally Posted by Padgett2

Was the entire world the same as the entire world that we know about today?

When it comes to the sea there is no difference between our world and theirs.
When one finds out that the sea level has been rising for thousands of years, he knows that it is rising everywhere.
Have a look at grapheme in post #312. The sea level commenced rising rapidly at about 15,000 years ago and stabilized at about 8,000 years ago.
For 7,000 years every generation was passing to the next the information that the sea level was constantly rising and in some cases the phenomenon could be verified by watching low lands disappearing under the sea.

The flood myths of the Mediterranean area were recorded 5,000 years after the sea level had stopped rising perceptibly. The people forgot it was the sea that flooded their lands and they only knew the legends they were told of a catastrophic flood.

5,000 years is time quite enough for producing the story of the single family that survived the flood on a raft, boat, or ark.

One only needs common sense to understand mythology once he possesses the necessary information. Unfortunately people think of themselves omniscient in matters they never studied.

Originally Posted by Padgett2

Did Noah and his familly know about all of the continents when they passed the story on, or were they just speaking of that little piece of earth that they knew about?

There was never a Noah, or a Deucalion, or a Utnapishtim, or a Manu family. That is just the fairy-tale part of the myth.

Originally Posted by Padgett2

The Times and Knowledge have changed since the Noah story was first told.

Correct! The... omniscient guys who never studied a single ancient text, however, do not take this factor into account.

[ArtieE]

Originally Posted by dtango

None of us is a looser. I learned who told Odin about Ragnarok and you learned about the Flood.

There is only logic, reason and common sense. Whoever presents that is the winner, whoever discards that is the loser. There's no converting anyone to their side because that would imply that one has an inflexible and rigid belief system. Logic, reason and common sense don't take sides. It's just a matter of trying to make people see that and if they do it's fine if they can't then just give up and move on. But in the meantime one can learn a lot!

[Vansdad]

Originally Posted by ArtieE

There is only logic, reason and common sense. Whoever presents that is the winner, whoever discards that is the loser. There's no converting anyone to their side because that would imply that one has an inflexible and rigid belief system. Logic, reason and common sense don't take sides. It's just a matter of trying to make people see that and if they do it's fine if they can't then just give up and move on. But in the meantime one can learn a lot!

Logic, reason and common sense do not explain everything.

[ArtieE]

Originally Posted by Vansdad

Logic, reason and common sense do not explain everything.

Nope. You need the scientific method and evidence and experiments etc etc to find explanations of course.

[Vansdad]

Originally Posted by ArtieE

Nope. You need the scientific method and evidence and experiments etc etc to find explanations of course.

They are all part of your logic and common sence. What about the things that lie beyond the physical world?

[ArtieE]

Originally Posted by Vansdad

They are all part of your logic and common sence. What about the things that lie beyond the physical world?

That is where the logic, reason and common sense comes in. We don't know there is anything beyond the physical world simply because if we could use scientific methods to measure it it wouldn't be beyond the physical world. Whatever it might be to have any effect in our physical world it would have to interact with it and is therefore not beyond it.

[Vansdad]

Originally Posted by ArtieE

That is where the logic, reason and common sense comes in. We don't know there is anything beyond the physical world simply because if we could use scientific methods to measure it it wouldn't be beyond the physical world. Whatever it might be to have any effect in our physical world it would have to interact with it and is therefore not beyond it.

True that there might be things we make sence of and become part of our physical world. like EM waves for example, but I think it's a stretch to think that there are not things of consciousness that are not physical and never will be. I think it is narrowing things in this world to just think that everything will fall into our catagory of logic.

[ArtieE]

Originally Posted by Vansdad

True that there might be things we make sence of and become part of our physical world. like EM waves for example, but I think it's a stretch to think that there are not things of consciousness that are not physical and never will be. I think it is narrowing things in this world to just think that everything will fall into our catagory of logic.

Our category of logic has worked wonders so far. I'll stick with it. If you want to believe there's something else that's ok but unless this something else interacts with our physical world it isn't even relevant to us and if it does it's natural.

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

Originally Posted by Vansdad

True that there might be things we make sence of and become part of our physical world. like EM waves for example, but I think it's a stretch to think that there are not things of consciousness that are not physical and never will be. I think it is narrowing things in this world to just think that everything will fall into our catagory of logic.

It is not simply that we have decided everything to do with consciousness MUST be physical and therefore we will dismiss all other claims.

The issue is that when we look for evidence that consciousness is connected to the physical we find loads, and we can manipulate it and end it and so forth.

When we look for evidence that there is a non physical aspect to it, we find none.

All we can do is operate on the evidence we have, without ignoring any we have, or inventing any we do not. To my knowledge all the evidence we have ties consciousness to the physical, none to the nonphysical.

So what is your point?