Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Then you are a fool, for a literal genesis has been so thoroughly discredited by modern science that to believe in it makes as much sense as believing in the Tooth Fairy.
Of course, perhaps that makes me a larger fool, for attempting to show something to someone unwilling to open their eyes to see it.
I merely made a valid point in response to a cheap shot against an ex-president who stayed true to his Christian values. Completely beaten? That's called intellectual dishonesty. This fantasy land where you believe atheists are always right and Christians are ALL stupid and completely wrong 100% of the time is the world you live in. That's not reality.
See the highlighted text? That's called a straw man. It is also known as crucifixation. You are playing the poor me, wanting so much to be a martyr. Do not blame me for the outrageous and unsupportable claims that are in your Bible. Those claims are your burden to bear if you claim they are true. Not you, or anyone else has been able to support what is one of the most ludicrous claims in the Bible to be true. Matthew 27:51-53 is perhaps the MOST ludicrous claim, but the flood is right up there.
Falsifiable physical event. Why is there no evidence? In this case, lack of evidence is stunning evidence that this whopper of a myth never happened.
I appreciate the rep and the PM, but just saying that "god did it" does not help your case at all. That is just another UNSUPPORTED claim.
Then you are a fool, for a literal genesis has been so thoroughly discredited by modern science that to believe in it makes as much sense as believing in the Tooth Fairy.
Of course, perhaps that makes me a larger fool, for attempting to show something to someone unwilling to open their eyes to see it.
I made it clear why I don't put blind faith in modern science. You ignored my arguments as expected. Go ahead and worship your test tube God. It won't serve you well in the afterlife though.
I made it clear why I don't put blind faith in modern science. You ignored my arguments as expected. Go ahead and worship your test tube God. It won't serve you well in the afterlife though.
there is no evidence for an afterlife. and if there is an after life to look forward to then why support our families and help the unfortunate? this is what is wrong with religion, make false promises of an afterlife
your life today depnds on modern science, internet, computers, cellphone, food at the local grocery stores, medical science which increase the life span from 30 years old to over 80 years today. if you hate science why don't you stop living a modern lifestyle?
Answer this, if God was truly real, would you bow down and serve Him, or give Him the finger and go to hell instead?
My first thought is that I had better bow down to avoid being tortured in hell for all eternity. However, if I was singing and shouting praises to him in a paradise paved with gold, I think I would always feel bad for the billions who were in extreme pain and agony. Therefore, knowing that masses of people are being tortured would not allow me to really be happy in this place called heaven.
there is no evidence for an afterlife. and if there is an after life to look forward to then why support our families and help the unfortunate? this is what is wrong with religion, make false promises of an afterlife
your life today depnds on modern science, internet, computers, cellphone, food at the local grocery stores, medical science which increase the life span from 30 years old to over 80 years today. if you hate science why don't you stop living a modern lifestyle?
There is no evidence for the afterlife because it is an event that occurs outside of this physical realm. I don't understand why you would think we should be able to recreate it in a lab or something.
There are countless reports of encounters with the supernatural, ghosts, hauntings, NDE to at least suggest that there is something beyond this life. That's more evidence than you have for your position.
I never said I hated science. I just don't believe it's completely infallible.
There is no evidence for the afterlife because it is an event that occurs outside of this physical realm. I don't understand why you would think we should be able to recreate it in a lab or something.
There are countless reports of encounters with the supernatural, ghosts, hauntings, NDE to at least suggest that there is something beyond this life. That's more evidence than you have for your position.
those are nothing more than hallucinations caused by chemicals in the brain. people with temporal lobe epilepsy and schizophrenia also report seeing things that cannot be seen. drugs, mushrooms, plants and other entheogens also produce similar results. in ancient times people ingest certain plants and mushrooms in order to see the gods and experience the supernatural. the brain is prone to hallucinations
I made it clear why I don't put blind faith in modern science. You ignored my arguments as expected. Go ahead and worship your test tube God. It won't serve you well in the afterlife though.
I was about ready to support you (in a limited way) by using the notion that a theoretical god could use miracles to create a vast amount of water and then when the water was no longer needed, dismiss it with another miracle. If I had a god, that's how he would operate. After all, any being that can create the universe can also create a few gallons of water.
I had one of these response text areas all ready for me to type that in, but when I gave the notion some more thought, the concept just did not work. I think the main problem is not simply that there is just no evidence of a world-wide flood, but that there is actually evidence that there was no flood. Technically two different things. If there were no evidence of a world-wide flood, that still leaves a distinct possibility that there could have been one. But when there is evidence that no such flood took place (i.e. huge areas of the planet have been dry since the dawn of mankind), then that really does pretty much shoot down the whole concept.
For me as an atheist, the prospect of Noah and an ark is one of the least problematic of the disproven and/or irrational acts and concepts required to make the traditional Bible god at all plausible. Heck, I'm still trying to figure out why a god would demand "faith" of his existence. Why not just tell us? Why not have regular chats with his flock? Franklin Roosevelt did it with his fireside chats, and any God worthwhile would be more powerful than any Democrat, and most Republicans.
As another poster asked; Why bother with a flood? Why not just use with some sort of simple swipe-of-the-hand mass extermination? I guess God may have been simply going for the dramatic, as he seemed to often do with his use of fire and brimstone, pestilence, and so forth.
I was about ready to support you (in a limited way) by using the notion that a theoretical god could use miracles to create a vast amount of water and then when the water was no longer needed, dismiss it with another miracle. If I had a god, that's how he would operate. After all, any being that can create the universe can also create a few gallons of water.
I had one of these response text areas all ready for me to type that in, but when I gave the notion some more thought, the concept just did not work. I think the main problem is not simply that there is just no evidence of a world-wide flood, but that there is actually evidence that there was no flood. Technically two different things. If there were no evidence of a world-wide flood, that still leaves a distinct possibility that there could have been one. But when there is evidence that no such flood took place (i.e. huge areas of the planet have been dry since the dawn of mankind), then that really does pretty much shoot down the whole concept.
For me as an atheist, the prospect of Noah and an ark is one of the least problematic of the disproven and/or irrational acts and concepts required to make the traditional Bible god at all plausible. Heck, I'm still trying to figure out why a god would demand "faith" of his existence. Why not just tell us? Why not have regular chats with his flock? Franklin Roosevelt did it with his fireside chats, and any God worthwhile would be more powerful than any Democrat, and most Republicans.
As another poster asked; Why bother with a flood? Why not just use with some sort of simple swipe-of-the-hand mass extermination? I guess God may have been simply going for the dramatic, as he seemed to often do with his use of fire and brimstone, pestilence, and so forth.
What would you say is the most problematic concept of Christianity? As for why God doesn't just come down and talk to us, you have to understand it from a spiritual perspective since God is a spiritual being. One reason He can't just simply reveal Himself fully to humans is our limited minds could not handle it all at once. It would be like trying to teach a baby advanced calculus. You must grow first through a process of salvation and then learning through faith.
Also sin basically acts like a barrier or signal jammer that prevents God from interacting with man. Now born again Christians who are not living in sin certainly hear from God. And He often tells them to do things they don't want to do. Now why would someone's imagination do such a thing?
WHAT springs of the deep? You cannot just make up things into existence. Where did the water come from and where did it go?
See that up there in red? That is a CLAIM. You cannot use one CLAIM as evidence for another CLAIM. Basic stuff, lad.
Springs of the Deep? Here is the Biblical map of the world showing where the deep is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
