04 Jul 05
Originally posted by telerionWind, heat, run off, plant life. How long does land take to dry once
Now I know that I am about to entertain a natural explaination, and that such an enterprise is unnecessary.
I would like to know why you don't think the earth would be covered in an enormous mudlayer? I have lived through a local flood, I guarentee you that floods leave exactly that. A flood as big and sudden as the one proposed by the literalists, a ...[text shortened]... ur scientific understanding of floods, or is now the time to skip to the crux of the matter?
it is above the water line?
Kelly
04 Jul 05
Originally posted by telerionI'm pointing out what the scripture says, natural explanations? The
What's with the natural explanations, KJ? Just get to the point.
God can do anything. God did it. It doesn't matter how, as there are an infinite number of ways he could do it.
water came from above and below during the flood.
Kelly
Genesis 7
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
04 Jul 05
Originally posted by KellyJayObservation contradicts a literal reading of this.
I'm pointing out what the scripture says, natural explanations? The
water came from above and below during the flood.
Kelly
Genesis 7
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
There is no evidence of a global flood, yet there is plenty of evidence of at least one local flood that would have seemed like the end of the world to anyone caught in it.
I use my judgement and go for the latter theory.
04 Jul 05
Originally posted by KellyJayI'm not slamming it per se. I'm slamming screwing around with ridiculous and unfounded assertions about the natural world when such sophistry is unnecessary.
I do not have trouble one saying God did it, because I believe that
God did it. Your post seemed to slam that, that was why I used
your post. I don't see how anyone can avoid God acted during that
story since the whole point of that story is one big, God acted.
Kelly
Goddunnit is fine. It's unreasonable (i.e. entirely dependent upon faith and devoid of empirical support), but as long as your audience grants your assumption that your god really exists, then it's fine. A lot of other claims are like that. In fact a countably infinite number of them. Every claim of the actions of god or god(s) is justified by an analogous criteria. Appeals to 'magic' also fall in this category. It also answers how Santa delivers presents to all the little children in one night.
Personally, even as a xtian, I never liked when all I could muster was the arbitrary, "My god can do anything," claim.
04 Jul 05
Originally posted by KellyJayInteresting question. Wondered through any wetland habitats recently? With that much water, probably many years. The ground would be saturated for a very, very long time.
Wind, heat, run off, plant life. How long does land take to dry once
it is above the water line?
Kelly
Besides, even if it did dry out, who said the mudflat had to be wet?
If you want to continue this naturalistic explaination a while longer, you still have to come up with the whole ecosystem mass simulteneous migration problem.
Eventually, you will be forced to cave in to 'Goddunnit.' Why not just go there right now and not muddle it with false empirics?
04 Jul 05
Originally posted by KellyJayWell, given that we can be pretty damn sure that no such vapor canopy or massive oceans in the center of the earth existed, I guess this isn't a natural explaination at all, but rather a mythological one. I concede that.
I'm pointing out what the scripture says, natural explanations? The
water came from above and below during the flood.
Kelly
Genesis 7
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
Of course, who knows, maybe the Earth was 10 billion degrees Fahrenheit yesterday, but all the laws of nature were radically different for that period and that kept us from detecting the heat wave. I don't want to be a uniformitarian you know.
04 Jul 05
Originally posted by telerionWhat's even worse is that "My god can do anything" is only used when it's convenient, while you may get "That's impossible" if that is convenient. Like in the discussion about the Ark: How could the animals get to the ark and survive there etc. etc.? - No problem, goddunnit. So, why didn't he let all animals survive the flood or destroy the humans in some other way? - What a stupid idea, that's impossible.
Personally, even as a xtian, I never liked when all I could muster was the arbitrary, "My god can do anything," claim.
05 Jul 05
Originally posted by telerionI agree, I am not at all happy about it either at times; however,
I'm not slamming it per se. I'm slamming screwing around with ridiculous and unfounded assertions about the natural world when such sophistry is unnecessary.
Goddunnit is fine. It's unreasonable (i.e. entirely dependent upon faith and devoid of empirical support), but as long as your audience grants your assumption that your god really exists, the ...[text shortened]... never liked when all I could muster was the arbitrary, "My god can do anything," claim.
at times that is the correct answer. I believe God is real, God is
alive, God has changed my life, and is still working on me for
the good. (Thank God) I am aware that many don't want to
believe in God, some even are ashamed or embarrass of their own
beliefs, that happens. I believe in a natural world, but also believe
in the supernatural, which can affect things both great and small
in the world and in our own individual lives.
Kelly
05 Jul 05
Originally posted by telerionI started out saying God did it, throughout that whole story God has
Interesting question. Wondered through any wetland habitats recently? With that much water, probably many years. The ground would be saturated for a very, very long time.
Besides, even if it did dry out, who said the mudflat had to be wet?
If you want to continue this naturalistic explaination a while longer, you still have to come up with the wh ...[text shortened]... in to 'Goddunnit.' Why not just go there right now and not muddle it with false empirics?
to be active, from telling Noah build the boat, sending all the various
kinds of animals to the ark, closing the door on the ark, flooding
the world, unflooding the world, allowing everything to multiply again
and diversify into the various of creatures we see today. If God isn’t
there doing directing and so on, it does not happen.
Kelly
05 Jul 05
Do you agree that there is no scientific evidence to your belief that in the global flood? If you do then I guess it's just a matter of faith. You believe God did all those things and erased the evidence. I believe he didn't (and couldn't).
Arguing more would not help any as you will not be shaken from your belief and neither will I.
05 Jul 05
Originally posted by XanthosNZI believe that the fossil record speaks to the flood, I do not believe
Do you agree that there is no scientific evidence to your belief that in the global flood? If you do then I guess it's just a matter of faith. You believe God did all those things and erased the evidence. I believe he didn't (and couldn't).
Arguing more would not help any as you will not be shaken from your belief and neither will I.
in our dating systems as I'm sure you are aware. Some of the
placement of fossils such as on top of mountains, give me reason
to believe as well. Just as I believe that each living being multiplying
after its own kind makes me believe in creation over evolution. It is
faith on my part, trust me I admit that! As I believe others believing
in many of the conclusions of man, or man's foundational views are
also matters of faith. We can both look at a fossil you can believe,
because of a dating method it is millions or billions of years old, but
you cannot be proven wrong. So the methods used are not conclusive
as far as I'm concern, if they are all in error, there is no way, none
what so ever that you can ever find that out.
Kelly
05 Jul 05
Originally posted by KellyJayThe fossil record speaks for a massive extinction a couple of thousand years ago? Care to back that up with evidence?
I believe that the fossil record speaks to the flood, I do not believe
in our dating systems as I'm sure you are aware. Some of the
placement of fossils such as on top of mountains, give me reason
to believe as well. Just as I believe that each living being multiplying
after its own kind makes me believe in creation over evolution. It is
faith on my p ...[text shortened]... are all in error, there is no way, none
what so ever that you can ever find that out.
Kelly
The fossils on top of mountains can be explained by the fact that mountains are forced up by tectonic plates. They weren't always mountains.
05 Jul 05
Originally posted by XanthosNZThere weren't always mountains, you can believe that? Hmm, I believe
The fossil record speaks for a massive extinction a couple of thousand years ago? Care to back that up with evidence?
The fossils on top of mountains can be explained by the fact that mountains are forced up by tectonic plates. They weren't always mountains.
that suggests that at some time in the past that the earth didn't look
like it does now.
Kelly
05 Jul 05
Originally posted by KellyJayThat's not inconsistent with uniformitarianism, if that's where you're going with this. Scientists embrace the fact that the earth didn't always look as it does now. It's the laws of the universe that they don't like to monkey around with to make an idea work out. Truthfully, KJ, when you are forced to ad hoc completely alter and then selectively tailor a universal law in order to cover for one of many holes in a naturalistic justification for a miracle, shouldn't that make you feel a little uneasy?
There weren't always mountains, you can believe that? Hmm, I believe
that suggests that at some time in the past that the earth didn't look
like it does now.
Kelly
KJ, there are a tremendous number of xtians that realize that accepting the evidence for evolution and accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior are not mutually exclusive actions. Why are you letting con men make a mockery of your faith by bonding it to a quacked out pseudo-science money pit? They have a control over you and your mind that is certainly not xtian.