Avesther
New Member
hmmm...basically, you utlimately have to come down to a creator? Interesting.
Genesis
- Thread starter Avesther
- Start date
I don't HAVE to come down to anything, GP. I've said I don't know - and you can push me as much as you like, but that's where I stay. I try and make decisions based on information, and I'm not aware of any reliable information on this subject.
Besides - aren't you glad that I'm at least open to the possibility?
Besides - aren't you glad that I'm at least open to the possibility?
PapaToad
Active Member
I am just glad your here Eon 
Dark Virtue
New Member
Gods_Peon said:
I agree with Eon, it's not quanity, it's QUALITY.
Avesther
New Member
Enough equates to quality not quantity? You said there is not enough evidence. So there is enough its just not good enough for you?
SLNT_FIR
New Member
Mmmm.... same question. According to the Bible (it interpretively says so) there will never be ENOUGH "quality" evidence to convince all people like this:
Person x: Hey, i'm a christian
Person y: that's stupid
Person x: well, it's actually not.
Person y: why?
Person x: because it is proven: ooaisjdfoafd & ajdsfljasfdl & afjdsa;jsdf.
Person y: o ok! That makes sense.
------
then again, keep the same names:
person x + y: person y was just converted to christianity!
person q: phhh! that's stupid, why?
person x + y: because of ____ & _____ &_____.
person q: oh, that make sense!
---
and so on, exponential growth, then christian = majority on earth.
---
***this is my view point
WRONG! I don't think that will ever happen.
You are waiting for something that is not going to happen.
***
---
Essentially, if you are not willling to change your viewpoint (not necesarilly right now because i would like you to) it would help you understand, you cannot simply change your angle and look at it as if you are on the inside, u must be inside, which cannot happen without truly changing.
Person x: Hey, i'm a christian
Person y: that's stupid
Person x: well, it's actually not.
Person y: why?
Person x: because it is proven: ooaisjdfoafd & ajdsfljasfdl & afjdsa;jsdf.
Person y: o ok! That makes sense.
------
then again, keep the same names:
person x + y: person y was just converted to christianity!
person q: phhh! that's stupid, why?
person x + y: because of ____ & _____ &_____.
person q: oh, that make sense!
---
and so on, exponential growth, then christian = majority on earth.
---
***this is my view point
WRONG! I don't think that will ever happen.
You are waiting for something that is not going to happen.
***
---
Essentially, if you are not willling to change your viewpoint (not necesarilly right now because i would like you to) it would help you understand, you cannot simply change your angle and look at it as if you are on the inside, u must be inside, which cannot happen without truly changing.
![[toj.cc]WildBillKickoff](/forums/data/avatars/m/1/1206.jpg?1442680067){kind=avatar}
[toj.cc]WildBillKickoff
New Member
SA, I'd venture to say that the vast majority of Christians came to Jesus not because of intellectual arguments, but because they reached a point in their lives where the yearning to be with God outweighed everything else in their life. That's not to say that some people have not come to Jesus intellectually (Josh McDowell and your favorite, Lee Strobel come to mind).
We can argue back and forth until we're blue in the face; the point is, the evidence for both sides is stacked fairly equally from an intellectual standpoint. For every argument, there is a counter-argument, for every theory, there is a weak point. What it boils down to is a decision, based not so much on intellect, but on where you are in life and how open you are to God's tugging on your heart. Before you ask, DV... I don't intellectually "know" that it was God's voice that was calling me. What I do know is that it has never let me down, and I'm certain that something my own 16-year old mind would have concocted would have failed by now, 12 years later.
We can argue back and forth until we're blue in the face; the point is, the evidence for both sides is stacked fairly equally from an intellectual standpoint. For every argument, there is a counter-argument, for every theory, there is a weak point. What it boils down to is a decision, based not so much on intellect, but on where you are in life and how open you are to God's tugging on your heart. Before you ask, DV... I don't intellectually "know" that it was God's voice that was calling me. What I do know is that it has never let me down, and I'm certain that something my own 16-year old mind would have concocted would have failed by now, 12 years later.
PapaToad
Active Member
Thats why the Bible says by Faith we are saved by Grace. Not by Pauls very convineing intellectual arguements.
Well, I disagree. Your faith is one thing - and a thing I would never question, because it's intensely personal and private to you - but to suggest that there is equal evidence both for and against a worldwide total deluge is patently untrue.
There is, in fact, no evidence for a world wide flood. There IS evidence for a number of localised floods, but not at the same time and not globally.
I liked your statements a lot more when you were saying that faith isn't about proof, it is about FAITH. I can respect and understand that - what I can't accept or understand is an usurping of knowledge and logic by faith. Keep them seperate, I say. Don't be like the bible belt school board that found Pi to be offensive and voted to change it to 3.
There is, in fact, no evidence for a world wide flood. There IS evidence for a number of localised floods, but not at the same time and not globally.
I liked your statements a lot more when you were saying that faith isn't about proof, it is about FAITH. I can respect and understand that - what I can't accept or understand is an usurping of knowledge and logic by faith. Keep them seperate, I say. Don't be like the bible belt school board that found Pi to be offensive and voted to change it to 3.
PapaToad
Active Member
Eon said:
Oh do send me something on the Pi thing, and I do concur about changing PROVEN fact because faith does not agree. Which leads me to the Fact that I know of no proven FACT there wasn’t a global flood? I can not recall one shred of written history that tells of dry land during Noah’s time.
I have heard a incredible amount of theories on both; theories and speculation are not proven fact. Not that I have ever let the lack of Facts drive my beliefs. But I would love to research any Facts you have about the Flod not be Global?
MontrezAnthony said:
This was not an agreement to the flood but to the response of MA to Willbillkickoff. Meaning the majority of Christians did not come to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savoir thru intellectual debates.
And its true The Bible says by faith we are saved thru grace.
Sorry if I seemed to lead you stay between the comments.
Have a happy Day!
I'm sorry, that's a highly disingenous statement. You choose to accept only written account histories as proof that the entire world didn't flood a couple of thousand years ago - despite the fact that there are actually trees that are antediluvian in age.
Here's some interesting facts about the Flood.
Maybe rain did fall for 40 days and nights, at least where Noah was. How about planetwide? We found some data about the distribution of Earth's water. The values are in cubic kilometers (km3).
Oceans: 1,370,000,000
Cryosphere (ice): 29,000,000
Groundwater: 9,500,000
Lakes: 125,000
Soil: 65,000
Atmosphere: 13,000
Rivers: 1,700
We need a few more numbers to work with, namely Earth's dimensions.
Earth radius: 6378 km.
Earth surface area: 511,185,932 km2. (Simple geometry)
It is obvious that most of Earth's water is in the oceans, so let's look at rain. Rain is atmospheric water condensing and falling. The atmosphere contains about 13,000 km3 of water. If ALL of this water were to rain out of the atmosphere at the same time, it amount to about 2.5 cm of rain planetwide. That's ONE INCH!
Now the claim is that ALL mountains on Earth were covered. That must include Everest, which is approximately 8.86 km. high. The claim is, therefore, that Earth was covered with water to a depth of 8.86 km. This amounts to a water volume of roughly 4,500,000,000 km3, which is about 3.25 times the total amount of water in the oceans today! And - the atmosphere contains only 13,000 km3. That's tiny compared to the total. Where does all that extra water come from? And where does it go when the flood recedes? If you postulate that is now in the Earth, it would occupy a cube about 1,650 km. on a side. That's just over 1,000 miles per side, or 1/8 of Earth's radius! That would show up FAST in seismic studies, and no such reservoir has been seen.
The story says that the water receded in 150 days. That's approximately 30,000,000 km3 per day! That's a LOT of water to dump. Here we have to work an assumption. Suppose there was a "drain" hole 10 km square (about 6.2 miles on a side). Again, simple calculations work. The product of hole area, water velocity and time will give the volume of water going through the hole. The volume per day we have, the postulated hole area is 100 km2, there are 86,400 seconds in a day. We will solve for the water velocity, which turns out to be about 3.5 km/sec! That's just over 2 miles per second, or 7,200 miles per hour! Not likely.
Quoted from: http://www.physics.smu.edu/~pseudo/ScienceReligion/noahflud.htm
There are, as I've been saying for a long time, a LOT of problems with a global flood that buries Everest.
Here's some interesting facts about the Flood.
Maybe rain did fall for 40 days and nights, at least where Noah was. How about planetwide? We found some data about the distribution of Earth's water. The values are in cubic kilometers (km3).
Oceans: 1,370,000,000
Cryosphere (ice): 29,000,000
Groundwater: 9,500,000
Lakes: 125,000
Soil: 65,000
Atmosphere: 13,000
Rivers: 1,700
We need a few more numbers to work with, namely Earth's dimensions.
Earth radius: 6378 km.
Earth surface area: 511,185,932 km2. (Simple geometry)
It is obvious that most of Earth's water is in the oceans, so let's look at rain. Rain is atmospheric water condensing and falling. The atmosphere contains about 13,000 km3 of water. If ALL of this water were to rain out of the atmosphere at the same time, it amount to about 2.5 cm of rain planetwide. That's ONE INCH!
Now the claim is that ALL mountains on Earth were covered. That must include Everest, which is approximately 8.86 km. high. The claim is, therefore, that Earth was covered with water to a depth of 8.86 km. This amounts to a water volume of roughly 4,500,000,000 km3, which is about 3.25 times the total amount of water in the oceans today! And - the atmosphere contains only 13,000 km3. That's tiny compared to the total. Where does all that extra water come from? And where does it go when the flood recedes? If you postulate that is now in the Earth, it would occupy a cube about 1,650 km. on a side. That's just over 1,000 miles per side, or 1/8 of Earth's radius! That would show up FAST in seismic studies, and no such reservoir has been seen.
The story says that the water receded in 150 days. That's approximately 30,000,000 km3 per day! That's a LOT of water to dump. Here we have to work an assumption. Suppose there was a "drain" hole 10 km square (about 6.2 miles on a side). Again, simple calculations work. The product of hole area, water velocity and time will give the volume of water going through the hole. The volume per day we have, the postulated hole area is 100 km2, there are 86,400 seconds in a day. We will solve for the water velocity, which turns out to be about 3.5 km/sec! That's just over 2 miles per second, or 7,200 miles per hour! Not likely.
Quoted from: http://www.physics.smu.edu/~pseudo/ScienceReligion/noahflud.htm
There are, as I've been saying for a long time, a LOT of problems with a global flood that buries Everest.
Avesther
New Member
Which is an assumption that Mt Everest existed pre-flood and not as a result of the flood.
Dark Virtue
New Member
What leads you to believe that it didn't?
The science of Geology is reasonably certain how old the Himalayan chain is.
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/5112/bio.html
Or do you honestly believe that those mountains shot up out of nowhere in less than 6,000 years? Regarding comments that Science cannot prove or disprove God - well, that's EXACTLY the point that I'VE been trying to make.
If you believe God has been planting / erasing scientific evidence for the actions that have been taken according to the bible so that signs of things that never happened have been created and signs of things that did happen have been erased, then you have to admit that there is no scientific basis for believing in the flood. You also have to start asking yourself the WHY behind such behaviour.
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/5112/bio.html
Or do you honestly believe that those mountains shot up out of nowhere in less than 6,000 years? Regarding comments that Science cannot prove or disprove God - well, that's EXACTLY the point that I'VE been trying to make.
If you believe God has been planting / erasing scientific evidence for the actions that have been taken according to the bible so that signs of things that never happened have been created and signs of things that did happen have been erased, then you have to admit that there is no scientific basis for believing in the flood. You also have to start asking yourself the WHY behind such behaviour.
PapaToad
Active Member
Eon said:
I admit I have no scientific base for believeing in GOD. That is true and I never said otherwise. But I do have a spiritual basis for it my beliefs. No I do not believe God erased all traces of himself, I believe we are looking with our eyes when we should be searching for God in our spirits.
PapaToad
Active Member
Eon said:
Are you refering That I was hypocritcal, uinsincere or lyning in a decitfull manner??? I made a comment, one that you seem very offended by. So what you are telling me is that science has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt the flood never happend?
I read your banter; And without completely reseaching everything you laid out. The best minds in the world figure the Moon would be hundreds of feet deep in moon dust if the age of the universe was correct by their mathimatical calcualtions.
The same theoris and equations proably came up with the theory that the atomic bomb would cause a chain reaction to every molicule it touched through out the world.
MY POINT Dear Eon, is science has about as much a handle on they theories as do the Christian faith between denomiations.
No one is sure; we are doing our best to make sense of this ball of mud, but I never made a disingenous statement; I stated it the best I could.
I'm choosing to believe that your statement was a debating tactic, yes. The alternative is to believe you actually don't know of any of the arguments against creationist science in general and against the flood in particular.
A five minute Google search brought me a detailed study by a CREATIONIST website telling Creationists not to use the tired old Moondust argument for fear that it makes Creationists look bad. I copy you a link to the document here to show you why.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v7/i1/moondust.asp
Like many arguments used by Creationists it was disproved some time ago - this one actually was disproved something like 25 years ago according to the article - but still gets trotted out to fool the unwary.
A five minute Google search brought me a detailed study by a CREATIONIST website telling Creationists not to use the tired old Moondust argument for fear that it makes Creationists look bad. I copy you a link to the document here to show you why.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v7/i1/moondust.asp
Like many arguments used by Creationists it was disproved some time ago - this one actually was disproved something like 25 years ago according to the article - but still gets trotted out to fool the unwary.
PapaToad
Active Member
Eon said:
No Eon, you somehow confuse me with someone who is trying to convine you that YOU must believe my point of view. I am no one of those people. I will be glad to explain my veiws and beliefs. BUT I will noit debate the vaildity of the Bible.
To debate and agrue such things is a fruitless endevor. Thats what we have debating clubs. To see who can make the most valid arguement. I am not one of those.
At the time of the hype, 1960 and so forth those were theories, because no one knew; and me adjusted our caluations snice then. That is true. My point was Dear Eon. No one can say for certain.
There are many things scince can not explain. and ""Guess at, same point, there are many tings in the Bible I can only specualte at and when I finally pass from this earth. Then we will see who was more on tract.
Odale
Active Member
Im not sure what i believe... anymore that is.
I AM A CHRISTIAN, KEEP THIS IN MIND!!! No one can prove either way that either Christianity or the Scientific belief of creation is valid. Im going to play the devil's advicate for a second. Lets say that im an Atheist inside and out. There is no proof Christianity is real. Your feelings, and your consience keep you going 100% all day long, and i cannot explain it, nor can i find evidence that Chirst walked the earth 2k+ years ago. Sure the bible SAYS Christ walked the earth, but did he really do it, or is this some phenominally successful practical joke played by some Middle Eastern men and women 2000 years ago? You dont know, no one does. You believe it, you have to.
No one can proove that everything we know and cherish came into being by one golfball sized object 10 billion years ago. I cannot jump in a time machine and show you all that i was once part of a golfball. Unfortuneatly it just doesnt work like that. There is no evidence of the big bang theory, none whatsoever. All we have to go by is the direction the galaxies are taking in the universe. They are expanding from a point. Perhapse the galaxies did come from an epicenter, that was the golfball that did the banging; you still have to ask where the golfball came from. And even if the golfball was a succession of another universe... you have to ask, yet again... where that pervious golfball came from. You cannot explain it, and you cannot answer it. No matter how mnay big words you use, that doesnt tell me if im wasting my time in Church or not. (Not that i am.) I am here and i am living, now. Thats all i care about. When i die i know i am going to a magnificent place we call Heaven. I have a ton of questions to ask God when i get up there... trust me; this is one of them.
Now... onto somthing that might need to be cleared up...
Their world was the area we know as the Middle East. Evidence is showing that the Mediterranean flooded into the Caspian sea through the Bosporus near present day Turkey. Heres the link for more info:
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/lessons/17/gk2/floods.html
Mount Everest is the product of the Indian Subcontinent colliding with the Asian Continent, which takes many millenia do to... not 9 or 10 thousand years.
I AM A CHRISTIAN, KEEP THIS IN MIND!!! No one can prove either way that either Christianity or the Scientific belief of creation is valid. Im going to play the devil's advicate for a second. Lets say that im an Atheist inside and out. There is no proof Christianity is real. Your feelings, and your consience keep you going 100% all day long, and i cannot explain it, nor can i find evidence that Chirst walked the earth 2k+ years ago. Sure the bible SAYS Christ walked the earth, but did he really do it, or is this some phenominally successful practical joke played by some Middle Eastern men and women 2000 years ago? You dont know, no one does. You believe it, you have to.
No one can proove that everything we know and cherish came into being by one golfball sized object 10 billion years ago. I cannot jump in a time machine and show you all that i was once part of a golfball. Unfortuneatly it just doesnt work like that. There is no evidence of the big bang theory, none whatsoever. All we have to go by is the direction the galaxies are taking in the universe. They are expanding from a point. Perhapse the galaxies did come from an epicenter, that was the golfball that did the banging; you still have to ask where the golfball came from. And even if the golfball was a succession of another universe... you have to ask, yet again... where that pervious golfball came from. You cannot explain it, and you cannot answer it. No matter how mnay big words you use, that doesnt tell me if im wasting my time in Church or not. (Not that i am.) I am here and i am living, now. Thats all i care about. When i die i know i am going to a magnificent place we call Heaven. I have a ton of questions to ask God when i get up there... trust me; this is one of them.
Now... onto somthing that might need to be cleared up...
Eon said:
Their world was the area we know as the Middle East. Evidence is showing that the Mediterranean flooded into the Caspian sea through the Bosporus near present day Turkey. Heres the link for more info:
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/xpeditions/lessons/17/gk2/floods.html
Gods_Peon said:
Mount Everest is the product of the Indian Subcontinent colliding with the Asian Continent, which takes many millenia do to... not 9 or 10 thousand years.
Last edited: