Do YOU believe in God?

[pianofrieak2]

Woot.. Go Satan.

 

 

 

Thank you for the great comment. :P

[gandalfmight]

There has never been a universal flood

 

Yep, thats why whole cities with people inside are still underwater....and why people still find fish on top of mountians. The flood infact messed up the layers, that scientists use to figure out how old their little fossils are (when not using carbon dating). Your going to say, well the layers settled like that over millions of years...tell me this why are there stone trees "growing" (petrafied) upward through millions of years of build up?

 

 

 

They didnt cross the sea? Any evidence?

 

 

 

Woot.. Go Satan.

 

 

 

If your talking about 666 then that was supposdly the number of Nero who kill many hundreds (thousands?) of christians.

[apinagez]

There has never been a universal flood

 

Yep, thats why whole cities with people inside are still underwater....and why people still find fish on top of mountians. The flood infact messed up the layers, that scientists use to figure out how old their little fossils are (when not using carbon dating). Your going to say, well the layers settled like that over millions of years...tell me this why are there stone trees "growing" (petrafied) upward through millions of years of build up?

 

 

 

Dude, oceans move. You don't have to be God to move mountains, you see?

[bjbj1991]

Can you find a single contradiction in the whole bible? Can you find a single thing that doesnt agree with the history of the earth?

 

Contradictions- http://www.ethicalatheist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=104

 

Online bibles- http://bibledatabase.net/

 

 

 

Flood, Red Sea, Creation, Plegues, Stoping of the Sun, Tower of Bable, Turning back time, Jesus' birth and revival.

[Mercifull]

http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/2 ... -8032r.htm

 

^^ News story of fish falling from the sky. Its happened a few times in the UK but i coudnt find the articles on the BBC site.

 

 

 

Nice links bjbj1991, another one you might like is this. http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ I think it uses the King James translation.

 

 

 

Would be nice to get some evidence of your claims too, gandalfmight.

[knives669]

That's an awesome link you posted, Matt. The site is very very interesting.

[_k0m0d0_]

Can you find a single contradiction in the whole bible? Can you find a single thing that doesnt agree with the history of the earth?

 

Contradictions- http://www.ethicalatheist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=104

 

Online bibles- http://bibledatabase.net/

 

 

 

Flood, Red Sea, Creation, Plegues, Stoping of the Sun, Tower of Bable, Turning back time, Jesus' birth and revival.

 

Wow... that contradictions link is just awsome! :shock:

[Tigra00]

There has never been a universal flood

 

Yep, thats why whole cities with people inside are still underwater....and why people still find fish on top of mountians. The flood infact messed up the layers, that scientists use to figure out how old their little fossils are (when not using carbon dating). Your going to say, well the layers settled like that over millions of years...tell me this why are there stone trees "growing" (petrafied) upward through millions of years of build up?

 

 

 

They didnt cross the sea? Any evidence?

 

 

 

Woot.. Go Satan.

 

 

 

If your talking about 666 then that was supposdly the number of Nero who kill many hundreds (thousands?) of christians.

 

 

 

I love how you use scientific facts and historic information to prove the Bible right, yet you refuse to believe the theory of evolution.

 

 

 

It's like the ultimate paradox or something.

[Lovelydude]

I, personally do not believe in the pursuit of god, nor do I live as if I am under constant scrutiny by a higher power.

 

 

 

I am absolutely sure, that If everyone grew up in solitary confinement, almost none would display the idea that god is there, and that god created us.

 

 

 

I'm not denying christianity, just saying that it has no logical points and anyone who tries to explain it logically has to do more then a scientist ever would, to explain evolution.

 

 

 

My basic way to live, is to be satisfied with the choices you make and the things you do, without upsetting anyone. Basically, satisfy yourself in the most impartial and safest way you can.

 

 

 

In a way, christianity is not only unethical on some level, but does not really accept those who do not agree with them. Strange, most say they do.

 

 

 

Also, to clarify, I believe good and bad are words to describe what level of satisfaction it brings to people. Therefore, if for you, sex = pleasure, then sex is good in your opinion. If sex brings you harm, it is bad in your opinion. If someone doesn't agree with you, the have either been taught wrong or you have, or disagree with whether you think something is good or bad.

 

 

 

If you save a thousand lives, most people will see that as good. If those thousand people go on to kill another two thousand, most will see your deed as a mistake. Perhaps, those first thousand would have done far more "good" things is life then the two thousand would have.

 

 

 

Everything does not have to be known, our understanding need not go past what we want and need to know.

 

 

 

I find science fascinating, but I do not feel the same about religion. I agree religion in the right circumstances, can make a community better themselves and better their community, but there are religions that are not open minded and make others feel bad or disriminated, and that my friends is not a good thing.

 

 

 

I think this thread, contrary to what others have said, is an excellent idea. I find it intruiging to discuss our religious, and non-religious views in such a fashion.

 

 

 

I therefore am an aethiest, not because I don't believe in religious views, but because I live life the way I want and not being governed by a higher power. Under the restrictions of the law. :oops:

[MyPurpleCrayon]

Would be nice to get some evidence of your claims too, gandalfmight.

 

 

 

Nothing you ever say has 'evidence'.

 

All you do is make ignorant claims.

 

 

 

Conclusion, you're not a hypocrite at all.

[Godzira]

There has never been a universal flood

 

Yep, thats why whole cities with people inside are still underwater....and why people still find fish on top of mountians. The flood infact messed up the layers, that scientists use to figure out how old their little fossils are (when not using carbon dating). Your going to say, well the layers settled like that over millions of years...tell me this why are there stone trees "growing" (petrafied) upward through millions of years of build up?

 

 

 

They didnt cross the sea? Any evidence?

 

 

 

Woot.. Go Satan.

 

 

 

If your talking about 666 then that was supposdly the number of Nero who kill many hundreds (thousands?) of christians.

 

 

 

Ok let me start off by saying that Iâââ‰â¢m not some 12 year old kid and Iâââ‰â¢m the last person the creation crowd wants to see on this thread as one of my pet peeves is bad science and I LOVE to debate this stuff. I assure you, you will not find an individual more well versed on either side of this argument on this forum. So that said, lets get started.

 

 

 

Evolution is proven - Evolution is called a theory because everything that is arrived at through quantitative analysis in considered a theory. Gravity is technically a theory. The truth is that you do not question gravity because gravity has no religious ramifications. The amount of proof for evolution is staggering. Does that mean that every singe part of the theory is perfect? No. But the general premise of evolution through natural selection is and will remain cogent from this day forward despite any tweaks to specific sections of knowledge.

 

 

 

The world is NOT young âââ‰â¬Å Flood geology is NOT REAL. Not a single flood geology theory has been submitted to a peer reviewed journal and survived; all were proven false in short order. There is not one single item of valid evidence that the earth is young or that there was a worldwide deluge. Radio carbon dating as a whole is valid despite isolated odd results due to contaminated samples âââ¬Ãâwhich are quickly identified as faulty and are really quite rareâââ¬Ã

[gandalfmight]

Do I have sources?

 

 

 

The Flood

 

Source 1

 

All of the advocates of the idea that our earth is ancient are insistent that the proof of its age lies in the fossils and rocks in the crust of the planet. They state that these rocks point to a long evolutionary history and were either laid down over a very long period, or with some exceptions, during a local cataclysmic event, such as a massive volcanic eruption.



The fact that many of these rock layers, with attendant sprawling beds of fossils, cover entire continents, even appearing on or near mountain peaks, force "old planet" proponents to theorise about shifting shorelines, massive long-evaporated inland seas, huge meandering rivers, far exceeding anything we see today. In reality, there is very little difference between these cataclysmic events and the probable events of a world-wide flood, other that the span of years in which they occurred. Evolutionary geologists talk in millions, if not billions of years, creationists postulate that these events occurred very rapidly and covered only a few hundred years.



The flood lasted just a year, but the "drying out" process and resultant settling down of a severely traumatised planted would have taken longer. There is for example a very interesting verse in Genesis chapter 10 verse: 25 "And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan." The Hebrew word for divided is PALAG and it means to divide-by a channel of water. It is only used three times in the entire Bible (1), and probably explains the origin of the "jig-saw" configuration of the continents, or the "continental drift" theory. Peleg lived just 3 generations after the flood, so itâââ‰â¢s evident that global catastrophes were still occurring in this "settling down" period. There is even geological evidence that the poles were reversed at this time! Literally, a world turned upside down.



Another event that must have occurred during, and immediately after the flood, but is not mentioned in Scripture, is unprecedented volcanic activity. The volume of water released is simply incalculable, thousands of billions of tons of water forcing down upon the mantle of the planet would have fractured and torn the surface, and depressed large land areas. It is estimated that today that parts of both Greenland and Antarctica are depressed by more than 3 kilometres by the weight of ice resting on these lands.



There is another "piece" of evidence that lends weight to the biblical flood account. Almost without exception, "flood stories" form part of the "tribal memories" of nearly every people group on earth today. These ancient verbal record pre-date Christianity and missionaries, some are as old as the biblical records, having been recorded for posterity by scribes in civilisations older than Egypt.



What would you expect to find as the result of a global flood?



Rapid destruction of an entire planetary infrastructure by flooding would leave widespread evidence of that event. Youâââ‰â¢d expect to find billions of dead things buried in rock layers, laid down by water all over the Earth. What do we find? Billions of dead things buried in rock layers, laid down by water all over the Earth! A biblical interpretation of the rocks arid fossils speaks of a global, dynamic, watery catastrophe: Noahâââ‰â¢s Deluge. The massive, world-wide coal deposits lend further weight to sudden destruction of immense primordial forests. Leave a tree on the surface of the ground today, and some species, especially softwoods like pine, aspen and birch rot and vanish within two or three years, less if the climate is damp.



The process of fossilisation is yet further evidence of a rapid event. Leave a shell or the body of a fish on the shoreline today, and its gone within a few days, either eaten, or washed out to sea again, eventually to be ground into sand by the incessant actions of the waves. There are simply no fossils being formed today. The process of calcification, the formation of stalactites and stalagmites, that according to evolutionary theories, take millions of years to occur, can and does happen rapidly. Inside the Washington Monument stalactites have formed from water seepage. A partially "fossilised" Coke bottle was found in an opal mine in Australia. We are told that diamonds take millions of years to form and are the result of carbon (coal) being exposed to high temperature and immense pressure. Artificial diamonds are regularly manufactured and form in only a few weeks!



Why is it necessary to "accept" the flood story?



I urge you to read carefully Genesis 6-9 -- chapters dealing with the Flood. If God was really trying to describe a local flood, He surely could have written a little more clearly, for over and over again the wording demands a global flood. Furthermore, God promised never to send another flood like Noah's Flood (9:11,15), but there have been many local floods, even regional floods, since Noah's time. If Noah's Flood was only local, then God lied to us. Likewise, there was no need for Noah to build an ark for his survival. He had up to 120 years' warning (6:3), long enough to walk anywhere on the earth, certainly out of the region of the coming local flood.



Perhaps more convincing is the fact that Jesus Christ based His teaching of coming judgement on all mankind on the fact that Noah's Flood judged all mankind (Matthew 24:36-39; Luke 17:26-27). A local flood implies a partial judgement. Likewise, Peter based his prophecy that the existing planet will 'melt with fervent heat' (II Peter 3:10) and an entire new heavens and new earth will be re-created (3:13) on the historical fact of the global Flood of Noah's day (3:6). All things considered, few doctrines are taught as clearly in Scripture as that of the global Flood.



Footnotes:



1. "And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg; because in his days the earth was divided (PALAG) and his brother's name was Joktan. 1Ch 1:19



"Who hath divided (PALAG) a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder." Job 38:25 

 

Or you can use the url

 

http://pages.zdnet.com/rwfortune/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/isthereanyproof.htm

 

 

 

Source TWO

 

 

 

Not really a source but a good reading on the Ark (Noah's ark)

 

It has had sightings...even by Turkish Officials....

 

 

 

Noah's Flood Proof? ... Page 7

 

 

 

Thursday, April 8, 2004

 

Where Did Noah Park the Ark?

 

By Kathy Louise Schuit

 

Telegraph Staff Writer

 

 

 

Almost since Moses reported the great flood and the ark that survived it in the Bible's book of Genesis, men have searched Mount Ararat for remains of the life-saving craft.

 

 

 

In this century, Ed Davis of Albuquerque was one of the few who, before his death in 1998 at age 95, claimed to have seen the ark.

 

 

 

Drawing by Ed Davis for Don Shockey. Source:Noahsarksearch.com Click and drag to resize. Script from The Java Script Source

 

 

 

But it was Mountainair's Don Shockey who told Davis' story to the world in his book "Agri-Dagh, Mount Araratâââ‰â¬

[Godzira]

I appreciate the search effort but unfortunately this proves nothing but a gross misunderstanding of geology.

 

 

 

The flood lasted just a year, but the "drying out" process and resultant settling down of a severely traumatised planted would have taken longer. There is for example a very interesting verse in Genesis chapter 10 verse: 25 "And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan." The Hebrew word for divided is PALAG and it means to divide-by a channel of water. It is only used three times in the entire Bible (1), and probably explains the origin of the "jig-saw" configuration of the continents, or the "continental drift" theory. Peleg lived just 3 generations after the flood, so itâââ‰â¢s evident that global catastrophes were still occurring in this "settling down" period. There is even geological evidence that the poles were reversed at this time! Literally, a world turned upside down.

 

 

 

This is interesting that you site the magnetic shift as a result of the global flood. Even assuming that there was enough water in the atmosphere to cover the entire planet âââ¬Ãâthere is notâââ¬Ã

[Godzira]

[gandalfmight]

First of all, Sorry for that massive post.... I was going to put more on but then I saw the size of it....

 

 

 

Parting Of Red Sea

 

 

 

Now I have found many ideas that comets just hit the water when Moses raised his hand. Or at that exact second a wind blowing over 67 miles per hour happened to be blowing. That would be nearly impossible without God.

 

 

 

However this article does state that this person found a egyptian wheel in the water. However the Egyptian government has made it illegal to bring up artifacts from their water now. Making it impossible to see if there are more.

 

Pharaoh's chariots found in Red Sea?

 

The url

 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33168

 

Here is a photo of a wheel.

 

 

This is a really good account of what some people found:

 

Confirmation of the actual Exodus route has come from divers finding coral-encrusted bones and chariot remains in the Gulf of Aqaba

ONE of the most dramatic records of Divine intervention in history is the account of the Hebrews' exodus from Egypt.



The subsequent drowning of the entire Egyptian army in the Red Sea was not an insignificant event, and confirmation of this event is compelling evidence that the Biblical narrative is truly authentic. Over the years, many divers have searched the Gulf of Suez in vain for artefacts to verify the Biblical account. But carefully following the Biblical and historical records of the Exodus brings you to Nuweiba, a large beach in the Gulf of Aqaba, as Ron Wyatt discovered in 1978.



Repeated dives in depths ranging from 60 to 200 feet deep (18m to 60m), over a stretch of almost 2.5 km, has shown that the chariot parts are scattered across the sea bed. Artefacts found include wheels, chariot bodies as well as human and horse bones. Divers have located wreckage on the Saudi coastline opposite Nuweiba as well.



Since 1987, Ron Wyatt found three 4-spoked gilded chariot wheels. Coral does not grow on gold, hence the shape has remained very distinct, although the wood inside the gold veneer has disintegrated making them too fragile to move. The hope for future expeditions is to explore the deeper waters with remote cameras or mini-subs. (ABOVE GILDED CHARIOT WHEEL - Mute witness to the miracle of the crossing of the Red Sea by the Hebrews 3,500 years ago. Found with metal detector. *Coral will not grow on gold)



biblicaltwo.jpg



biblicalthree.jpg



biblicalfour.jpg



Coral-encrusted chariot wheel, filmed off the Saudi coastline, matches chariot wheels found in Tutankhamen's tomb

2. Mineralised Bone - One of many found at the crossing site (above centre). This one Tested by the Dept. of Osteology at Stockholm University, was found to be a human femur, from the right leg of a 165-170cm tall man. It is essentially 'fossilized' i.e. replaced by minerals and coral, hence cannot be dated by radiocarbon methods, although this specimen was obviously from antiquity.

3. Chariot wheel and axle covered with coral and up-ended. Exodus 14:25 "And took off their chariot wheels, that they drave them heavily:....."



Solomon's memorial pillars



biblicalfive.jpg



WHEN Ron Wyatt first visited Nuweiba in 1978, he found a Phoenician style column lying in the water. Unfortunately the inscriptions had been eroded away, hence the column's importance was not understood until 1984, when a second granite column was found on the Saudi coastline opposite -- identical to the first, except on this one the inscription was still intact.



In Phoenician letters (Archaic Hebrew), it contained the words: Mizraim (Egypt); Solomon; Edom; death; Pharaoh; Moses; and Yahweh, indicating that King Solomon had set up these columns as a memorial to the miracle of the crossing of the sea. Saudi Arabia does not admit tourists, and perhaps fearing unauthorized visitors, the Saudi Authorities have since removed this column, and replaced it with a flag marker where it once stood.



biblicalsix.jpg





How deep is the water? THE Gulf of Aqaba is very deep, in places over a mile (1,600m) deep. Even with the sea dried up, walking across would be difficult due to the steep grade down the sides. But there is one spot where if the water were removed, it would be an easy descent for people and animals. This is the line between Nuweiba and the opposite shore in Saudi Arabia.



Depth-sounding expeditions have revealed a smooth, gentle slope descending from Nuweiba out into the Gulf. This shows up almost like a pathway on depth-recording equipment, confirming it's Biblical description "...a way in the sea, and a path in the mighty waters." (Isaiah 43:16) The Bible writers frequently refer to the miracle of the Red Sea crossing, for it was an event which finds no equal in history.



The Hebrew prophets describe the sea at the crossing site as "...the waters of the great deep ...the depths of the sea..." (Isaiah 51:10). Knowing the exact spot to which the Bible writers were referring, what is the depth there? The distance between Nuweiba and where artifacts have been found on Saudi coast is about 18km (11 miles).Along this line the deepest point is about 800m (2,600 feet). No wonder that Inspired writers of the Bible described it as the mighty waters. And no wonder that not a single Egyptian survived when the water collapsed in upon them. (above right NUWEIBA BEACH - The spot where the crossing began.

 

 

 

The website has many pictures so here is the url:

 

http://firstbaptistchurch2.tripod.com/id34.html

[Mercifull]

I read that site but i didnt see any evidence there at all. Just speculatative nonsence really. If there really were 100% proof evidence it would be on the TV, newpapers and scientific journals not on a free hosted tripod page.

[pianofrieak2]

Ok let me start off by saying that Iâââ‰â¢m not some 12 year old kid and Iâââ‰â¢m the last person the creation crowd wants to see on this thread as one of my pet peeves is bad science and I LOVE to debate this stuff. I assure you, you will not find an individual more well versed on either side of this argument on this forum. So that said, lets get started.

 

 

 

Evolution is proven - Evolution is called a theory because everything that is arrived at through quantitative analysis in considered a theory. Gravity is technically a theory. The truth is that you do not question gravity because gravity has no religious ramifications. The amount of proof for evolution is staggering. Does that mean that every singe part of the theory is perfect? No. But the general premise of evolution through natural selection is and will remain cogent from this day forward despite any tweaks to specific sections of knowledge.

 

 

 

The world is NOT young âââ‰â¬Å Flood geology is NOT REAL. Not a single flood geology theory has been submitted to a peer reviewed journal and survived; all were proven false in short order. There is not one single item of valid evidence that the earth is young or that there was a worldwide deluge. Radio carbon dating as a whole is valid despite isolated odd results due to contaminated samples âââ¬Ãâwhich are quickly identified as faulty and are really quite rareâââ¬Ã

[Godzira]

LOL. How can you embrace logic, denounce science, and invoke religion all in the same argument. Your argument is not cogent. You forget the laws of nature. Sure our brains are a function of quantum wave form collapse, but they still function by a set of root laws (quantum mechanics) and donâââ‰â¢t need some spooky god figure to give them meaning.

 

 

 

Why do we need to invoke faith and the supernatural just to embrace that just maybe our thoughts mean something? Why must we assume that we need a god to have a purpose? Youâââ‰â¢re argument is only logical from your own viewpoint of âââ¬ÃâOur thoughts are like the wind. Utterly useless if one denies the supernatural.âââ¬Ã

[Random]

For if you believe in evolution, it is highly likely that you do not believe in God. If you do not believe in God, it is highly likely that you do not believe in a scientific realm.

 

 

 

This is illogical, evolution=biology=science. From what logic do you derive that someone who believes in evolution does not blieve in science?

 

 

 

If there is no supernatural realm. then our thoughts are merely brain cells and chemicals in our ever-evolving brain. Thus, our thoughts cannot be used as proof for anything since they may be wrong. Every single thought we have on any subject must be subject to its tendencies, one's past, one's genetics, and one's innate desires.

 

 

 

Of course thoughts alone are not proof for prticular subjects, it's the evidence that backs up those thoughts that gives it weight.

 

 

 

Our thoughts are like the wind. Utterly useless if one denies the supernatural.

 

 

 

How is it usless? Our thoughts still allow us to formualte ideas and influence others towards those ideas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thus, to disbelieve in the supernatural is to deny everything that science can come up with. It denies even our reality, for our reality is based on our logical, absolute thoughts. And if our thoughts are not absolute and have no reason to be logical, then we have no basis for even reality.

 

 

 

Science is methodical, not philosophical. Again, from what logic do you derive these conclusions? To dismiss the supernatural is not to dismiss science, considering that conclusions are based on the evidence and phenomenon observed around us. And in most cases, science thaught in schools is able to be proved in a lab

 

 

 

Without God and the supernatural realm, there is no such thing as science, at least a science that can be trusted. With God, at least you have room for science.

 

 

 

 

Says you. Now where is the logic?

 

 

 

I fail to see, like C.S. Lewis, how anyone who denies the supernatural can even believe in science. For they are utterly contradictory.

 

 

 

Your inablility to comprehend others does in noway make your argument logical.[/code]

[pianofrieak2]

For if you believe in evolution, it is highly likely that you do not believe in God. If you do not believe in God, it is highly likely that you do not believe in a supernatural realm.

 

 

 

This is illogical, evolution=biology=science. From what logic do you derive that someone who believes in evolution does not blieve in science?

 

 

 

I'm sorry. That was my mistake. I meant "supernatural".

 

 

 

If there is no supernatural realm. then our thoughts are merely brain cells and chemicals in our ever-evolving brain. Thus, our thoughts cannot be used as proof for anything since they may be wrong. Every single thought we have on any subject must be subject to its tendencies, one's past, one's genetics, and one's innate desires.

 

 

 

Of course thoughts alone are not proof for prticular subjects, it's the evidence that backs up those thoughts that gives it weight.

 

 

 

This is where I believe you are incorrect. It is your train of thought that one cannot support or even take into account as halfway true or "logical, whatever that term means, if your thoughts are merely chemicals and electrical impulses.

 

 

 

Our thoughts are like the wind. Utterly useless if one denies the supernatural.

 

 

 

How is it usless? Our thoughts still allow us to formualte ideas and influence others towards those ideas.

 

 

 

Boy, you missed my entire topic. Try posting more stuff than one sentence before you make a comment that is totally irrelevant to the topic. Oh, I already answered that question in the above so see that too.

 

 

 

 

 

Thus, to disbelieve in the supernatural is to deny everything that science can come up with. It denies even our reality, for our reality is based on our logical, absolute thoughts. And if our thoughts are not absolute and have no reason to be logical, then we have no basis for even reality.

 

 

 

Science is methodical, not philosophical. Again, from what logic do you derive these conclusions? To dismiss the supernatural is not to dismiss science, considering that conclusions are based on the evidence and phenomenon observed around us. And in most cases, science thaught in schools is able to be proved in a lab

 

 

 

We use REASONING to determine what we believe. Science gives us facts and we DEDUCT the conclusion and hypothesize reasons behind those facts. Those are the things that are based upon our chemicals and brain cells; those cannot be trusted. Which I have already proven so please see above.

 

 

 

Without God and the supernatural realm, there is no such thing as science, at least a science that can be trusted. With God, at least you have room for science.

 

 

 

 

Says you. Now where is the logic?

 

 

 

Please read my post before you make such ridiculous comments.

 

 

 

I fail to see, like C.S. Lewis, how anyone who denies the supernatural can even believe in science. For they are utterly contradictory.

 

 

 

Your inablility to comprehend others does in noway make your argument logical.[/code]

 

 

 

I know I sound harsh but I'm really annoyed by people who quote 1 sentence and argue that sentence even though they did not even comprehend HALF of what I talked about. So don't hate me for saying this:

 

 

 

Your inability to comprehend my view does in no way validate your comments.

 

 

 

 

 

@Godzira:

 

 

 

LOL. How can you embrace logic, denounce science, and invoke religion all in the same argument. Your argument is not cogent. You forget the laws of nature. Sure our brains are a function of quantum wave form collapse, but they still function by a set of root laws (quantum mechanics) and donâââ‰â¢t need some spooky god figure to give them meaning.

 

 

 

I talked about our powers of inductive and deductive reasoning. Not the laws of science. You and the person after you refer to your reasonings as clear and factual when, in fact, your reasonings are based upon chemicals and electrical impulses...such things that cannot be trusted to be "logical" if you do not believe in a higher power that created your thoughts with authority to be "logical."

 

 

 

Your ability to even debate with me assumes that your thoughts can be trusted, when, in fact, they cannot. At least without the supernatural realm, specifically God, a Creator.

 

 

 

Why do we need to invoke faith and the supernatural just to embrace that just maybe our thoughts mean something? Why must we assume that we need a god to have a purpose? Youâââ‰â¢re argument is only logical from your own viewpoint of âââ¬ÃâOur thoughts are like the wind. Utterly useless if one denies the supernatural.âââ¬Ã

[pianofrieak2]

For if you believe in evolution, it is highly likely that you do not believe in God. If you do not believe in God, it is highly likely that you do not believe in a supernatural realm.

 

 

 

This is illogical, evolution=biology=science. From what logic do you derive that someone who believes in evolution does not blieve in science?

 

 

 

I'm sorry. That was my mistake. I meant "supernatural".

 

 

 

If there is no supernatural realm. then our thoughts are merely brain cells and chemicals in our ever-evolving brain. Thus, our thoughts cannot be used as proof for anything since they may be wrong. Every single thought we have on any subject must be subject to its tendencies, one's past, one's genetics, and one's innate desires.

 

 

 

Of course thoughts alone are not proof for prticular subjects, it's the evidence that backs up those thoughts that gives it weight.

 

 

 

This is where I believe you are incorrect. It is your train of thought that one cannot support or even take into account as halfway true or "logical, whatever that term means, if your thoughts are merely chemicals and electrical impulses.

 

 

 

Our thoughts are like the wind. Utterly useless if one denies the supernatural.

 

 

 

How is it usless? Our thoughts still allow us to formualte ideas and influence others towards those ideas.

 

 

 

Boy, you missed my entire topic. Try posting more stuff than one sentence before you make a comment that is totally irrelevant to the topic. Oh, I already answered that question in the above so see that too.

 

 

 

 

 

Thus, to disbelieve in the supernatural is to deny everything that science can come up with. It denies even our reality, for our reality is based on our logical, absolute thoughts. And if our thoughts are not absolute and have no reason to be logical, then we have no basis for even reality.

 

 

 

Science is methodical, not philosophical. Again, from what logic do you derive these conclusions? To dismiss the supernatural is not to dismiss science, considering that conclusions are based on the evidence and phenomenon observed around us. And in most cases, science thaught in schools is able to be proved in a lab

 

 

 

We use REASONING to determine what we believe. Science gives us facts and we DEDUCT the conclusion and hypothesize reasons behind those facts. Those are the things that are based upon our chemicals and brain cells; those cannot be trusted. Which I have already proven so please see above.

 

 

 

Without God and the supernatural realm, there is no such thing as science, at least a science that can be trusted. With God, at least you have room for science.

 

 

 

 

Says you. Now where is the logic?

 

 

 

Please read my post before you make such ridiculous comments.

 

 

 

I fail to see, like C.S. Lewis, how anyone who denies the supernatural can even believe in science. For they are utterly contradictory.

 

 

 

Your inablility to comprehend others does in noway make your argument logical.[/code]

 

 

 

I know I sound harsh but I'm really annoyed by people who quote 1 sentence and argue that sentence even though they did not even comprehend HALF of what I talked about. So don't hate me for saying this:

 

 

 

Your inability to comprehend my view does in no way validate your comments.

 

 

 

 

 

@Godzira:

 

 

 

LOL. How can you embrace logic, denounce science, and invoke religion all in the same argument. Your argument is not cogent. You forget the laws of nature. Sure our brains are a function of quantum wave form collapse, but they still function by a set of root laws (quantum mechanics) and donâââ‰â¢t need some spooky god figure to give them meaning.

 

 

 

I talked about our powers of inductive and deductive reasoning. Not the laws of science. You and the person after you refer to your reasonings as clear and factual when, in fact, your reasonings are based upon chemicals and electrical impulses...such things that cannot be trusted to be "logical" if you do not believe in a higher power that created your thoughts with authority to be "logical."

 

 

 

Your ability to even debate with me assumes that your thoughts can be trusted, when, in fact, they cannot. At least without the supernatural realm, specifically God, a Creator.

 

 

 

Why do we need to invoke faith and the supernatural just to embrace that just maybe our thoughts mean something? Why must we assume that we need a god to have a purpose? Youâââ‰â¢re argument is only logical from your own viewpoint of âââ¬ÃâOur thoughts are like the wind. Utterly useless if one denies the supernatural.âââ¬Ã

[gandalfmight]

Massive Double post....

 

 

 

Science with out god is just a bunch of useless facts that the brain attempts to conncet together.

 

 

 

Good night....

[gandalfmight]

Where did the flood come from? There isnt enough water!

 

 

 

Im going to quote the bible becuse it is not false. Meaning it is not contrary to fact or truth.

 

 

 

To start off the bible speaks of 3 heaven and earth systems

 

 

 

Did you know that the Bible speaks of three heaven and earth systems and that we are living in heaven and earth system number two?

 

 

 

"It escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men" (2 Peter 3:5-7, NASB).

 

 

 

Reasons for long life during the pre-flood times

 

 

A pre-flood canopy would shield them from cosmic radiation. Scientists have studied what types and how much radiation would be filtered through 40 feet of water. Radiation affects the longevity of life. One of the main aging factors on people are the rays of the sun.

 

 

 

We are told that people lived to be very, very old before the flood of Noah. The Bible says they lived to be 800 and 900 years old. This sounds like fantasy when compared to life expectancy in our own experience. But we don't have a vapor canopy up there protecting us from the harmful radiation of the sun like they must have had.

 

 

 

Some physicians at Southwestern Medical School did a study on longevity of life back in the nineteen-seventies. They decided that if they could build a canopy over the city of Dallas that filtered out the harmful rays of the sun that cause aging, and also filtered the air that now has many contaminants that affect our quality of life, they predicted that man could live to be somewhere between 800 and 1,000 years old.

 

 

 

Maybe the Bible is not so far off. Maybe people really did live that long back in those days. The vapor canopy was up there protecting man from the harmful radiation of the sun. At the flood of Noah, the canopy comes down in rain. The full intensity of the sun begins to radiate mankind. Then we read in the Bible that the ages drop from 800 and 900 years over a period of years down to about 70 or 80 years. It is exactly what we would expect.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Water Vapor

 

 

 

Ok now that you have read that now the rest will make sense. This will be on Heaven and earth #1:

 

Then in Genesis 1:6-7, God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters and let it separate the waters from the waters. He separated the waters which were below the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament.

 

 

 

Which means that there was water around the earth and on the face of the earth.

 

We know that the waters below the firmament are oceans and other bodies of water. But what is the water that is above the firmament? It is unlikely that this refers to the clouds we see in today's environment (the second heaven and earth system). In the first heaven and earth system, God may not have caused it to rain (see Genesis 2:5). Some believe that the first rain was at the flood of Noah. If so, there would have been no clouds.

 

 

 

There are other theories about the waters above the firmament, but the theory that the evidence seems to support is called the "vapor canopy."

 

The Vapor Canopy THEROY

 

 

 

This is very important:

 

The sun hits the vapor canopy. It's hot. This would warm the earth up all the way around. They would have a tropical, or sub-tropical earth -- everywhere! North pole. South pole. No ice caps. Hot!

 

It would be like a giant terrarium. It wouldn't rain. That could be the significance of the rainbow. After the flood, God told Noah, that the rainbow "shall be a sign of a covenant between Me and the earth... that never again shall the water become a flood to destroy all flesh" (Genesis 9:13, 15 NASB). If Noah had seen rainbows all of his life, would the rainbow be significant?

 

 

 

"There went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground" (Genesis 2:6). That's exactly what we would expect if God put water up there and surrounded the earth with it. We will say it is water vapor because you would be able to see through it. The sun would have had to come through. It may have been 33% less bright. They would have been able to see some of the stars.

 

 

 

Evidence

 

 

 

Palm tree fossils have been found in Alaska. How did palm trees get to Alaska? Some textbooks say that they traveled there. It is called tectonic plate movement. How long would it take a palm tree to travel from southern California to Alaska? About 20 million years. However, the oldest palm trees they have found in Alaska, according to current dating techniques, is only 10,000 years old. You can't have a 10,000 year old tree making a 20 million year trip.

 

But, a vapor canopy around the earth during the first heaven and earth system would explain this. The sun could heat the water vapor to 212 degrees hot. That would warm the entire earth, including Alaska. Palm trees could live there.

 

 

 

Evidence 2

 

 

 

Another evidence for the vapor canopy is broad leaf ferns in the Arctic. They have also found a tropical forest (frozen) in the Antarctica. They could thaw the trees out and burn the wood. It wasn't even fossilized.

 

 

 

#3

 

 

 

Coal deposits provide another bit of evidence. How is coal made? Plant material buried under time and pressure and heat becomes coal. They've found coal deposits in the Antarctica. It must have been warm enough for trees to grow there sometime in the past.

 

 

 

And another piece of evidence:

 

 

 

A vapor canopy also would have filtered out the radiation that causes Carbon 14 to be formed. Therefore, in such things as deep coal deposits you would not expect to find Carbon 14. There would be no Carbon 14 formed in plants that grew before the flood of Noah, before that canopy came down. Guess what. Scientists say that they don't find any Carbon 14 in some of the deep coal deposits.

 

 

 

Some comparison to todays atomosphere nad tempatures and thoe one of pre-flood.

 

 

 

Ninety-foot plum trees, quick-frozen with fruit and green leaves have been discovered in the New Siberian Islands. By contrast, today just little tiny one-inch willows grow there. It is said that these ninety-foot trees have been frozen for 5,000 to 10,000 years. There was a sudden permanent change in temperature from greenhouse warm to totally frozen cold. And it stayed that way because they are still frozen. More about this later.

 

 

 

More Evidence ---> Atmospheric Pressure and Dinosaurs

 

 

 

Number one with the large canopy overhead.

 

 

 

We would expect greater atmosphere pressure. Some scientists have made a study and determined that if there was about 40 feet of water spread out as water vapor, it would have increased atmospheric pressure to about twice what it is today.

 

 

 

Effects On Life

 

 

 

Healing

 

 

 

Healing would be quicker. For example, surgeons and physicians have discovered that burn patients heal up much more efficiently and quickly in a pressurized room with lots of oxygen in it.

 

 

 

How dinosars were able to live on the planet.

 

 

 

Giant reptiles could have lived easier. Scientists tell us we have a great dinosaur mystery. Where did dinosaurs come from? How did they get so big? Evolutionists say the fittest survive. They were the biggest and the meanest. Why don't they rule the earth? Why did they go extinct? Where are they?

 

 

 

Reptiles continue to grow as long as they live. If you can keep a reptile for a long, long time, let's say a thousand years, it is going to be very, very big. Let's say we're before the flood of Noah, and the canopy is up there. God said, "To all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground -- everything that has the breath of life in it -- I give every green plant for food" (Genesis 1:30, NIV, emphasis mine).

 

 

 

The only thing animals could eat was plants. They wouldn't have anybody eating dinosaurs and dinosaurs would not be eating dinosaurs. Today you may see artists' paintings and movie special effects showing dinosaurs with a lizard hanging out of their mouths, eating meat, but the Bible says they didn't eat meat.

 

 

 

We are told that Tyrannosauruswere huge, swift, aggressive meat eaters (Editors of Life, Evolution, (New York: Life Nature Library, 1962), 122). Has a scientist ever found a Tyrannosaurus rex's stomach with undigested lizards in it? Not to my knowledge. But they have recently removed some teeth from some of the skulls of Tyrannosaurus rex and made an amazing discovery. The teeth have little tiny roots. They are too small for a bone-crushing, meat-tearing animal. More likely, they ate leaves. They used those sharp teeth and the spaces between them to strip the leaves from branches.

 

 

 

Scientists have discovered that in our atmosphere, dinosaurs could not have pumped the blood up their long skinny necks unless their hearts were almost as big as their whole body. But, if the atmostphere had been heavier and greenhouse warm, they probably could have done it with the extra pressure.

 

 

 

The Bible says before the flood of Noah, everything ate green plants. Giant reptiles could have lived easier. Dinosaurs could have grown very, very big, because they continue to grow as long as they live. Fossil dragonflies with a 32-inch wing span have been found. Before the flood of Noah, things got very big.

 

 

 

Volcanic Erruption allowed By God Triggers Fall of Canopy

 

 

 

The Bible tells of a global flood. "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the deep burst open, and the floodgates of the sky were opened. And the rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights" (Genesis 7:11-12, NASB).

 

 

 

Scientists have gone to both polar regions. They have done core samples down into the oldest glacial ice. They have discovered that all deep Arctic and Antarctica ice is saturated with volcanic ash. Why is that?

 

 

 

Could those ice caps have been formed during the year of the flood of Noah, when the water that formed those ice caps was full of volcanic ash? Why is all this volcanic ash down there?

 

 

 

The God who spoke the heavens and the earth into existence could have said the word and a flood would have occurred, with or without rain. But He could have used some sort of naturalistic method as well.

 

 

 

Scientists say that hundreds and hundreds of volcanoes went off simultaneously all over the earth somewhere between 5,000 and 10,000 years ago. They call it the "Ring of Fire." The fountains of the deep burst open the day the flood began (Genesis 7:11). How is water formed on earth? Scientists tell us that it occurs through volcanic activity. So we have water coming up from under the earth through volcanic activity. We have volcanoes shooting their dust up into the water vapor canopy, causing the nuclei of condensation. Down comes the rain. That could be an explanation for what caused the canopy to come down.

 

 

 

We know the flooding today that takes place when we get six inches of rain. What about forty days and forty nights of two inches of rain per hour? The fountains of the deep were also bursting forth. Water was coming up from underneath while it was coming down from above, according to the Bible.

 

 

 

We have volcanoes shooting their dust up, we have the rain coming down. We have the canopy being broken. We have heat being released out into the universe. We have the clouding from the dust that remains after the water comes down. We have a rapid, rapid cooling of parts of the earth. This could explain some things.

 

 

 

Explanation for the Sudden Frozen enviroments

 

 

 

The quick-frozen mammoths in Siberia is another evidence for the flood. (See "Riddle of the Frozen Giants," by Ivan T. Sanderson, The Saturday Evening Post, Jan. 16, 1960, p. 39.) Usually you see pictures of them in blizzards with "an ice age" creeping slowly upon them. Some of these mammoths had undigested buttercups in their mouths and in their stomachs. Undigested! They have examined many of these mammoths and have found up to 1,500 species of plants in their stomachs. They can still tell the color of the buttercups.

 

 

 

Some scientists went to the Birds-Eye Frozen Food Company and asked what it would take to quick freeze a happy, grazing giant 9-ton mammoth so that the buttercups in its stomach did not digest. How quickly must that animal be frozen? These experts on quick-frozen meat said, as far as they could determine, it would take a chill of wind moving at 200 to 400 miles per hour constantly over a four to eight hour period with a temperature of minus 175 degrees Fahrenheit. We don't have anything like that on earth today.

 

 

 

Science says we have a problem here. That was no slowly creeping ice age. That was a rapid, quick something that went suddenly from permanently warm to permanently cold.

 

 

 

When the scientists dissected the skin on some of these mammoths, they discovered that they did not have oil glands in their skin. Seals, polar bears, and wolves have much oil in their fur, which keeps water away from their skin and keeps them from freezing in cold climates. The mammoths had no oil glands, which means they were a warm temperature animal. Why were they found in Siberia?

 

 

 

Until the flood of Noah, it would have been tropically warm under the vapor canopy. In this environment they could have easily grown to be the giants that have been found. There would have been plenty to eat, and we're just recently discovering what they did eat. Plants! Just like Genesis 1:30 says.

 

 

 

Other animals that have been found in Siberia include hyena, horse, deer, oxen, bison, reindeer, antelope, badger, lynx, fox, wolf, leopard, elephant, saber-toothed tiger, and hippopotamus.

 

http://www.theophilus.org/ofc/vapor.html

 

 

 

However the term firmament may have a different meaning.

 

 

 

In this from dictionary.com

 

from the Vulgate firmamentum, which is used as the translation of the Hebrew

 

_raki'a_. This word means simply "expansion." It denotes the space or expanse

 

like an arch appearing immediately above us. They who rendered _raki'a_ by

 

firmamentum regarded it as a solid body. The language of Scripture is not

 

scientific but popular, and hence we read of the sun rising and setting, and

 

also here the use of this particular word. It is plain that it was used to

 

denote solidity as well as expansion. It formed a division between the waters

 

above and the waters below (Gen. 1:7). The _raki'a_ supported the upper

 

reservoir (Ps. 148:4). It was the support also of the heavenly bodies (Gen.

 

1:14), and is spoken of as having "windows" and "doors" (Gen. 7:11; Isa. 24:18;

 

Mal. 3:10) through which the rain and snow might descend.

 

 

 

Also at http://www.sentex.net/~tcc/fcanopy.html

 

The "waters above the firmament" thus probably constituted a vast blanket of water vapor above the troposphere and possibly above the stratosphere as well, in the high-temperature region now known as the ionosphere, and extending far into space. They could not have been the clouds of water droplets which now float in the atmosphere, because the Scripture says they were "above the firmament." Furthermore, there was "no rain upon the earth" in those days (Genesis 2:5), nor any "bow in the cloud" (Genesis 9:13), both of which must have been present if these upper waters represented merely the regime of clouds which functions in the present hydrologic economy.

[logic-is-overrated]

Im going to quote the bible becuse it is not false. Meaning it is not contrary to fact or truth.

You do realize that the authenticity of the Bible has been seriously contested? Seriously.

[bjbj1991]

Im going to quote the bible becuse it is not false. Meaning it is not contrary to fact or truth.

 

Didn't you look at the links I posted? Between the OT and NT the Bible contracts nearly everything it says.

 

 

 

 

 

BTW, NO MORE HUGE BLOCKS OF TEXT!!!! Just link to the sites and post your opinion please. My finger is sore from using the scroll key on my mouse too much.