When was the Flood of Noah?

[AV1611VET]

Your 'images' ...

No, they're not 'images.'

You can go there and stand atop them yourself (sans trespassing charges).

If, however, you're referring to 'images' as in your "Icons of Evolution," then that's different, and I'll address that by saying that calling them "irrelevant" is your prerogative.

Joe: Show me evidence of the Flood.
Tom: White Cliffs of Dover.
Joe: Irrelevant. Show me evidence of the Flood.
Tom: Meandering rivers.
Joe: Irrelevant. Show me evidence of the Flood.
Tom: The Bible.
Joe: Irrelevant. Show me evidence of the Flood.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Oh, please.

Why the facepalm?
Isn't that a potential reason?

Assuming for a second that the story is true and that this god removed all traces of his actions. Why motivation would this entity have, if not to see if people would be willing to believe things on bad evidence? Especially considering how much value is given to "faith" in this worldview...

Very seldom now, but tweaks are still being made.What evidence?
Even you admitted there isn't any.

I just gave 2 very good reasons for not believing the flood story.
Those reasons were evidence.

The genetic evidence shows no bottlenecks.
The geological evidence doesn't show a global flood.

Those 2 independent lines of evidence are a direct refutation of the flood story.

Which is mentionworthy, since it isn't upto us to provide evidence against the story. It's upto those who are for the story that need to support it.
That evidence, I agree, does not exist.

Thank you, but my honesty isn't the point here.

It kind of is.

Discussion is futile if one side honestly admits that no amount of evidence will ever be sufficient to accept that his beliefs are wrong.

 

[Ben West]

Another baseless, evidence-free claim.

Not so, so long as today's scientists CANNOT tell us exactly HOW and WHEN prehistoric people changed into Humans (descendants of Adam). Can you? Of course not. God Bless you

 

[SteveB28]

No, they're not 'images.'

You can go there and stand atop them yourself (sans trespassing charges).

If, however, you're referring to 'images' as in your "Icons of Evolution," then that's different, and I'll address that by saying that calling them "irrelevant" is your prerogative.

Joe: Show me evidence of the Flood.
Tom: White Cliffs of Dover.
Joe: Irrelevant. Show me evidence of the Flood.
Tom: Meandering rivers.
Joe: Irrelevant. Show me evidence of the Flood.
Tom: The Bible.
Joe: Irrelevant. Show me evidence of the Flood.

Those are not evidence for a global flood. They are part of your delusion.

 

[SteveB28]

Not so, so long as today's scientists CANNOT tell us exactly HOW and WHEN prehistoric people changed into Humans (descendants of Adam). Can you? Of course not. God Bless you

Which has absolutely nothing to do with providing evidence for a global flood.

 

[RickG]

Operations leave scars.

So do flood, especially those of global proportion covering the highest mountain. No such scars exist.

 

[AV1611VET]

Assuming for a second that the story is true and that this god removed all traces of his actions. Why motivation would this entity have, if not to see if people would be willing to believe things on bad evidence? Especially considering how much value is given to "faith" in this worldview...

I contend -- and still do -- that evidence of the Flood would just make things worse for unbelievers.

Imagine finding Noah's Ark intact.

Scientists would be all over it, as I believe I said once before, like ants on an ice cream cone.

They would then, IMO, conclude the Ark wasn't seaworthy, and use it as physical evidence that the story of the Flood is a myth.

The genetic evidence shows no bottlenecks.

I'm not sure exactly what a bottleneck is, but as I have stated many times, God blessed Noah and company with fertility that would make Nadya Suleman (sp?) jealous.

The geological evidence doesn't show a global flood.

Again, I get the image of one saying this from atop the White Cliffs of Dover, or at least with the cliffs in view outside his window.

 

[Ben West]

Assuming for a second that the story is true and that this god removed all traces of his actions. Why motivation would this entity have, if not to see if people would be willing to believe things on bad evidence? Especially considering how much value is given to "faith" in this worldview...

God totally DESTROYED Adam's world because the Violent men of that world would have made Humanity go extinct. Gen 6:13 Gen 9:11 Isa 24:19 ll Peter 2:5 ll Peter 3:3-7 When Jesus returns to the present Earth, it will be for the SAME reason.

Jesus:>>Mat 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

 

[AV1611VET]

No such scars exist.

I don't believe Adam had a scar either.

God closed up the flesh, as the verse says, and I don't think Adam walked around with scar tissue on his side.

 

[SteveB28]

God totally DESTROYED Adam's world because the Violent men of that world would have made Humanity go extinct. Gen 6:13 Gen 9:11 Isa 24:19 ll Peter 2:5 ll Peter 3:3-7 When Jesus returns to the present Earth, it will be for the SAME reason.

Jesus:>>Mat 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

As with many of your kind, you're very rich in claims.

But dirt-poor in evidence.

 

[Ben West]

DogmaHunter said:
The genetic evidence shows no bottlenecks.

WHY should there be a bottleneck? There were a Million sons of God (prehistoric people) ALIVE on this Earth when Noah arrived. You seem to think they all died. It has taken some 10k years for God to produce the 7 Billion Humans (descendants of Adam) alive today. Humans and sons of God (prehistoric people) produce other Humans so NO bottleneck results. Genesis 6:4 God's Truth is the Truth in EVERY way. Amen?

 

[Ben West]

As with many of your kind, you're very rich in claims.

But dirt-poor in evidence.

What evidence would you accept? I've also noticed that you have no evidence of your misinterpretation of God's Holy Word. Amen?

 

[DogmaHunter]

I contend -- and still do -- that evidence of the Flood would just make things worse for unbelievers.

Imagine finding Noah's Ark intact.

Scientists would be all over it, as I believe I said once before, like ants on an ice cream cone.

They would then, IMO, conclude the Ark wasn't seaworthy, and use it as physical evidence that the story of the Flood is a myth.

This makes no sense.

I'm not sure exactly what a bottleneck is, but as I have stated many times, God blessed Noah and company with fertility that would make Nadya Suleman (sp?) jealous

Irrelevant. The original couple will have only "so much" variation to spread around. It doesn't matter if they reproduced like rabbits or not.

If you only have A and B to reproduce, it doesn't matter how many times you do it, the result will be mixes of A and B. You won't find any C, D, E, F's etc in the offspring.
Because those were all removes by killing 99% of the population.

 

[AV1611VET]

But dirt-poor in evidence.

What happened to* Jesus after He healed the sick, raised the dead, and walked on water?

Do you think it would be any different today?

* And please don't come back with, "Many believed on His Name and got saved." I said what happened to Jesus.

 

[SteveB28]

What evidence would you accept? I've also noticed that you have no evidence of your misinterpretation of God's Holy Word. Amen?

No, that isn't how it works. YOU are the one making the ridiculous claim about a global flood. It is therefore incumbent upon YOU to provide evidence to support that claim. I don't have to drum up your evidence - YOU DO.

 

[Ben West]

Which has absolutely nothing to do with providing evidence for a global flood.

Not so since Science CANNOT tell us How or When prehistoric people changed into Humans. It's because God destroyed Adam's world and Science, by ignoring Genesis, has FORGOTTEN about the Flood. Their False ToE ASSUMES that Human life began on Planet Earth which makes the whole ToE FALSE. Amen?

 

[AV1611VET]

Because those were all removes by killing 99% of the population.

Well, thankfully, that theory cannot be tested, can it?

 

[SteveB28]

What happened to* Jesus after He healed the sick, raised the dead, and walked on water?

Do you think it would be any different today?

* And please don't come back with, "Many believed on His Name and got saved." I said what happened to Jesus.

Yes, I would change the subject too, if I were you. Your evidence for a global flood is entirely absent. Because there was no such event.

And you know it.

 

[SteveB28]

Not so since Science CANNOT tell us How or When prehistoric people changed into Humans. It's because God destroyed Adam's world and Science, by ignoring Genesis, has FORGOTTEN about the Flood. Their False ToE ASSUMES that Human life began on Planet Earth which makes the whole ToE FALSE. Amen?

Oh please. Even the Mormons and the Scientologists come up with better stories than yours. You have no evidence for a flood. Just more crazy claims.

 

[RickG]

Yah, I believe we all learned that the world started october 23, 4004 b.c. according to a study of the genealogies in Genesis done by Bishop Ussher. This seems to be disputable, but never mind. I would like a discussion, where/when does real evidence point that the flood was. I can begin myself with this contribution: Evidence Noah's biblical flood happened, says Robert Ballard that points to a flood in the Black sea region around 5000 B.C.

I don't think your chronologies agree. For example"

"world started" 4004 b.c. = 6004 + 15 (2015) or 6019 years before present.
"black sea flood" 5000 b.c. = 7000 + 15 (2015) or 7015 years before present.

So the flood was 2000 years before the earth was made?

Aside from that, yes, the Ballard study is correct and even published in the peer review literature, of which there are many many studies providing similar information. The final outbreak of Lake Agassi-Ojibway, raising global sea levels some 2 meters, breaching the Bosporus Straight and increasing the Black Sea by more than a third did occur some 7000 + 14C years ago, or 8200 calendar years ago. This is a well known event documented in the scientific literature known as the 8200 Event. The significance of course is that the Mountains of Ararat border the Black Sea. Keep in min the the biblical description states "the mountains of Ararat, and not Mt. Ararat specific. Thus, a likely origin of both the Gilgamesh and Noachic flood stories.