im going to vote yes but i'm not sure but i'm going to vote yes just in case and he's watching this right now??
deletedover 9 years
That's because you've got nothing to go on, and your argument has no validity. Here are the options for people on this subject: either believe the masses of people who dedicate their lives and time to going out into the fields and oceans and collecting data to add to the already massive amounts of information we have compiled over the years - people who use this data to then draw conclusions about our world based on this data, people who admit when they do not know something, or believe the people who read one book. YOU DECIDE.
Would be so much better if a person could, instead of defaulting to "you have your beliefs I have mine," admit they made a faulty argument and maybe reflect on it a little.
deletedover 9 years
Boy I'm going to read all these words.
deletedover 9 years
It's just, when someone argues in favour of there being a God, or any gods, if their only source of evidence for the matter is relating back to the bible, then there is literally no argument, and they can not hold themselves with any credibility when they are arguing with someone with genuine credible facts and sources to support the notion that there is no God or gods. As controversial as it may seem, I genuinely believe that when mankind finally as a unit decides to stop relying on there being a higher being, and the struggles of coexisting with communities with a different higher being/s, only then can there be a movement towards greater unity and greater peace. Religion kills, religion excludes, religion punishes, religion restricts, religion brainwashes. And do you know what, without religion I am still capable of having a moral compass, and a set of moral values that I hold true to myself, so really what good does religion do that can not be achieved without it?
Bad analogy. Many cultures have a sun god because the sun is such a huge part of life. Many cultures have a flood myth because that great flood was such a huge point for their culture.
Taking the Bible literally is for Pentecostals and idiots. The likelihood of a worldwide flood is very low. The likelihood of a great flood is almost certain. The difference is the area of effect the flood had. It is entirely plausible that thousands of years ago there was a man named Noah, and there was a flood that covered the fertile crescent in the Middle East. At this point in time, that would have been seen as the whole world, and thus it would be a flood that covered the world. Not to mention that if he sailed anywhere north, south, or east in a boat at that point, he would have found himself in the Mediterranean or similarly flooded regions. The other obvious explanation for flooding is the end of the last Ice Age, which would have had rising sea levels. In South America, floods could originate with especially snowy winters in the Andes which would flood lower lying areas when the snow melted in spring, or with high tides in the Amazon river. The key to looking at a text like the Bible and at myths is to remember that these events could have plausibly happened, and then been adapted for allegorical reasons, like "oh hey, people were evil so God drowned them all!"
I didn't say that the Bible itself was evidence of a worldwide flood. I said that the Bible says that there was a worldwide flood. Also, sickle-cell anemia is beneficial, true. But sickle-cell anemia can also bring out negative effects as well.
I can see that no matter what I say, you all will still not understand. You all have your beliefs, and I have mine. It was a nice talk with all of you. God bless. c:
deletedover 9 years
Maybe. I think the better explanation for it though is the same reason why so many cultures around the world also have a sun god - not because there actually is/was a sun god, but because it was part of the mythology, and the sun/flood represents natures power.
And the bible still isn't evidence that a world wide flood occured, which Fruity, the person I was responding to, claims to have been.
deletedover 9 years
Some myths have a factual basis, there's definitely evidence of localized deluges in various parts of the world just not a global one, which is possibly the reason so many cultures have this particular narrative. That being said it is probably just an extremely hyperbolic portrayal of what was really one or more local floods, nothing more.
I believe in God personally but the bible is riddled with enough historical errors that taking any narrative in it at 100% face value is silly.
