How Archaeology Disproves Noah's Flood

[atlashunter]

So your out to save the world then ? If not...what do you get out of trying to take their beliefs and religion from them ?

You think I'm trying to save the world by challenging religious dogma on a hunting forum? I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone. Why are you bothered so much by having something you know to be true challenged with facts and evidence? Why should that not be of extreme interest to you? Why is it of greater concern to you whether people hold a belief than whether that belief is actually true or not?

 

[Hillbilly stalker]

You think I'm trying to save the world by challenging religious dogma on a hunting forum? I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone. Why are you bothered so much by having something you know to be true challenged with facts and evidence? Why should that not be of extreme interest to you? Why is it of greater concern to you whether people hold a belief than whether that belief is actually true or not?

So, answer my question instead of asking me others. What do you get out of it ?? . I promise you I am not bothered. I belive the word I used was amazed. Now please answer the question. No diversions.

 

[atlashunter]

It leaves the "Noah Story" as a recounting of a part of the history of a people who believed in one Creator God, celebrated their relationship with the Divine, honored their ancestors, counted upon the grace of God to help them overcome adversity, and recorded their experience in a collection of books they (and about 3 billion people alive today) believe are inspired by that one God.

While the scribes (theologians of their era) of David's court, and the Priests and Scribes of Solomon's court, may not have been as informed as modern physicists, astronomers or geologists, and their world view may be considered "limited" by today's standards, these were educated people who tried to get it right. They believed the works they composed, copied, transcribed, or edited were inspired by God even though they did NOT then consider their books Holy works.

Let's look at it in a bit more detail.

Genesis 6
6 The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. 7 So the Lord said, “I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created—and with them the animals, the birds and the creatures that move along the ground—for I regret that I have made them.”

^Can this be achieved with a local flood?

Genesis 6
13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.

^Does a local flood between the Euphrates and Tigris river put an end to "all people"?

Genesis 6
17 I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.

^Does all live under the heavens reside only between the Tigris and Euphrates? What about the life on the rest of the earth? How will "Everything on earth" perish from a local flood?

Genesis 6
19 You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you.

^ Why bother doing this for a local flood that only impacts a relatively tiny part of the earth?

Genesis 7
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”

^Does this include kangaroos and koalas and grizzly bears? Are they not living creatures he made? How are they in danger if this is just a local flood in the middle east?

Genesis 7
16 The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the Lord shut him in.

^Does this include species not found in the middle east? That's been the traditional understanding no? How can believers who got this word from god and who are in constant communication with god get it so wrong on a detail like this? And if it doesn't include those species from other parts of the earth then it wasn't really male and female of every living thing was it?

Genesis 7
19 They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered.

^Is Mount Everest a high mountain under the heavens? What part of the earth exactly do the heavens not cover? Where is that boundary?

Genesis 7
21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

^How did a local flood in the middle east achieve this?

Genesis 8
21 The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of humans, even though[a] every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.

^How can he vow to never again to destroy all living creatures if he didn't do it in the first place? Was he lying to himself? Was he just unaware of the people living in other parts of the world at this time? And if he was just vowing to never again destroy part of humanity with a local flood hasn't that promise been broken many times over?

Genesis 9
15 I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life.

^ Same question as above. A local flood in mesopotamia would no more destroy all life than the 2004 tsunami destroyed all life. So which was it?

Genesis 9
19 These were the three sons of Noah, and from them came the people who were scattered over the whole earth.

^ Sure seems to indicate everyone but Noah and his family were killed around the entire planet. If that wasn't the case then this scripture is a lie.

 

[Hillbilly stalker]

What do you get out of it ? Simple question.

 

[atlashunter]

So, answer my question instead of asking me others. What do you get out of it ?? . I promise you I am not bothered. I belive the word I used was amazed. Now please answer the question. No diversions.

Answer mine and I'll answer yours. This is a give and take conversation, not an interrogation. You're in no position to dictate terms to me demanding answers while not offering any of your own.

 

[Hillbilly stalker]

I asked you a very simple question that requires absolutely no research, only honesty.

 

[atlashunter]

Oh and I'm particularly interested to know if you even bothered to watch the video and consider any of the content and if not why? This guy is challenging the truth claims of a biblical story with fact after fact. Either he is wrong or the bible is wrong. If you're confident that the bible is right why would you not welcome the challenge so that it could be handled in convincing terms?

 

[atlashunter]

I asked you a very simple question that requires absolutely no research, only honesty.

And I answered it although it seems to have gone right by you. If you aren't going to answer my questions in turn then you may as well go elsewhere.

 

[Hillbilly stalker]

i will go where I please . No you didn't answer. What do you get out of it ?

 

[atlashunter]

i will go where I please . What do you get out of it ?

Sure but you won't get the results you want. I told you before this isn't a one way interrogation. If you want to have a conversation I'm game. If you want to ignore my questions while demanding I answer yours then you're not going to get very far.

 

[atlashunter]

Notice the responses we have had so far.

1. A straw man claim that the man in the video purports to know everything.

2. The biblical story of Noah doesn't really mean what it says and what it was traditionally understood by believers to mean.

3. A complete refusal to address the content of the video or my questions or the truth claims of the story instead questioning my motives for "taking away people's beliefs".

So far not a single believer has actually addressed the content of the videos.

Imagine if someone challenged the veracity of some piece of history such as the holocaust? Are these the sort of responses that should be expected? A straw man that the person denying the holocaust happened thinks they know everything? Or asking what they get out of taking away peoples belief in the holocaust? The responses are as interesting as the challenge itself.

 

[ky55]

Sure but you won't get the results you want. I told you before this isn't a one way interrogation. If you want to have a conversation I'm game. If you want to ignore my questions while demanding I answer yours then you're not going to get very far.

Seems like it’s always- this is what you are doing...why are you doing it.
They can never have an honest discussion because it alway has to start from their preconceived idea.

 

[atlashunter]

So, answer my question instead of asking me others. What do you get out of it ?? . I promise you I am not bothered. I belive the word I used was amazed. Now please answer the question. No diversions.

And why does it amaze you that you would find people questioning the veracity of a biblical story in an apologetics forum?

 

[atlashunter]

Seems like it’s always- this is what you are doing...why are you doing it.
They can never have an honest discussion because it alway has to start from their preconceived idea.

But it says a lot doesn't it? That they bend over backwards to not address the challenges. I mean if someone said dinosaurs were a myth and here are some factual pieces of evidence that show they couldn't have existed that would be fascinating. The last thing that would cross a person's mind is "why do you want to take away our belief in dinosaurs". Going immediately to that is a tacit admission that your belief is indefensible and you would rather not have it challenged at all. In which case, what the heck are you doing in an apologetics forum???

 

[ky55]

But it says a lot doesn't it? That they bend over backwards to not address the challenges. I mean if someone said dinosaurs were a myth and here are some factual pieces of evidence that show they couldn't have existed that would be fascinating. The last thing that would cross a person's mind is "why do you want to take away our belief in dinosaurs". Going immediately to that is a tacit admission that your belief is indefensible and you would rather not have it challenged at all. In which case, what the heck are you doing in an apologetics forum???

Yes, it absolutely speaks volumes.
I think most of them have been indoctrinated into a system that expects and demands an automatic reverence for their beliefs, and when anything falls outside of that norm they just have no idea how to handle the difference.
Go back and look at some of SFD’s posts in this forum. He continues to make assertions than he can never even begin to support, and when he is asked to provide evidence and proof of those assertions he insults folks who have participated in the thread.

 

[WaltL1]

It has always amazed me that the great lengths of trouble non-believers will go to, just to try to cast doubt in believers . What do you have to gain by doing this ? I promise you will not be lonely where your going. What do you get out of it ?

Great lengths?
This is a sub forum designed specifically for debate/discussion on this specific subject.
You came here, we didn't seek you out and drag you in.
Not sure you/believers voluntarily coming here constitutes us going to great lengths

 

[WaltL1]

Its interesting that believers, in this case Christians, do EXACTLY the same thing amongst themselves as we are doing here -
Trinity vs. Non Trinity
Free will vs Predetermined
Baptist vs Catholic
Works vs.....
Elect vs............
100 other varying beliefs......
I guess those are just "discussions" but what WE do is going to great lengths to cast doubt on someones beliefs....

 

[bullethead]

What do you get out of it ? Simple question.

Non Believers come here to discuss things that are in a book many of us used to believe in. We try to validate or refute the claims made in the book and by it's followers. We try to find evidence that backs up what the book says while providing evidence that also refutes it. If a believer wants to chime in with assertions and claims, is it too much to ask by us to expect them to back it up...especially if the claims center around "truth"?

See you in that place where we won't be lonely...

 

[kmckinnie]

I’ve watched similar shows to the one you posted. Didn’t watch that one yet.
They maybe great shows with interesting facts.
One fact remains with me. It was written during history that is recorded to the best that can be searched.
Jesus was executed by the state of Rome and he rose ? from the dead 3 days later.
So it was written during a time when items of this nature was documented.
Therefore I hold the rest of the book to be true as written and I know some was lost in translation.

I see all kind of Science ? shows. About many topics.
I enjoy watching most. Don’t watch much tv ? anymore. Don’t have time.
Have a good day.

 

[atlashunter]

Non Believers come here to discuss things that are in a book many of us used to believe in. We try to validate or refute the claims made in the book and by it's followers. We try to find evidence that backs up what the book says while providing evidence that also refutes it. If a believer wants to chime in with assertions and claims, is it too much to ask by us to expect them to back it up...especially if the claims center around "truth"?

See you in that place where we won't be lonely...

I doubt any dead person experiences loneliness.

“I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it.”​

Mark Twain