Sunday School And A Worldwide Flood (Pt.3)

[Bikeemikey]

So God is just mythical? Well then throw out all moral law and lets party!

 

Hardly so my friend.

 

Party Hater!!

[jkwilliams]

Your first sentence contains two non-sequiturs. It does not follow that not taking the Bible literally means that God is mythical, and it does not follow from either statement that anyone needs to throw out their morals.

 

His first sentence is a textbook declaration of fundamentalism. I've always liked Terry Eagleton's definition of fundamentalism:

The word "fundamentalism" was first used in the early years of the last century by anti-liberal US Christians, who singled out seven supposed fundamentals of their faith. The word, then, is not one of those derogatory terms that only other people use about you, like "fatso". It began life as a proud self-description. The first of the seven fundamentals was a belief in the literal truth of the Bible; and this is probably the best definition of fundamentalism there is. It is basically a textual affair. Fundamentalists are those who believe that our linguistic currency is trustworthy only if it is backed by the gold standard of the Word of Words. They see God as copperfastening human meaning. Fundamentalism means sticking strictly to the script, which in turn means being deeply fearful of the improvised, ambiguous or indeterminate.

 

Fundamentalists, however, fail to realise that the phrase "sacred text" is self-contradictory. Since writing is meaning that can be handled by anybody, any time, it is always profane and promiscuous. Meaning that has been written down is bound to be unhygienic. Words that could only ever mean one thing would not be words. Fundamentalism is the paranoid condition of those who do not see that roughness is not a defect of human existence, but what makes it work. For them, it is as though we have to measure Everest down to the last millimetre if we are not to be completely stumped about how high it is. It is not surprising that fundamentalism abhors sexuality and the body, since in one sense all flesh is rough, and all sex is rough trade. ...

 

Fundamentalists are really necrophiliacs, in love with a dead letter. The letter of the sacred text must be rigidly embalmed if it is to imbue life with the certitude and finality of death.

[Flyonthewall]

The difference is one of evidence left behind. Miraculously walking on water for a short time on a lake leaves nothing behind. Turning water into wine leaves no evidence once the wine is drunk. Same with the fish. Causing the dead to live again is definitely miraculous but would leave no clues unless the resurrected being chooses to visit you.

 

Separating continents, flooding the whole earth, and so forth could be miraculously done but this is a jarring change to things we can later study and all evidence suggests it never happened. You can argue that God also miraculously covered up all the evidence but why? That comes dangerously close to outright lying. If all things denote there is a God that seems incompatible with God hiding his handiwork.

 

This is why I hate this kind of reasoning. It argues God hides the miraculous in spectacular events.....so it undermines belief in smaller miracles.

 

God can do anything He likes of course. I am not limiting His power. I just find no reason to believe in a spectacular miracle when evidence suggests a less dramatic one occurred. This does not diminish God's power.

I believe evidence does exist, but is simply not recognized as such for whatever reason.

What if the continental drift did not take place over millions of years, but God did a one time accelerated shift to separate them then they went back to their much slower rate...the evidence may indicate it took millions of years but actually did not. Just guessing here, but wouldn't that work. There would be no "cover up" but simply a misinterpretation of evidence.

Same thing with the a global flood... not sure what evidence would look like, but it could exist but simply mis-interpreted for whatever reason.

God can do anything He wants, and if He wanted to flood the earth as has been recorded, He could have done it.

I don't argue staunchly for a global flood but until there is further revelation on it I don't discount that it could have happened.

[Tiki]

• 1 Nephi 17:50

  50 And I said unto them: If God had commanded me to do all things I could do them. If he should command me that I should say unto this water, be thou earth, it should be earth; and if I should say it, it would be done.

Apparently this verse of scripture is lost on some.

[The Nehor]

I believe evidence does exist, but is simply not recognized as such for whatever reason.

What if the continental drift did not take place over millions of years, but God did a one time accelerated shift to separate them then they went back to their much slower rate...the evidence may indicate it took millions of years but actually did not. Just guessing here, but wouldn't that work. There would be no "cover up" but simply a misinterpretation of evidence.

Same thing with the a global flood... not sure what evidence would look like, but it could exist but simply mis-interpreted for whatever reason.

God can do anything He wants, and if He wanted to flood the earth as has been recorded, He could have done it.

I don't argue staunchly for a global flood but until there is further revelation on it I don't discount that it could have happened.

 

There are a few problems here. A one time shift have been catastrophic in terms of its effects on geology. The problem is we can date a lot of the pieces that shifted due to continental drift. God could have accelerated it but why would he also ensure everything appeared like He did not.

 

God could flood the whole earth. Nephi states God could turn the seas into sand so moving in extra water would not be an issue. It does leave some burning questions though. If the flood was global it would have left trackable geological layers worldwide. Most non-sea plant and animal life would be extinguished (the flood lasted over a year; that would be enough to kill pretty much everything on the planet. Even if the highest mountains were only covered for a short time there is not a lot of life in the highest mountains anyways. Add to that that terrestrial and shallow water plants would die (they need sunlight and covering the whole earth would mean over 8 kilometers of extra water on top of where they were. At that depth seeds would be destroyed due to pressure. Even if you assume somehow that Noah preserved the complete biodiversity with his pair of animals and somehow also brought plants it would take more miracles to repopulate the species. You know what we call animals of which only two survive? We call them doomed to extinction due to shallow gene pool. That's only the beginning of the problems.

 

Yes, God could miraculously fix all those problems but He never said He did and Noah did not mention it. Noah did not know how extensive the flood was. That is why he sent out birds. If he did not know then why should we think we do? I admit I could be wrong about the flood but I REALLY doubt it was global.

[The Nehor]

 

• 1 Nephi 17:50

  50 And I said unto them: If God had commanded me to do all things I could do them. If he should command me that I should say unto this water, be thou earth, it should be earth; and if I should say it, it would be done.

Apparently this verse of scripture is lost on some.

 

 

And if God should command me to drown the whole earth and then magically recreate all the life on it and even alter the nature of the planet to hide that the flood occurred He could have it be done. Then many shall ask, "Why the subterfuge?"

[Rob Osborn]

Ancient Greeks believed that Mars(the God of War) built the lightening bolts thrown by Zeus.

 

A. The ancient Greek Gods were immortal.

B. Lightening bolts are part of creation.

C. Lightening bolts are mentioned in ancient Greek scripture.

D. There was no literal global flood some 5000 years ago.

E. There are no dinosaur tacks from a post flood world.

 

So when you add A+B+C. Zeus threw lightening bolts built on the planet Mars. I'm convinced by your such impeccable logic I'm going to renounce my membership in the Church and start worshiping Zeus.

I am quite convinced you worship Zeus because we are worlds apart on LDS doctrine.

[Brian 2.0]

Rob,

 

Forgive me if you've already covered this in the thread.  But do you believe that every verse and passage in the scriptures should be taken literally?  Are you a believer in transubstantiation like the Catholics to make sense of the following verses in John 6:

 

51 I am the living ^abread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the ^bbread that I will give is my ^cflesh, which I will ^dgive for the ^elife of the world.

 52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

 53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye ^aeat the flesh of the ^bSon of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

 54 Whoso eateth my ^aflesh, and drinketh my ^bblood, hath eternal life; ^cand I will ^draise him up at the last day.

 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

 56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, ^adwelleth in me, and I in him.

 

If you do not take these verses literally (that we literally need to eat the flesh and drink the book of Christ) then what is your methodology for determining what verses should be interpreted literally and what verses should be interpreted symbolically?

[Rob Osborn]

Rob,

 

Forgive me if you've already covered this in the thread.  But do you believe that every verse and passage in the scriptures should be taken literally?  Are you a believer in transubstantiation like the Catholics to make sense of the following verses in John 6:

 

 

If you do not take these verses literally (that we literally need to eat the flesh and drink the book of Christ) then what is your methodology for determining what verses should be interpreted literally and what verses should be interpreted symbolically?

A thorough investigation of scripture and one is pretty much left without excuse in most cases. As for the flood we have ample evidence littered in all of scripture that the flood was a real physical event not a symbolic event. Then you have the myriad of witnesses from prophets that i was a real physical event. Bit by bit, piece by piece and the truth becomes as bright as day. I guess one could get caught up in denying all of these witnesses and claim it symbolic but who are they kidding?

There is so much at stake here regarding the flood. With a global flood as a reality it completely and entirely changes the game for almost every aspect of science. Geology takes the biggest hit, then biology takes a big hit. Things like dinosaurs become a reality of them walking with man. Evolution gets entirely turned on its head and buried for good. Long ages for the strata layers disappear entirely. Mountain building times also get turned on their heads. Its a game changing ordeal. It doesn't bother me one bit that man can laugh when I say dinosaurs and man co-existed. i am in the same group as Noah- go ahead and laugh but we already know the truth. I do not even question for a moment if there was a global flood or the age of dinosaurs. I know the truth and it brings me great peace and joy. It has also allowed me to have a clearer understanding of scripture in defining what is real and what is symbolic. Why? because I no longer lean on mans understanding. I have the light of Christ, the truth radiating to me- its clear as a perfect day on these issues.

[Brian 2.0]

A thorough investigation of scripture and one is pretty much left without excuse in most cases. As for the flood we have ample evidence littered in all of scripture that the flood was a real physical event not a symbolic event. Then you have the myriad of witnesses from prophets that i was a real physical event. Bit by bit, piece by piece and the truth becomes as bright as day. I guess one could get caught up in denying all of these witnesses and claim it symbolic but who are they kidding?

There is so much at stake here regarding the flood. With a global flood as a reality it completely and entirely changes the game for almost every aspect of science. Geology takes the biggest hit, then biology takes a big hit. Things like dinosaurs become a reality of them walking with man. Evolution gets entirely turned on its head and buried for good. Long ages for the strata layers disappear entirely. Mountain building times also get turned on their heads. Its a game changing ordeal. It doesn't bother me one bit that man can laugh when I say dinosaurs and man co-existed. i am in the same group as Noah- go ahead and laugh but we already know the truth. I do not even question for a moment if there was a global flood or the age of dinosaurs. I know the truth and it brings me great peace and joy. It has also allowed me to have a clearer understanding of scripture in defining what is real and what is symbolic. Why? because I no longer lean on mans understanding. I have the light of Christ, the truth radiating to me- its clear as a perfect day on these issues.

Much of the sciences indeed take a hit if the global flood was an actual event. You have spoken of a number of non-biblical evidences for a global flood, I think you at have said they are all over the place. But do you think these evidences stand on their own as a witness to a global flood? Or only when viewed in light of the biblical belief of a global flood?

I am not aware of anyone believing in a global flood that does not also believe in the literalness of the biblical flood story. If the non-biblical evidences for a global flood are so strong then wouldn't you think there would be people/scientists that hold a belief in the global flood while not holding a belief in the bible?

[Alan]

There is so much at stake here regarding the flood. With a global flood as a reality it completely and entirely changes the game for almost every aspect of science. Geology takes the biggest hit, then biology takes a big hit. Things like dinosaurs become a reality of them walking with man. Evolution gets entirely turned on its head and buried for good. Long ages for the strata layers disappear entirely. Mountain building times also get turned on their heads. Its a game changing ordeal. It doesn't bother me one bit that man can laugh when I say dinosaurs and man co-existed. i am in the same group as Noah- go ahead and laugh but we already know the truth. I do not even question for a moment if there was a global flood or the age of dinosaurs. I know the truth and it brings me great peace and joy. It has also allowed me to have a clearer understanding of scripture in defining what is real and what is symbolic. Why? because I no longer lean on mans understanding. I have the light of Christ, the truth radiating to me- its clear as a perfect day on these issues.

 

Well said Rob.

Creation deniers and flood deniers are simply evidence that we are in the last days.

[Flyonthewall]

There are a few problems here. A one time shift have been catastrophic in terms of its effects on geology. The problem is we can date a lot of the pieces that shifted due to continental drift. God could have accelerated it but why would he also ensure everything appeared like He did not.

 

God could flood the whole earth. Nephi states God could turn the seas into sand so moving in extra water would not be an issue. It does leave some burning questions though. If the flood was global it would have left trackable geological layers worldwide. Most non-sea plant and animal life would be extinguished (the flood lasted over a year; that would be enough to kill pretty much everything on the planet. Even if the highest mountains were only covered for a short time there is not a lot of life in the highest mountains anyways. Add to that that terrestrial and shallow water plants would die (they need sunlight and covering the whole earth would mean over 8 kilometers of extra water on top of where they were. At that depth seeds would be destroyed due to pressure. Even if you assume somehow that Noah preserved the complete biodiversity with his pair of animals and somehow also brought plants it would take more miracles to repopulate the species. You know what we call animals of which only two survive? We call them doomed to extinction due to shallow gene pool. That's only the beginning of the problems.

 

Yes, God could miraculously fix all those problems but He never said He did and Noah did not mention it. Noah did not know how extensive the flood was. That is why he sent out birds. If he did not know then why should we think we do? I admit I could be wrong about the flood but I REALLY doubt it was global.

I understand it would be an insurmountable task from our prospective, but for the Being that created the world... not so much.

The task given to Noah, as I see it, was not the sum total of what it took to re-vitalize the earth. On a similar vein I don't think there is a correlation on what kind of sticks you put in front of goats or cattle and the coloration of their offspring. Nor do I think bathing in the river Jordan 7 times is a cure for cancer. Nor do I think putting mud on one's eyes will cure blindness. As in all these events, there is more going on behind the scenes than is recorded. The mundane is what we do, the miraculous is God's part.

You put forth that God made it look like it was done different than what was recorded, and I would accept that if we could be assured that we have ALL the pieces of the puzzle, and put them together correctly.

Of course I could be way off.

[jkwilliams]

A thorough investigation of scripture and one is pretty much left without excuse in most cases. As for the flood we have ample evidence littered in all of scripture that the flood was a real physical event not a symbolic event. Then you have the myriad of witnesses from prophets that i was a real physical event. Bit by bit, piece by piece and the truth becomes as bright as day. I guess one could get caught up in denying all of these witnesses and claim it symbolic but who are they kidding?

There is so much at stake here regarding the flood. With a global flood as a reality it completely and entirely changes the game for almost every aspect of science. Geology takes the biggest hit, then biology takes a big hit. Things like dinosaurs become a reality of them walking with man. Evolution gets entirely turned on its head and buried for good. Long ages for the strata layers disappear entirely. Mountain building times also get turned on their heads. Its a game changing ordeal. It doesn't bother me one bit that man can laugh when I say dinosaurs and man co-existed. i am in the same group as Noah- go ahead and laugh but we already know the truth. I do not even question for a moment if there was a global flood or the age of dinosaurs. I know the truth and it brings me great peace and joy. It has also allowed me to have a clearer understanding of scripture in defining what is real and what is symbolic. Why? because I no longer lean on mans understanding. I have the light of Christ, the truth radiating to me- its clear as a perfect day on these issues.

 

I think it's sad to read the scriptures in such a fundamentalist way that one excludes all discovery, all illuminating truth, simply because it doesn't fit in one's rigid interpretation of scripture. There is so much of wonder and knowledge in the world that I am sure God wants to share with His children, but too many of us are so set in our rigid, narrow ways that we don't want to hear it.

[Gray]

Well said Rob.

Creation deniers and flood deniers are simply evidence that we are in the last days.

 

And behold, in the last days there shall be wicked men who believe in science; but behold, 'tis sorcery! 

[Rob Osborn]

Much of the sciences indeed take a hit if the global flood was an actual event. You have spoken of a number of non-biblical evidences for a global flood, I think you at have said they are all over the place. But do you think these evidences stand on their own as a witness to a global flood? Or only when viewed in light of the biblical belief of a global flood?

I am not aware of anyone believing in a global flood that does not also believe in the literalness of the biblical flood story. If the non-biblical evidences for a global flood are so strong then wouldn't you think there would be people/scientists that hold a belief in the global flood while not holding a belief in the bible?

Let me ask- Who of us has witnessed a global flood? What would it look like?

The problem you pose goes away once we realize that pretty much the entirety of huma population have been preconditioned by modern science to believe in this uniformatarian model and no global flood. It wasn't that long ago when the bible dominated and the majority of people believed in the global flood. By the time most children get into high school they have been conditioned enough about long ages and slow gradual prices that it becomes ingrained in them and they genuinely believe it blindly.

Go out in the world, look at all the evidence. The evidence points to very catastrophic events in our past. You cannot go anywhere in the world and not find deep sedimentary layers now exposed in the rock. You cannot climb any of the major mountain chains and not find seashells in the strata layers high up in elevation. The evidence exists. Even the scientists know that pretty much every part of the earth was under the water at some time in the past. The only difference is theydo not all agree that it was at the same time in the recent past.

Beisdes all of that you have myriads of large beasts that died quickly and were buried quickly and turned into fossils. In order to understand fossilization one must realize that deposition must happen extremely fast. For a dinosaur to become fossilized it has to die and be buried by sediments very rapidly. Let me ask- what events in the world today are burying something large such as a hippo or horse on every continent? There aren't any events i the world that are doing this. These large beasts that by chance do get caught and died in water are eaten by predators in the water far faster than they can be buried and preserved.

Let me just say- the present is definitely not the key to the past

[jkwilliams]

And behold, in the last days there shall be wicked men who believe in science; but behold, 'tis sorcery! 

 

It has really hit me in the last few days how much people have been attacking science, as if accepting scientific data were somehow in conflict with faith. I'm glad that, in my experience, this disdain for science is not widespread among members of the LDS church.

 

As I said, the problem isn't in rejecting scripture in favor of science; it's in assuming that your interpretation of scripture is the right one. IMO, if revelation and science appear to be in conflict, one has a few choices:

 

1. The revelation (as you see it) is right, and the science is wrong.

2. The science (as you see it) is right, and the revelation is wrong.

3. Your interpretation of scripture may not be correct, so it may be wise to adjust your thinking.

4. Your understanding of science may not be correct, so it may be wise to adjust your thinking.

 

Plenty of faithful members of the LDS church don't have a problem accepting the evidence for the age of the earth and organic evolution. Why? Because they rightly understand that, seeing through a glass darkly, they don't have to choose between their interpretation of scripture and their interpretation of science.

[Alan]

It has really hit me in the last few days how much people have been attacking science, as if accepting scientific data were somehow in conflict with faith.

 

It's not the data that's in conflict, it's the interpretation of that data.

[Rob Osborn]

I think it's sad to read the scriptures in such a fundamentalist way that one excludes all discovery, all illuminating truth, simply because it doesn't fit in one's rigid interpretation of scripture. There is so much of wonder and knowledge in the world that I am sure God wants to share with His children, but too many of us are so set in our rigid, narrow ways that we don't want to hear it.

God is really trying to share the truthfulness of his scripture. Its no ones fault but their own if they cannot see the evidence and testimony of the flood. I agree that too many of us are set in the narrow mindset of mans learning that they cannot see the truth when it stares at them from so many angles.

[jkwilliams]

It's not the data that's in conflict, it's the interpretation of that data.

 

Or it's the interpretation of the scripture that's in conflict. Or it's a combination of the two.

[jkwilliams]

God is really trying to share the truthfulness of his scripture. Its no ones fault but their own if they cannot see the evidence and testimony of the flood. I agree that too many of us are set in the narrow mindset of mans learning that they cannot see the truth when it stares at them from so many angles.

 

I'm sorry, but your interpretation of scripture is rigidly fundamentalist. You say that the spirit tells you to interpret the scriptures that way, but I've always followed the spirit in my reading of scripture, and the spirit tells me to reject your hyper-literal reading. In short, I do not feel bound by what you say the spirit is telling you. I don't expect you to be bound by my spiritual experiences, either. Even if I weren't following the spirit, I wouldn't find your fundamentalism at all attractive or spiritual.

[Rob Osborn]

I'm sorry, but your interpretation of scripture is rigidly fundamentalist. You say that the spirit tells you to interpret the scriptures that way, but I've always followed the spirit in my reading of scripture, and the spirit tells me to reject your hyper-literal reading. In short, I do not feel bound by what you say the spirit is telling you. I don't expect you to be bound by my spiritual experiences, either. Even if I weren't following the spirit, I wouldn't find your fundamentalism at all attractive or spiritual.

Then don't feel bound. its that simple. I have peace knowing the truth. You can lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink. Hopefully I can go out in the world and lead many to find water, but its then up to them to partake and drink and have joy.

[jkwilliams]

Then don't feel bound. its that simple. I have peace knowing the truth. You can lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink. Hopefully I can go out in the world and lead many to find water, but its then up to them to partake and drink and have joy.

 

I don't, and I'm at peace. I just hope to limit the damage you do to other people by constantly denigrating science, as if it were some kind of evil profession designed to fight God. Leading people into ignorance is not commendable, especially when your sole reason for doing so is that you think your personal interpretation of scripture is right.

[Gray]

Let me ask- Who of us has witnessed a global flood? What would it look like?

The problem you pose goes away once we realize that pretty much the entirety of huma population have been preconditioned by modern science to believe in this uniformatarian model and no global flood. It wasn't that long ago when the bible dominated and the majority of people believed in the global flood. By the time most children get into high school they have been conditioned enough about long ages and slow gradual prices that it becomes ingrained in them and they genuinely believe it blindly.

Go out in the world, look at all the evidence. The evidence points to very catastrophic events in our past. You cannot go anywhere in the world and not find deep sedimentary layers now exposed in the rock. You cannot climb any of the major mountain chains and not find seashells in the strata layers high up in elevation. The evidence exists. Even the scientists know that pretty much every part of the earth was under the water at some time in the past. The only difference is theydo not all agree that it was at the same time in the recent past.

Beisdes all of that you have myriads of large beasts that died quickly and were buried quickly and turned into fossils. In order to understand fossilization one must realize that deposition must happen extremely fast. For a dinosaur to become fossilized it has to die and be buried by sediments very rapidly. Let me ask- what events in the world today are burying something large such as a hippo or horse on every continent? There aren't any events i the world that are doing this. These large beasts that by chance do get caught and died in water are eaten by predators in the water far faster than they can be buried and preserved.

Let me just say- the present is definitely not the key to the past

 

There is no evidence that points to a global flood. In fact all of the evidence from the physical world rules it out. 

[Gray]

God is really trying to share the truthfulness of his scripture. Its no ones fault but their own if they cannot see the evidence and testimony of the flood. I agree that too many of us are set in the narrow mindset of mans learning that they cannot see the truth when it stares at them from so many angles.

 

I don't think God wants us to stick our heads in the sand and take literally stories that were always intended to be conveyances for deeper meaning. 

[Gray]

Then don't feel bound. its that simple. I have peace knowing the truth. You can lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink. Hopefully I can go out in the world and lead many to find water, but its then up to them to partake and drink and have joy.

 

What spiritual value is there in "knowing" that the earth was literally flooded a few thousand years ago, to the tops of the highest mountain?

 

Even if it were true, it has no intrinsic meaning.