Jump to content

Why does jesus confirm the universal flood myth?


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

This is a very weird way to put it, but the evolution of humans from an ape ancestor is not controversial. It is in fact taught at church schools. The evidence when studied is pretty incontrovertible. 

Yes but then when the spirit of Adam was put into one of these Homo sapiens our race began.

Link to comment

 

3 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

This is a very weird way to put it, but the evolution of humans from an ape ancestor is not controversial. It is in fact taught at church schools. The evidence when studied is pretty incontrovertible. 

I guess what I meant was you see multiple progenitors evolving from apes, roughly around the same time, rather than one initial pair of humans?  You know Science changes.  Newtonian physics was turned upside down by Quantum theory.  I'm old enough to recall BOM anachronisms that aren't as strong today as they once were. Heck I remember doctors believed stomach ulcers were caused by spicy food & stress before the discovery that H. pylori bacteria was the source.  So, I think we have no idea what science may yet discover about human origins.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:
1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

Yes but then when the spirit of Adam was put into one of these Homo sapiens our race began.

I think this a great melding of religion and science. 

Joseph Smith is quoted as saying:

"Now regarding Adam: He came here from another planet, an immortalized Being, and brought his wife Eve with him, and by eating of the fruit of this earth, became subject to death and decay. . . was made mortal and subject to death." - (Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., as recorded by Anson Call)

Link to comment
45 minutes ago, Esrom said:

 

I guess what I meant was you see multiple progenitors evolving from apes, roughly around the same time,

That’s not how evolution works. Every child born looks as much like their parents as you look like yours. 

45 minutes ago, Esrom said:


You know Science changes.  Newtonian physics was turned upside down by Quantum theory. 
 

Newtonian physics still works just fine. Kids are still taught Newtonian physics. It’s how we build buildings, design cars, and launch rockets. 
 

Will we understand better later? Yes. Will gaps be filled? Yes. Will we discover that common descent was wrong. No. Either common descent is true, or God spent an inordinate amount of time faking it just for kicks and giggles. 

45 minutes ago, Esrom said:

I'm old enough to recall BOM anachronisms that aren't as strong today as they once were. Heck I remember doctors believed stomach ulcers were caused by spicy food & stress before the discovery that H. pylori bacteria was the source.  So, I think we have no idea what science may yet discover about human origins.

I have no doubt that you do think that, but from this short conversation it appears to me that you have no idea what evolution is or how it works. If I’m wrong about that sorry, but if not, you probably ought to read a book or two on it before attempting to debate whether it happened or not. 

Edited by SeekingUnderstanding
Link to comment
36 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

How would you suggest finding out?

A young earth was the default view among European scientists as well as a global flood. Then they looked at the data. And data across disciplines across time and space came back over and over again. The earth is old. Very old. 
 

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

The evidence when studied is pretty incontrovertible. 

I was studying at a large public university in the American Midwest in the late 1990s when an emeritus professor of biological anthropology who had discovered and named a particular species of Homo published an op-ed in the local newspaper disavowing everything he'd ever taught about human origins based on what he carefully explained was a lack of convincing evidence. I was curious what his colleagues thought of what he'd written. I walked through the anthropology department the next day en route to a meeting with my supervisor and overheard a group of academics discussing how sad it was that this man had obviously lost his mind.

I share just to provide some context for the pretty part of 'pretty incontrovertible'.

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

That’s not how evolution works. Every child born looks as much like their parents as you look like yours. 

Newtonian physics still works just fine. Kids are still taught Newtonian physics. It’s how we build buildings, design cars, and launch rockets. 
 

Will we understand better later? Yes. Will gaps be filled? Yes. Will we discover that common descent was wrong. No. Either common descent is true, or God spent an inordinate amount of time faking it just for kicks and giggles. 

I have no doubt that you do think that, but from this short conversation it appears to me that you have no idea what evolution is or how it works. If I’m wrong about that sorry, but if not, you probably ought to read a book or two on it before attempting to debate whether it happened or not. 

you're clearly rude and full of yourself.  I politely asked what the alternative was that you espouse.  No, I don't have expertise in the mechanics of evolution but didn't realize that was a requirement to ask a question.  I am new here but will note that you're best avoided.  

Link to comment
54 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I was studying at a large public university in the American Midwest in the late 1990s when an emeritus professor of biological anthropology who had discovered and named a particular species of Homo published an op-ed in the local newspaper disavowing everything he'd ever taught about human origins based on what he carefully explained was a lack of convincing evidence. I was curious what his colleagues thought of what he'd written. I walked through the anthropology department the next day en route to a meeting with my supervisor and overheard a group of academics discussing how sad it was that this man had obviously lost his mind.

I share just to provide some context for the pretty part of 'pretty incontrovertible'.

Completely agree. The evidence is such that the most likely explanation for the outburst was that he lost his mind. 

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Completely agree. The evidence is such that the most likely explanation for the outburst was that he lost his mind. 

'Outburst'? It was a long, thoughtfully written, carefully argued op-ed. I don't expect you to agree with it, of course, but it certainly didn't match your dismissive label.

Link to comment
50 minutes ago, Esrom said:

you're clearly rude and full of yourself. 

Clearly. It’s my best qualities. Don’t ask about the worst. 

50 minutes ago, Esrom said:


I politely asked what the alternative was that you espouse.

With respect, you launched into a lecture on how science changes. It was that to which I responded. 

50 minutes ago, Esrom said:

 
I am new here but will note that you're best avoided.  

There are forums that are echo chambers, you might prefer that? Otherwise, this forum supposedly has an ignore feature. I’m sure someone could help you find it. 

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

'Outburst'? It was a long, thoughtfully written, carefully argued op-ed. I don't expect you to agree with it, of course, but it certainly didn't match your dismissive label.

I guess I misunderstood the point of your post? I have never come across a thoughtfully written, carefully argued argument against the theory of common descent (that said there is plenty of argument about mechanisms, and other nuances).  I’d love to read it. Can you share?

 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Clearly. It’s my best qualities. Don’t ask about the worst. 

With respect, you launched into a lecture on how science changes. It was that to which I responded. 

There are forums that are echo chambers, you might prefer that? Otherwise, this forum supposedly has an ignore feature. I’m sure someone could help you find it. 

and the rudeness continues. Civil discussion need not be in that tone. I will disregard your invitation to leave and find a better forum.  It wasn't a "lecture".. it was observation.  And while I'm reading up on evolution, perhaps you could brush up on the paradigm shattering Quantum theory that has birthed dozens of books and debate.  All this because I asked what your alternative to Adam & Eve was?   I hope this is not what predominates this forum.

Link to comment
26 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I have never come across a thoughtfully written, carefully argued argument against the theory of common descent (that said there is plenty of argument about mechanisms, and other nuances).  I’d love to read it. Can you share?

I wish I could! I clipped and saved it. I have no clue what I did with it. :(

Link to comment

I am coming to the party late. I haven't read all the replies. I would only in the whatever it is worth department comment that as an Evangelical (capital E) I believe that the flood story has been changing and evolving over my entire life. As a boy and a young man the flood was always interpreted as universal and the ark rests somewhere on Mt. Ararat. Now there is interest in the idea that the flood was regional and that the ark rested on Mt Cudi in extreme southeast Turkey. Mt Cudi (or Judi), rather than a single mountain is more a contiguous series of high areas like we see here in Chihuahua. The view south from Mt Cudi is extraordinary and certainly looks like the whole of the earth. It is the last range north of the flat plains. For hundreds of years Christian (Nestorian), Muslims, and Jews held a joint peaceful estival of sacrifice on Mt Cudi in commemoration of their shared history of the the flood and the resting of the Ark on that spot. We have British and German archaeologist's accounts of this event. Sennacherib, the Assyrian after his spectacular defeat at Jerusalem made a specific journey there, climbed that mountain and captured the surrounding land because of the flood narrative there. He left huge reliefs of himself near the site. The location of the town, altar that Noah built are nearby. He was said to have been buried near there and a monastery (Nestorian) held his remains. It is said they have now been moved to Cizre - but of course we don't know for sure. 

The combined Jewish, Muslim, and Christian truce on the Mt Cudi feast day lasted for many years until the genocide in 1915. By then even the Presbyterians had a presence there. Today the site is terribly rugged and dangerous as the Kurds and Turkish Muslims are fighting there. The Christians (Nestorian and Orthodox) left. Many settled in Belgium. Some are slowly returning to the area. For several years a state university of Turkey in Sirnak has held a conference on Noah in a major town near (relatively speaking) the site. Speakers and attendees are predominantly Muslim and Christian. Chalk me up for a regional flood guy who rejects the Mt Ararat location (Genesis after all says "the mountains of Ararat") which was clearly a region, not a location. So, yes there are Evangelical proponents of a regional flood on the plains of the Tigris stretching down into Syria which to the folks living there was the known extent of the world. Thanks for letting me opine.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...