Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: metmom
The Bible doesn’t state one. There’s no justification for any of the dates.

But if you’re looking for a Flood in the wrong time frame, of course, you’re not going to find it. That doesn’t mean it didn’t ever happen, though. It just means that it didn’t happen when you’re looking.

Nice work if you can get it. Be just as vague as you need in your claims so that they can't be checked.

That reminds me of a line from another of my favorite science fiction writers:

It does not pay a prophet to be too specific.

L. Sprague de Camp

Let's summarize. Geologists gave up looking for the flood in geological strata in the early 1800s. Archaeologists and sedimentologists, two professions which have developed since then, have never found evidence of the global flood in the soils. No matter what time period you look its not there. The global flood is a local tribal myth.

You can play games with the dates all you want, and keep shifting the goalposts. But you at some point will have to face the evidence; there was no global flood.

685 posted on 08/13/2008 1:09:15 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 684 | View Replies ]


To: metmom; Coyoteman

The Bible doesn’t state any dates for the flood and somehow you metmom are shifting the goal posts by pointing that out.

pm


687 posted on 08/13/2008 1:49:11 PM PDT by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies ]

To: Coyoteman

The only game playing with dates is by those who want to lock the Flood into a certain time of their choosing so they can “scientifically” deny it and then make the Bible out to be a lie.

The further back the Flood goes in time, the less evidence there will be for it as it gets lost. By locking the time in recently at a point at which people know there’s no evidence for the Flood, it’s far easier to discredit the whole thing.

It’s also incredibly intellectually dishonest.

Besides, as I’ve been told.... lack of evidence is not evidence of lack. There’ve been many things that the Bible was criticized as being historically inaccurate about that archeological evidence has demonstrated to be true.

As far as the evidence of the Flood, it’s a matter of opinion as to whether the evidence is reliable or not. I wouldn’t expect anyone who has already decided that the Bible is not true to accept as reliable evidence that proves that it is. Anyone who so wants to deny the truth of Scripture will find some way of explaining away the most obvious evidence in the world.


688 posted on 08/13/2008 3:06:24 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 685 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson