Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: reasonisfaith
All I’m saying is that once you accept the truth of God’s existence according to the Bible, you cannot refute the story of Noah by using naturalistic arguments. This is because God acts outside the laws of nature.

You seem to be trying to establish a case for Biblical literalism by making the belief in the existence of God dependent on belief in the literal text of the Bible.

I understand your religious beliefs dictate that for you these questions are already answered and any further debate is neither needed nor wanted. What I don't understand is why it's necessary to try to disrupt the discussion and debate by people who don't subscribe to the same degree of literalism that you do and can discuss it based on the physical evidence.

51 posted on 06/10/2013 12:23:06 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic

It’s simple logic.

Take any part of the story of Noah commonly referenced by opponents: impossible to get all the animals in it, impossible to feed all the animals, impossible to create enough water to flood the whole planet, impossible to repopulate humanity with just Noah and his family—what am I forgetting to mention?

The logic goes like this: if God is truly the creator of the universe, then none of the above would be impossible or even difficult for him.


52 posted on 06/10/2013 1:02:39 PM PDT by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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