Conversation with An Atheist

[NayborBear]

And the unanswered question is; how do you know this? Seems you’re connecting this conclusion to Pangaea.

Methinks the lad is referring to a "slice of eternity" prior to this current "slice of eternity" where "Pangea" DID exist!
Far as I can see?
He's still trying to sort the difference/s in these "slices of eternity."
Which is a "perpetually confusing and terminal" problem that has and shall continue to perplex "sciences of empiricism."
1 Timothy 6:20
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
and 5 bucks'll get ya a cup of coffee!

 

[CrowCross]

Interesting. I checked about 5 different commentaries on the verse and 4 out of the 5 agreed that the division was a political/ethnic one and not a physical division of the land. I have always though it was referring to a cataclysmic physical division of the land.

It could have also been speaking about the Tower of Babel dividing of the people.

 

[Mancunian]

The salt from the flood waters...which wasn't as high as oceans of today...would have easily been leached out of the soil by rain water

The ark supposedly came to rest on Mt Ararat? The flood waters covered the highest mountains on earth, I'm assuming though that the flood waters would have been a diluted saltwater... Rain is freshwater and so are underground springs.
A pretty toxic mix for fish, but that's another topic....
The earth would have been in ruins after a global flood.
Noah's family would definitely have been starved to death when back on 'dry land' if any of this was remotely true.

 

[NayborBear]

Noah's family would definitely have been starved to death when back on 'dry land' if any of this was remotely true.

That's assuming Noah and family consumed all the food, and all the feed and fodder for the critters, and the critters quit doing that which critters do in preserving their species.
Whilst awaiting for the fields to repopulate.
Look what God did through His Prophet Elijah and that poor woman and her son.
And you are under the premise that this SAME God would NOT take care of not only Noah and families needs as well as the critters?

Under empiricism? It would be easy to draw the same conclusion you have.
And?

 

[Mancunian]

That's assuming Noah and family consumed all the food, and all the feed and fodder for the critters, and the critters quit doing that which critters do in preserving their species.
Whilst awaiting for the fields to repopulate.
Look what God did through His Prophet Elijah and that poor woman and her son.
And you are under the premise that this SAME God would NOT take care of not only Noah and families needs as well as the critters?

Under empiricism? It would be easy to draw the same conclusion you have.
And?

Yes we all know what the God who created the universe, our solar system, the laws of physics and mathematics did to the children of bethel too according to the Bible.

Are we accepting that a God that is so powerful and all knowing, sent some bears to maul children because they mocked Elijah?

Are we not taking that literally? Which bits are we taking literally?

 

[Mancunian]

It's all very confusing.
Little wonder that I don't believe.

 

[Mancunian]

And before you say it Elijah ascended and Elisha was the replacement prophet that was mocked for his baldness.

I wonder why the creator of Saturn Uranus and Jupiter would get involved?

 

[Mancunian]

The main reason that I don't believe in the Christian God is that the gospels don't agree with eachother.
This is the most important part of the holy Bible. This part must be coherent and all of the gospels must agree.
The crucifixion and resurrection of jesus must be the most important event ever witnessed by mankind, the son of God, here to pay for our sins.
Why don't the accounts of Matthew Mark Luke and John match perfectly regardless of the time between the accounts?
If you want to, we can make a separate thread for the contradictory gospels.

 

[Mancunian]

I've read it over and over and over and over.
Matthew Mark Luke and John.
I've read them over and over and over and over.

 

[Mancunian]

That's assuming Noah and family consumed all the food, and all the feed and fodder for the critters, and the critters quit doing that which critters do in preserving their species.
Whilst awaiting for the fields to repopulate.
Look what God did through His Prophet Elijah and that poor woman and her son.
And you are under the premise that this SAME God would NOT take care of not only Noah and families needs as well as the critters?

Under empiricism? It would be easy to draw the same conclusion you have.
And?

Do you really believe that God eliminated every living thing on this planet apart from Noah, his family and two of every 'Kind'.
I always wonder about marsupials? I wonder about eucalyptus. I wonder about bamboo. I wonder about the giant anteater. I wonder about where Noah got his Emperor penguins from. I wonder where Noah got his poison dart frogs from. Noah doesn't have time on his side. Noah the 800+ year old boat builder doesn't have reality on his side.