Did a world wide flood caused by God actually occur as state

[upallnite]

I would like to begin by thanking Twobitsmedia for standing by his word and excepting this debate. We have agreed on many things in the past and I am sure we will agree on many more in the future. I would also like to thank Otseng for being our gracious host. I will do my best to treat both Twobits views and the views of the readers with respect.

I do not want to create a straw man argument and would like a detailed outline of how Twobits interprets the flood described in Genesis 7&8 of the King James Version of the Holy Bible. I will begin with questions that I have from my interpretation of reading Genesis 7&8 and follow with my position.

Questions:

What was the time period that the flood happened?
How long did the flood last?
How was a boat on top of Mt. Ararat when no Mountain had been uncovered yet?
Did the flood kill plants?
On what day was the land dry?

My position:

I do not think the flood happened as stated in the KJV of the Holy Bible. My reasons for not believing the event took place as stated are contradictions dealing with this event in the KJV, lack of evidence of massive amounts of water during the time period, evidence that shows areas that were not under water during the time period, and societies that were not destroyed during the time period. I think these reasons are sufficient but I may add more as the debate progresses.

My first reason, contradictions, will be elaborated after Twobits answers my opening questions. For now I would like to point out why contradictions cause me not to believe. A self contradiction is when someone makes a factual statement about something and then makes another factual statement about that same thing when both statements cannot be true. I hope to show Twobits and readers that the KJV of the Holy Bible makes this error in both chapters 7&8 of Genesis.

My second reason for not believing is the lack of evidence of massive amounts of water during the time period. I know, this is just an argument from ignorance on my part. But after asking so many people for so long for evidence I have come to the conclusion that there is none. As Twobits can attest to, I can be quite annoying when I want something. I find it more likely that there is no evidence than that everyone that I have annoyed about this was willing to let me annoy them.

Another reason that I do not believe is that I trust the findings of scientists that have and do work in fields of study that state there was not a global flood during the time period. I have read their findings about various features of the earth and do not see why all of them would commit a vast conspiracy to fool others about this matter.

My final reason for not beliving is the societies that were not killed by a global flood. I think my grand father would wonder where his people came from if I told him all the Native Americans were wiped out by a global flood. My Puerto Rican wife would find it odd that her people could be drowned at all much less wiped out by a flood. My Aunt from Asia would have a few words with me if I told her the history of her ancestors was a fake because the flood killed them all. I would have a lot of explaining to do to people in my own family if I subscribed to a global flood as stated in the KJV of the Holy Bible.

I think my reasons for not believing and Twobits evidence will fail to convince people that read this debate with an open mind. I will now wait for Twobits answers and his opening statement.

Readers, thank you for taking the time to read and consider both sides of this debate.

[twobitsmedia]

Thanks Upallnite for starting this off. I wasn't real sure what the subject was going to be since we hit several in the debate leading up to this, but I think we can work with this title: Did a world wide flood caused by God actually occur as stated?

We are dealing with a historic event and which falls somewhat under the category of a "miracle." We had previously agreed that this would be the accepted definition of the term, which came from wikipedia:

A miracle, derived from the old Latin word miraculum meaning "something wonderful", is a striking interposition of divine intervention by a supernatural being in the universe by which the ordinary course and operation of Nature is overruled, suspended, or modified.

I will probably be deriving most of my application from the Biblical text, and will agree to the King James version, but would like to use the Revised also called New King James Version as it is not so old-English, but still translates the same, if that is OK with Upallnite. But I do want to make it clear from the start that I do not believe the Bible is without errancy, particulary when it comes to translation. But I don't believe it is so off the mark, either, that it creates whole different Bible. Some numbers, some figures, etc, or some poetic style of the orginal language may or may not have translated properly into modern English, after having been translated from another language, etc etc.





In regards to the questions:

What was the time period that the flood happened?

"When it came to pass" and " the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. "

How long did the flood last?

It appears the rains probably lasted about 40 days and nights but the waters may not have completely dispersed for onwards up to a year. There's variable numbers used in the passages which probably got lost in translation and its kind of hard to put an actual number on it, as least the way I see it.

How was a boat on top of Mt. Ararat when no Mountain had been uncovered yet?

The translation uses the words "mountains of Ararat" which could be problematic, once again for the translation. It does not appear to me it actually rested on the mountain, but over the range. I might translate it to say the ark rested above the mountains because it took about another three months for the moutain tops to be visible.

Did the flood kill plants?

Not clear. One would think a normal flood would. The dove, however, brought back an olive leaf, of which the olive plant is a plant which survives well in areas that are very dry (from what I understand).

On what day was the land dry?

in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth;


Now, I will let you go with what direction you want.


My position:

I accept the Biblical Record and don't cherry pick which parts of the Bible to accept or not accept. (If I did, I might pitch the book of Jude or most of Ecclesiastes). I have never been presented any reasonable argument in which to not accept it, although there have been some good ones presented. And, by all means it runs against scientifc data and information. But, of course the event was started by "a supernatural being (God) in the universe by which the ordinary course and operation of Nature is overruled, suspended, or modified."

I try not to ever just rest any argument on "well you just got to have faith" or something like that or you have to "believe to believe" which, to me, ridiculous assertions. However, I will admit that the idea of presenting "miracles" without resorting to such cliches will be a challenge. Which is one of the reasons I agreed to this. Iron sharpens iron, and Upallnite is by no means an unreasonable lightweight.

[upallnite]

Thank you Twobits for taking time out of your weekend to make your opening post. It shows that you take the debate seriously.

A miracle, derived from the old Latin word miraculum meaning "something wonderful", is a striking interposition of divine intervention by a supernatural being in the universe by which the ordinary course and operation of Nature is overruled, suspended, or modified.

I except the definition offered by Twobits.

I will probably be deriving most of my application from the Biblical text, and will agree to the King James version, but would like to use the Revised also called New King James Version as it is not so old-English, but still translates the same, if that is OK with Upallnite.

I have reread the NKJV and only found one minor change that I do not know how they came to it. I do not see that change having any effect on our debate and will not bring it up again. I accept the substitution of the KJV for the NKJV.

But I do want to make it clear from the start that I do not believe the Bible is without errancy, particulary when it comes to translation. But I don't believe it is so off the mark, either, that it creates whole different Bible. Some numbers, some figures, etc, or some poetic style of the orginal language may or may not have translated properly into modern English, after having been translated from another language, etc etc.

I understand and will allow some translation errors as an answer. I would like to point out that excessive translation errors will cause the entire section of text to be questioned of its accuracy. If you do not trust the Bible to be accurate, than I do not understand why you would encourage others to trust it. I will give a lot of leave way in this debate and request that both Twobits and the readers do the same.


What was the time period that the flood happened? Not answered.

"When it came to pass"

This is like saying, “I will get there when I get there.” It does not answer the question.
If I said something like this to my wife, when she asks me when I will be home, she would kick my but. She expects better from me and I expect better from you.

"the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month”

This also, does not answer the question. I do not know when Noah was born. Giving me a reference to how old he was does not help me know when the flood occurred.

How long did the flood last? Not answered.

It appears the rains probably lasted about 40 days and nights but the waters may not have completely dispersed for onwards up to a year.

I agree with the rains lasted 40 days. I do not agree with the “completely dispersed for onwards up to a year”. I did not find this in my reading of Genesis 7&8 in the NKJV.

There's variable numbers used in the passages which probably got lost in translation and its kind of hard to put an actual number on it, as least the way I see it.

Gen7:24 states that the flood was 150 days.
Gen8:3 states that the flood was 150 days.
Now that I have pointed it out, do you agree with 150 days?

How was a boat on top of Mt. Ararat when no mountain had been uncovered yet? Not answered.

The translation uses the words "mountains of Ararat" which could be problematic, once again for the translation. It does not appear to me it actually rested on the mountain, but over the range. I might translate it to say the ark rested above the mountains because it took about another three months for the moutain tops to be visible.

I agree with your approach. But I did ask how. Keep in mind that I am a U.S. Marine and spent 6 years in an amphibious MOS. Was the craft bottom anchored, sea anchored, have a propulsion device, or some other method? If you do not know then there is no honor lost in stating that the bible is not clear or that you do not currently know. I would actually think more of you for such honesty.

Did the flood kill plants? Not answered.

Not clear. One would think a normal flood would. The dove, however, brought back an olive leaf, of which the olive plant is a plant which survives well in areas that are very dry (from what I understand).

Gen7:23 states that all living things died. Do you disagree with the Bible on this matter?

On what day was the land dry? Not answered.

in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth;

This does not give a frame of reference. Is this date BCE?
This date also disagrees with Gen8:14.

My thoughts to your opening position:

I accept the Biblical Record and don't cherry pick which parts of the Bible to accept or not accept.

This does not seam to mesh well with the acceptance of translation errors. Please explain further.

I have never been presented any reasonable argument in which to not accept it, although there have been some good ones presented.

What you are doing is attempting to shift the burden of proof. The burden lies on you to provide evidence that what you assert is true. For Twobits convince and the convince of the readers I would like to add a link for everyone to familiarize (or re-familiarize) themselves with the logical fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_ ... l_fallacy)

But, of course the event was started by "a supernatural being (God) in the universe by which the ordinary course and operation of Nature is overruled, suspended, or modified."

I am not arguing against miracles (at least not in this debate). I am asserting that this particular one did not happen. As others have said of themselves, I am willing to look at miracles case by case. I just wanted to make that abundantly clear to Twobits and the readers.

I try not to ever just rest any argument on "well you just got to have faith" or something like that or you have to "believe to believe" which, to me, ridiculous assertions. However, I will admit that the idea of presenting "miracles" without resorting to such cliches will be a challenge. Which is one of the reasons I agreed to this.

I have noticed that in the past. I do not consider you to be a blind faith kind of person. But if either of us have to resort to “believe to believe” then I like to think the readers will recognize that the debate cannot proceed.

My rebuttal to your opening position:
Upallnite: 1st post 2nd paragraph

I do not want to create a straw man argument and would like a detailed outline of how Twobits interprets the flood described in Genesis 7&8 of the King James Version of the Holy Bible.

I am still trying to be courteous and not create a straw man. I do not feel Twobits has given me a reasonable outline of how he interprets the flood described in Gen7&8. I would like to continue with my position but feel I am hindered by not having something to argue against.

I like to think of Twobits as trustworthy, but I require more than just his word to believe in the flood as described in Gen7&8. “What can be asserted without evidence can be denied without evidence.”-Unknown at this time.

[twobitsmedia]

But I do want to make it clear from the start that I do not believe the Bible is without errancy, particularly when it comes to translation. But I don't believe it is so off the mark, either, that it creates whole different Bible. Some numbers, some figures, etc, or some poetic style of the original language may or may not have translated properly into modern English, after having been translated from another language, etc etc.

I understand and will allow some translation errors as an answer. I would like to point out that excessive translation errors will cause the entire section of text to be questioned of its accuracy. If you do not trust the Bible to be accurate, than I do not understand why you would encourage others to trust it. I will give a lot of leave way in this debate and request that both Twobits and the readers do the same.

I think you will find that my message has always been consistent: that the overall message is sound. When I say inaccuracies, I think the issues might be small things like numbers or dates or things not really important to the main theme. If someone wants to try and use the Bible as a science book, it could be a problem and a big problem, since that is not what it is or ever suggests it is. I believe the original text in the original language would be great to debate out of, but I do not read or understand much Greek or Hebrew and what little I do, I am very sure of the problems with translations. The word "translation" is just what it says. It is a translation of the original. And there are dozens of them. And then there's paraphrase on top of those. Some of the original text was written in prose form, and then translated. Though it had a poetic sound in its original text, it does not always translate clearly and some translators Will use different words to replace something out of the original. I read through, for example, the book of Job several times last year, and once with the help of a Jewish writer. It really brought it to life in a different way. As per your comment, I do not encourage others to "trust it" blindly. I do not even refer to it as a Holy Bible or the "word of God." It is written by men, many unidentified, many who did not know each other, and many using information they had. At best, it is "inspired" as even one of the epistles suggests. It is the overall message that is important to Christianity. It not based on whether one writer crossed a T and another did not.

"When it came to pass"

This is like saying, “I will get there when I get there.” It does not answer the question.
If I said something like this to my wife, when she asks me when I will be home, she would kick my but. She expects better from me and I expect better from you.

It is apparently an irrelevant point of the text. But let me ask...what will knowing the actual date mean? I can get a date for you. I could use wikipedia, or go to some website or maybe pick one from a book if it helps you. But, having just said what I said, it will be clear that it is not because of any calculated calculation of my own.

"the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month”

This also, does not answer the question. I do not know when Noah was born. Giving me a reference to how old he was does not help me know when the flood occurred.

The same question. What does the actual date mean to the context of the short-lived flood? However, if you really need one. I would do the same for finding the other dates.

It appears the rains probably lasted about 40 days and nights but the waters may not have completely dispersed for onwards up to a year.

I agree with the rains lasted 40 days. I do not agree with the “completely dispersed for onwards up to a year”. I did not find this in my reading of Genesis 7&8 in the NKJV.

Well, the flood didn't appear to end just after the rain stopped on the 41st day. Reading the months between different events like the tops of the mountains being seen, and releasing of the dove and the time before they actually got off the ark and seems a difference in numbers. When the ark rested it mentions 600 and the first year, which could be a correlation with Noah's age of 600 and then maybe being on the ark for 1 year. So I am looking at start time, drain (or time to dry) time and am considering the whole event as the "flood."

There's variable numbers used in the passages which probably got lost in translation and its kind of hard to put an actual number on it, as least the way I see it.

Gen7:24 states that the flood was 150 days.

It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth. It wasn't until

Gen8:3 states that the flood was 150 days.

That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

Now that I have pointed it out, do you agree with 150 days?

I wont agree or disagree but it still falls within my 40 days to one year response. I will agree that it could be 150 days.

The translation uses the words "mountains of Ararat" which could be problematic, once again for the translation. It does not appear to me it actually rested on the mountain, but over the range. I might translate it to say the ark rested above the mountains because it took about another three months for the mountain tops to be visible.

I agree with your approach. But I did ask how. Keep in mind that I am a U.S. Marine and spent 6 years in an amphibious MOS. Was the craft bottom anchored, sea anchored, have a propulsion device, or some other method? If you do not know then there is no honor lost in stating that the bible is not clear or that you do not currently know. I would actually think more of you for such honesty.

I couldn't even imagine Noah having a clue as to anything about navigation or where he even might be. Not to mention how one would really know where one is at unless navigating off the stars and moon, but I am not clear on what kind of vocation Noah had before this calling. I can only presume that it was God's intent to have the boat land there and kept. The Bible is not a science book and I believe it should never be portrayed as one. Do you believe the Bible is a science book?

Not clear. One would think a normal flood would. The dove, however, brought back an olive leaf, of which the olive plant is a plant which survives well in areas that are very dry (from what I understand).

Gen7:23 states that all living things died. Do you disagree with the Bible on this matter?

You are correct. All living things died. I spoke in terms of permanence which is why I mentioned the olive leaf. The olive leaf was around before the flood and then again after. If a plant falls under the Biblical definition of "living" in this context then it, of course, died also. It isn't totally clear. The curse of the flood was directed toward man and beast (Gen 6).

in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth;

This does not give a frame of reference. Is this date BCE?

Just using this text, I do not know, but also find it irrelevant. Am I to presume the date is necessary to correspond with some scientific data?

This date also disagrees with Gen8:14.

Not really. vs 13 says the surface of the ground. 14 says the earth. I would presume the surface of the ground would be the first to dry.

I accept the Biblical Record and don't cherry pick which parts of the Bible to accept or not accept.

This does not seam to mesh well with the acceptance of translation errors. Please explain further.

In further explanation of what Is said above, I know some people who accept the Bible, but then say the ark event was not a real story, of Job, or Adam and Eve but there is no Biblical information which suggests that is or this isn't. It seems to end up in a pick and choose situation. When I weighed it, I had to ask if God is the one who created the heaven and earth, could he create a flood and end it in a short amount of time? I had to answer yes.

I have never been presented any reasonable argument in which to not accept it, although there have been some good ones presented.

What you are doing is attempting to shift the burden of proof. The burden lies on you to provide evidence that what you assert is true. For Twobits convince and the convince of the readers I would like to add a link for everyone to familiarize (or re-familiarize) themselves with the logical fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_ ... l_fallacy)

No, what I am telling you is that I have never been presented any reasonable argument in which not to accept it. That is a reality...not a guilt trip.

But, of course the event was started by "a supernatural being (God) in the universe by which the ordinary course and operation of Nature is overruled, suspended, or modified."

I am not arguing against miracles (at least not in this debate). I am asserting that this particular one did not happen. As others have said of themselves, I am willing to look at miracles case by case. I just wanted to make that abundantly clear to Twobits and the readers.

OK, but I think "miracle" will be a very important part of this because I already agree that there was no cataclysmic worldwide flood that occurred and ended in any sense of a natural event.

Upallnite: 1st post 2nd paragraph

I do not want to create a straw man argument and would like a detailed outline of how Twobits interprets the flood described in Genesis 7&8 of the King James Version of the Holy Bible.

I am still trying to be courteous and not create a straw man. I do not feel Twobits has given me a reasonable outline of how he interprets the flood described in Gen7&8. I would like to continue with my position but feel I am hindered by not having something to argue against.

I guess I thought I was laying it out. I am accepting the Biblical application, but had to note that I do think there are a few translation problems, though that do not take away from the entire event. If you are asking if I have a play by play description of it, then no, not really. I can lay it out according to the text if you like. Let me know if that would help.


My response to these: not answered. I disagree. They were answered. It is appearing you want a more absolute answer and as in most of them, I can arbitrarily pick one or dates or such. It is the YE creationists that usually supply those dates and is, for the most part, a methodology that I do not think merits my attention. My opinion is that they are attempting to use the Bible as a science book but in doing so leave out the important central character: God. The Bible as a science book is worthy of the garbage can.

What can be asserted without evidence can be denied without evidence.”-Unknown at this time.

What can be asserted as a miracle may only be evidenced by the fruit of its goal.

[upallnite]

If someone wants to try and use the Bible as a science book, it could be a problem and a big problem, since that is not what it is or ever suggests it is.

I do not expect the Bible to hold true to the scientific method. I do expect Twobits to defend that the Bible is speaking of an event that actually happened. I like to write stories some are fiction and some are about events in my life. Even the non-fiction stories I like to add a little “poetic license”. Most of my fiction is meant to incite emotion. I have no qualms with the story as fiction. Do you consider this one event in the Bible as fiction or non-fiction?

As per your comment, I do not encourage others to "trust it" blindly.

If you do not trust the Bible, then I need to know what other tools you are using to decide the accuracy of statements about this event in the Bible. I would like to use the same tools as you so that we come to an agreement in a timely manner.


What was the time period that the flood happened? Not answered.

"When it came to pass"

It is apparently an irrelevant point of the text. But let me ask...what will knowing the actual date mean? I can get a date for you. I could use wikipedia, or go to some website or maybe pick one from a book if it helps you. But, having just said what I said, it will be clear that it is not because of any calculated calculation of my own.

Inserting irrelevant information is a red herring only useful for getting away from a topic. I would like to continue with the topic of this debate.

Knowing the actual date (or a reasonable approximation) will help us find if the event occurred. If I am looking for my birth certificate it would help if I was looking in the correct decade. Looking for evidence of my birth in the 1960’s would show no evidence that I was born. Looking for my birth certificate in 1979 would quickly yeild positive results.


How long did the flood last? Not answered.

Well, the flood didn't appear to end just after the rain stopped on the 41st day. Reading the months between different events like the tops of the mountains being seen, and releasing of the dove and the time before they actually got off the ark and seems a difference in numbers. When the ark rested it mentions 600 and the first year, which could be a correlation with Noah's age of 600 and then maybe being on the ark for 1 year. So I am looking at start time, drain (or time to dry) time and am considering the whole event as the "flood."

Please cite scripture so that I may use the same passage as you and come to the same conclusion. I have stated that I did not find your conclusion of 1-year in my reading. If you are using another source for your 1-year then please cite the source so that I may use it also.

It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth.

That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

Please explain how the flood both prevailed and decrease on the same day.

I wont agree or disagree but it still falls within my 40 days to one year response. I will agree that it could be 150 days.

Please explain why you refuse to agree with the Bible.


How was a boat on top of Mt. Ararat when no mountain had been uncovered yet? Not answered.

I can only presume

I except that Twobits does not currently know how this event took place.

Did the flood kill plants? Not answered.

You are correct. All living things died. I spoke in terms of permanence which is why I mentioned the olive leaf. The olive leaf was around before the flood and then again after. If a plant falls under the Biblical definition of "living" in this context then it, of course, died also. It isn't totally clear. The curse of the flood was directed toward man and beast (Gen 6).

Are you arguing that living, as used in the Bible, is a translation error?


On what day was the land dry? Not answered.

Just using this text, I do not know, but also find it irrelevant. Am I to presume the date is necessary to correspond with some scientific data?

I except that Twobits does not know what day the land was dry.

Not really. vs 13 says the surface of the ground. 14 says the earth. I would presume the surface of the ground would be the first to dry.

Please explain the difference between ground and Earth as you are using the terms.
I currently think the difference is being visible water (surface) and ground water (Earth).


My thoughts to your opening position:

In further explanation of what Is said above, I know some people who accept the Bible, but then say the ark event was not a real story, of Job, or Adam and Eve but there is no Biblical information which suggests that is or this isn't. It seems to end up in a pick and choose situation. When I weighed it, I had to ask if God is the one who created the heaven and earth, could he create a flood and end it in a short amount of time? I had to answer yes.

Is this statement a yes answer to, “do you consider this event to be an actual event (non-fiction)?”

No, what I am telling you is that I have never been presented any reasonable argument in which not to accept it. That is a reality...not a guilt trip.

The link I provided was very clear that asking someone to prove a negative is shifting the burden of proof. That is a logical fallacy…not a valid reason.

OK, but I think "miracle" will be a very important part of this because I already agree that there was no cataclysmic worldwide flood that occurred and ended in any sense of a natural event.

I have no problem with assuming the flood was a miracle. But you still need to show that the miracle actually occurred. Even miracles have time frames and effect the natural world. I am willing to agree that the flood did not have a time frame and did not effect the natural world in any way.

I guess I thought I was laying it out. I am accepting the Biblical application, but had to note that I do think there are a few translation problems, though that do not take away from the entire event. If you are asking if I have a play by play description of it, then no, not really. I can lay it out according to the text if you like. Let me know if that would help.

I have read the Bible in many forms. If “read it again” is all you are offering then this is not a debate.

My response to these: not answered. I disagree. They were answered. It is appearing you want a more absolute answer and as in most of them, I can arbitrarily pick one or dates or such. It is the YE creationists that usually supply those dates and is, for the most part, a methodology that I do not think merits my attention. My opinion is that they are attempting to use the Bible as a science book but in doing so leave out the important central character: God. The Bible as a science book is worthy of the garbage can.

You quoted my questions then typed text under them. That does not mean you answered the question. I addressed every response you gave to my questions and have shown how they do not answer the question or asked for more information and explanation. I have no problem with you elaborating, explaining, or even restating your answers.

What can be asserted as a miracle may only be evidenced by the fruit of its goal.

I find this to be wrong. Here is an example of why this is wrong.
If Jesus turns water to wine, can people no longer touch, smell, or taste the wine? Of course they could. If they couldn’t they would have stated that he made the water disappear or that his magic had no effect on the water.

I would like to apologize to the readers for not submitting my evidence against a global flood. Unless Twobits gives me a time the event took place then my evidence might be of the wrong time period. I would have to construct a straw man to provide evidence against. I am sorry I have not gained enough information about Twobits position to continue with my evidence.

[twobitsmedia]

If someone wants to try and use the Bible as a science book, it could be a problem and a big problem, since that is not what it is or ever suggests it is.

Do you consider this one event in the Bible as fiction or non-fiction?

Non-fiction

As per your comment, I do not encourage others to "trust it" blindly.

If you do not trust the Bible, then I need to know what other tools you are using to decide the accuracy of statements about this event in the Bible. I would like to use the same tools as you so that we come to an agreement in a timely manner.

It has to be taken in context of a whole work. No God= no miracles. No God=no flood.

"When it came to pass"

It is apparently an irrelevant point of the text. But let me ask...what will knowing the actual date mean? I can get a date for you. I could use wikipedia, or go to some website or maybe pick one from a book if it helps you. But, having just said what I said, it will be clear that it is not because of any calculated calculation of my own.

Inserting irrelevant information is a red herring only useful for getting away from a topic. I would like to continue with the topic of this debate.

It is irrelevant to the text, If it were it would be there. You did not answer if you want me to arbitrarily come up with a date to make you happy and give you something you think you can sink your teeth into? I told you how I would come up with the date.
I stated CLEARLY that I would use the Biblcal text and you agreed. If you do not see a date, then I dont see a date either.

Knowing the actual date (or a reasonable approximation) will help us find if the event occurred. If I am looking for my birth certificate it would help if I was looking in the correct decade. Looking for evidence of my birth in the 1960’s would show no evidence that I was born. Looking for my birth certificate in 1979 would quickly yeild positive results.

If you feel your birth has some kind of miraculous impact on the world, I might agree with your example. However, I do not.

Well, the flood didn't appear to end just after the rain stopped on the 41st day. Reading the months between different events like the tops of the mountains being seen, and releasing of the dove and the time before they actually got off the ark and seems a difference in numbers. When the ark rested it mentions 600 and the first year, which could be a correlation with Noah's age of 600 and then maybe being on the ark for 1 year. So I am looking at start time, drain (or time to dry) time and am considering the whole event as the "flood."

Please cite scripture so that I may use the same passage as you and come to the same conclusion. I have stated that I did not find your conclusion of 1-year in my reading. If you are using another source for your 1-year then please cite the source so that I may use it also.

Gen 8:2 The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. 3 And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. 4 Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
6 So it came to pass, at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. 7 Then he sent out a raven, which kept going to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth. 8 He also sent out from himself a dove, to see if the waters had receded from the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark to him, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took her, and drew her into the ark to himself. 10 And he waited yet another seven days, and again he sent the dove out from the ark. And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and indeed the surface of the ground was dry. 14 And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dried.

It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth.

That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

Please explain how the flood both prevailed and decrease on the same day.

You need to keep up with you own argument. You said stopped and used 8:3 as your source. That verse says "decreased." You are also running responses together again. One comment was about verse 7:23, the next was 8:3

I wont agree or disagree but it still falls within my 40 days to one year response. I will agree that it could be 150 days.

Please explain why you refuse to agree with the Bible.

I don't

I can only presume

I except that Twobits does not currently know how this event took place.

You would be correct.

You are correct. All living things died. I spoke in terms of permanence which is why I mentioned the olive leaf. The olive leaf was around before the flood and then again after. If a plant falls under the Biblical definition of "living" in this context then it, of course, died also. It isn't totally clear. The curse of the flood was directed toward man and beast (Gen 6).

Are you arguing that living, as used in the Bible, is a translation error?

Nope. I am saying that "living" as applied might not be in relationship to plants since plants were not the focal point. But, neither do I have a problem if you want to accept that they are. It changes nothing.

Just using this text, I do not know, but also find it irrelevant. Am I to presume the date is necessary to correspond with some scientific data?

I except that Twobits does not know what day the land was dry.

Nope.

Not really. vs 13 says the surface of the ground. 14 says the earth. I would presume the surface of the ground would be the first to dry.

Please explain the difference between ground and Earth as you are using the terms.

The surface is the surface........the rest of the earth is below that.

I currently think the difference is being visible water (surface) and ground water (Earth).

I wouldn't have a problem with that interpretation either. as it doesn't change it either.

In further explanation of what Is said above, I know some people who accept the Bible, but then say the ark event was not a real story, of Job, or Adam and Eve but there is no Biblical information which suggests that is or this isn't. It seems to end up in a pick and choose situation. When I weighed it, I had to ask if God is the one who created the heaven and earth, could he create a flood and end it in a short amount of time? I had to answer yes.

Is this statement a yes answer to, “do you consider this event to be an actual event (non-fiction)?”

What debate are you reading? That was in response to this comment of yours: This does not seam to mesh well with the acceptance of translation errors. Please explain further. (You might go back and re-read it.

No, what I am telling you is that I have never been presented any reasonable argument in which not to accept it. That is a reality...not a guilt trip.

The link I provided was very clear that asking someone to prove a negative is shifting the burden of proof. That is a logical fallacy…not a valid reason.

There was no shift. But, since you mention it, of course I do not buy the "you can't prove a negative" crap. For the umpteenth time I can post all the links again.......mostly from nontheists, if you wish to make that an issue.

OK, but I think "miracle" will be a very important part of this because I already agree that there was no cataclysmic worldwide flood that occurred and ended in any sense of a natural event.

I have no problem with assuming the flood was a miracle.

Then what are we debating?

But you still need to show that the miracle actually occurred.

It's history. If you can figure out how to go back in time........However, what kind of evidence do miracles leave behind? If you have an answer maybe I can find something.

Even miracles have time frames and effect the natural world. I am willing to agree that the flood did not have a time frame and did not effect the natural world in any way.

It killed a generation, save for Noah and his family. That was the goal and affect.

I guess I thought I was laying it out. I am accepting the Biblical application, but had to note that I do think there are a few translation problems, though that do not take away from the entire event. If you are asking if I have a play by play description of it, then no, not really. I can lay it out according to the text if you like. Let me know if that would help.

I have read the Bible in many forms. If “read it again” is all you are offering then this is not a debate.

I stated CLEARLY that I would use the Biblical text and you agreed.
I am suspecting if I leave a word out, then I might get called on it, so here it is as you requested:

1 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
3 And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
Noah Pleases God

9 This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. 12 So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.
The Ark Prepared

13 And God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the earth. 14 Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch. 15 And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16 You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. 17 And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. 18 But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the ark—you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. 19 And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. 20 Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive. 21 And you shall take for yourself of all food that is eaten, and you shall gather it to yourself; and it shall be food for you and for them.”
22 Thus Noah did; according to all that God commanded him, so he did 1 Then the LORD said to Noah, “Come into the ark, you and all your household, because I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation. 2 You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female; 3 also seven each of birds of the air, male and female, to keep the species alive on the face of all the earth. 4 For after seven more days I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made.” 5 And Noah did according to all that the LORD commanded him. 6 Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters were on the earth.
7 So Noah, with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives, went into the ark because of the waters of the flood. 8 Of clean animals, of animals that are unclean, of birds, and of everything that creeps on the earth, 9 two by two they went into the ark to Noah, male and female, as God had commanded Noah. 10 And it came to pass after seven days that the waters of the flood were on the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. 12 And the rain was on the earth forty days and forty nights.
13 On the very same day Noah and Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Noah’s wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark— 14 they and every beast after its kind, all cattle after their kind, every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, every bird of every sort. 15 And they went into the ark to Noah, two by two, of all flesh in which is the breath of life. 16 So those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as God had commanded him; and the LORD shut him in.
17 Now the flood was on the earth forty days. The waters increased and lifted up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. 18 The waters prevailed and greatly increased on the earth, and the ark moved about on the surface of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. 20 The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered. 21 And all flesh died that moved on the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man. 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit[a] of life, all that was on the dry land, died. 23 So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive. 24 And the waters prevailed on the earth one hundred and fifty days. Then God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the animals that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters subsided. 2 The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. 3 And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. 4 Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
6 So it came to pass, at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. 7 Then he sent out a raven, which kept going to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth. 8 He also sent out from himself a dove, to see if the waters had receded from the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark to him, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took her, and drew her into the ark to himself. 10 And he waited yet another seven days, and again he sent the dove out from the ark. 11 Then the dove came to him in the evening, and behold, a freshly plucked olive leaf was in her mouth; and Noah knew that the waters had receded from the earth. 12 So he waited yet another seven days and sent out the dove, which did not return again to him anymore.
13 And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and indeed the surface of the ground was dry. 14 And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dried.
15 Then God spoke to Noah, saying, 16 “Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you. 17 Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you: birds and cattle and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, so that they may abound on the earth, and be fruitful and multiply on the earth.” 18 So Noah went out, and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives with him. 19 Every animal, every creeping thing, every bird, and whatever creeps on the earth, according to their families, went out of the ark.

My response to these: not answered. I disagree. They were answered. It is appearing you want a more absolute answer and as in most of them, I can arbitrarily pick one or dates or such. It is the YE creationists that usually supply those dates and is, for the most part, a methodology that I do not think merits my attention. My opinion is that they are attempting to use the Bible as a science book but in doing so leave out the important central character: God. The Bible as a science book is worthy of the garbage can.

You quoted my questions then typed text under them. That does not mean you answered the question. I addressed every response you gave to my questions and have shown how they do not answer the question or asked for more information and explanation. I have no problem with you elaborating, explaining, or even restating your answers.

I answered them clearly and concise. By elaborating I might be adding to the text, which we agreed I would use.

What can be asserted as a miracle may only be evidenced by the fruit of its goal.

I find this to be wrong. Here is an example of why this is wrong.

If Jesus turns water to wine, can people no longer touch, smell, or taste the wine? Of course they could. If they couldn’t they would have stated that he made the water disappear or that his magic had no effect on the water.

Yes. And the goal and result of the flood was to wipe out a generation.

I would like to apologize to the readers for not submitting my evidence against a global flood.

I wouldn't apologize. I could have saved you the time and let you know that there was no global flood in the way you want to assert. In fact, I said that in the previous post.

Unless Twobits gives me a time the event took place then my evidence might be of the wrong time period.

Well, don't let the Biblical reality deflate your theory.........The wisdom of the book is not it's emphatic absoluteness, as some infer, ...but it's blatant ambiguousness.....

I would have to construct a straw man to provide evidence against. I am sorry I have not gained enough information about Twobits position to continue with my evidence.

[upallnite]

It has to be taken in context of a whole work. No God= no miracles. No God=no flood.

I have not attempted to make an argument that God does not exist. I have even referred to God. For this debate I am willing to assume that God exists. Did God tell you that the flood actually happened? Are there any other tools you have used to come to the conclusion that the flood actually occurred?


What was the time period that the flood happened? Not answered.

You did not answer if you want me to arbitrarily come up with a date to make you happy and give you something you think you can sink your teeth into? I told you how I would come up with the date.

I would like you to state your position. I see nothing wrong in citing the work of others if it agrees with your position. I will be citing the work of others once I know more about your position.

I stated CLEARLY that I would use the Biblcal text and you agreed. If you do not see a date, then I dont see a date either.

I am able to extrapolate a date from the NKJV of the Bible. Are you able to do the same or would you like me to present my method?

If you feel your birth has some kind of miraculous impact on the world, I might agree with your example. However, I do not.

I gave an example to demonstrate how important looking in the correct time frame is to finding evidence of an event. Do you agree that looking in the correct time frame is important to finding evidence of and event?


How long did the flood last? Not answered.

Gen 8:2 The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. 3 And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. 4 Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
6 So it came to pass, at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. 7 Then he sent out a raven, which kept going to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth. 8 He also sent out from himself a dove, to see if the waters had receded from the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark to him, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took her, and drew her into the ark to himself. 10 And he waited yet another seven days, and again he sent the dove out from the ark. And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and indeed the surface of the ground was dry. 14 And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dried.

Please state the number of days you think this passage represents and how you came to your sum. Again, I am simply being considerate by not making assumptions about your position. If you are unwilling or unable to come to a sum I will show you my figures.

You need to keep up with you own argument. You said stopped and used 8:3 as your source. That verse says "decreased." You are also running responses together again. One comment was about verse 7:23, the next was 8:3

Twobits in refrence to Gen7:24

It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth.

Here Twobits is clearly stating that the waters prevailed. Gen7:24 uses 150 days as the time frame.

That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

Here Twobits is clearly stating that the waters decreased. Gen8:3 uses 150 days as the time frame.
Twobits, you confused your Bible verses and didn’t answer the question. Please take a moment to ensure you are citing the correct verse.
Please answer: Explain how the flood both prevailed and decreased on the same day.

Twobits wrote:

I wont agree or disagree but it still falls within my 40 days to one year response. I will agree that it could be 150 days.

Upallnite wrote:

Please explain why you refuse to agree with the Bible.

Twobits wrote:

I don't

This is a self-contradiction. I explained in my first post the problem with self-contradictions. You should now explain why you are contradicting your self.

How was a boat on top of Mt. Ararat when no mountain had been uncovered yet? Not answered.

Did the flood kill plants? Not answered.

Nope. I am saying that "living" as applied might not be in relationship to plants since plants were not the focal point. But, neither do I have a problem if you want to accept that they are. It changes nothing.

I except that all plants are living.


On what day was the land dry? Not answered.

I wouldn't have a problem with that interpretation either. as it doesn't change it either.

Please explain why the rate of water loss varied at a rate that has never been seen before.


My views on Twobits opening statement:

What debate are you reading? That was in response to this comment of yours: This does not seam to mesh well with the acceptance of translation errors. Please explain further. (You might go back and re-read it.

Twobits stated earlier in his response that he considers the story to be non-fiction. I am now pointing out how Twobits treats those he debates with. Berating those you debate with adds nothing to the debate and does not encourage others to converse with you. I ask that the readers do not hold this incident against Twobits and look at the debate and not the attitude of the debaters.

There was no shift. But, since you mention it, of course I do not buy the "you can't prove a negative" crap. For the umpteenth time I can post all the links again.......mostly from nontheists, if you wish to make that an issue.

I am willing to leave it up to the readers to decide if you attempted to shift the burden of proof.

Then what are we debating?

We are debating if the flood actually happened.
First post second paragraph:

I do not want to create a straw man argument and would like a detailed outline of how Twobits interprets the flood described in Genesis 7&8 of the King James Version of the Holy Bible. I will begin with questions that I have from my interpretation of reading Genesis 7&8 and follow with my position.

It's history. If you can figure out how to go back in time........However, what kind of evidence do miracles leave behind? If you have an answer maybe I can find something.

There is no need for a time machine to determine if the flood actually happened.
If the flood killed nearly all animals and plants on the planet then we should see some evidence of it.
If water covered the entire planet then we should see evidence of it in the fields of both geology and cosmology.
I can come up with many more if statements but do not want to create a straw man of what your position actually is.

It killed a generation, save for Noah and his family. That was the goal and affect.

Please provide evidence that an entire generation was killed on the entire planet at one time.

Upallnite wrote:

I have read the Bible in many forms. If “read it again” is all you are offering then this is not a debate.

Twobits responded by quoting a large block of scripture with no interpretation or explanation.

I answered them clearly and concise. By elaborating I might be adding to the text, which we agreed I would use.

“it happened when it happened” is not clear or concise. I asked in my opening post for your interpretation of the event. Are you unwilling or unable to give your interpretation? Do you not use tools other than the Bible to decide if what the Bible states is accurate?

I wouldn't apologize. I could have saved you the time and let you know that there was no global flood in the way you want to assert. In fact, I said that in the previous post.

I have repeatedly asked for your position.
Please outline the global flood in the way you want to assert. As a helping hand I am offering a few questions you may want to consider when outlining your view of the global flood.
What time frame did it occur?
What effect did it have on plants?
What effect did it have on animals and humans?
What effect did it have on the geology of the planet?
What effect did it have on the trajectory of the planet?
What effect did it have on the trajectory of the moon?
What effect did it have on the gravitational center of the solar system?
What effect did it have on existing infrastructure?
What effect did it have on the atmosphere and climate?

[twobitsmedia]

It has to be taken in context of a whole work. No God= no miracles. No God=no flood.

I have not attempted to make an argument that God does not exist.

I didn't say you did.

I have even referred to God. For this debate I am willing to assume that God exists.

You can assume or not assume, it is up to you.

Did God tell you that the flood actually happened? Are there any other tools you have used to come to the conclusion that the flood actually occurred?

God's word has remained true to his character. I have no reason to believe there is a contradiction.

You did not answer if you want me to arbitrarily come up with a date to make you happy and give you something you think you can sink your teeth into? I told you how I would come up with the date.

I would like you to state your position. I see nothing wrong in citing the work of others if it agrees with your position. I will be citing the work of others once I know more about your position.

My positon, for the third or fourth time is that the text gives no date. So, if I find an arbitrary date then it would NOT agree with my position. It would be a date that someone else came up with. So, on this I will remain true to OUR agreement that I would use the text.

I stated CLEARLY that I would use the Biblcal text and you agreed. If you do not see a date, then I dont see a date either.

I am able to extrapolate a date from the NKJV of the Bible. Are you able to do the same or would you like me to present my method?

Knock yourself out.

If you feel your birth has some kind of miraculous impact on the world, I might agree with your example. However, I do not.

I gave an example to demonstrate how important looking in the correct time frame is to finding evidence of an event. Do you agree that looking in the correct time frame is important to finding evidence of and event?

What is the evidence of an event that is being described as a miracle? Don't forget that word. That is important.

Gen 8:2 The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. 3 And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. 4 Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
6 So it came to pass, at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. 7 Then he sent out a raven, which kept going to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth. 8 He also sent out from himself a dove, to see if the waters had receded from the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark to him, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took her, and drew her into the ark to himself. 10 And he waited yet another seven days, and again he sent the dove out from the ark. And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and indeed the surface of the ground was dry. 14 And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dried.

Please state the number of days you think this passage represents and how you came to your sum. Again, I am simply being considerate by not making assumptions about your position. If you are unwilling or unable to come to a sum I will show you my figures.

I have stated that the implications could be anywhere from 40 days up to a little over a year. That is the implication from the text.

You need to keep up with you own argument. You said stopped and used 8:3 as your source. That verse says "decreased." You are also running responses together again. One comment was about verse 7:23, the next was 8:3

It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth.

Here Twobits is clearly stating that the waters prevailed. Gen7:24 uses 150 days as the time frame.

Good grief: the verse says: 24 And the waters prevailed on the earth one hundred and fifty days.

That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

Here Twobits is clearly stating that the waters decreased. Gen8:3 uses 150 days as the time frame. 3 And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased.

As you can see YOU have YOURS confused.

Twobits, you confused your Bible verses and didn’t answer the question.

No, as I pointed out, yours are reversed.

Please take a moment to ensure you are citing the correct verse.

I did, and I was using the right verses.

Please answer: Explain how the flood both prevailed and decreased on the same day.

You are still taking it all out of context and mixing responses together. One says decreased, as in the waters decrased. One says prevailed, as in the possibilityu of the rains still prevailing. I am repeating my self again. Go read the response to you I made before this last one. It says:

Gen7:24 states that the flood was 150 days.
It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth. It wasn't until
Quote:
Gen8:3 states that the flood was 150 days.
That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

Twobits wrote:

I wont agree or disagree but it still falls within my 40 days to one year response. I will agree that it could be 150 days.

Upallnite wrote:

Please explain why you refuse to agree with the Bible.

Twobits wrote:

I don't

This is a self-contradiction. I explained in my first post the problem with self-contradictions. You should now explain why you are contradicting your self.

Theres no self contradiction. Just interpretation contradiction (yours). I must be contradicting whatever you belivee about the flood time...but that is YOUR position. NOT mine. The text is not clear. My position is still anywhere from 40 days to a bit over one year.

Nope. I am saying that "living" as applied might not be in relationship to plants since plants were not the focal point. But, neither do I have a problem if you want to accept that they are. It changes nothing.

I except that all plants are living.

OK

I wouldn't have a problem with that interpretation either. as it doesn't change it either.

Please explain why the rate of water loss varied at a rate that has never been seen before.

God created this flood.

What debate are you reading? That was in response to this comment of yours: This does not seam to mesh well with the acceptance of translation errors. Please explain further. (You might go back and re-read it.

Twobits stated earlier in his response that he considers the story to be non-fiction. I am now pointing out how Twobits treats those he debates with. Berating those you debate with adds nothing to the debate and does not encourage others to converse with you. I ask that the readers do not hold this incident against Twobits and look at the debate and not the attitude of the debaters.

If you feel berated, you need to get a grip on yourself and quit whining for sympathy. You are not being berated.

There was no shift. But, since you mention it, of course I do not buy the "you can't prove a negative" crap. For the umpteenth time I can post all the links again.......mostly from nontheists, if you wish to make that an issue.

I am willing to leave it up to the readers to decide if you attempted to shift the burden of proof.

OK

Then what are we debating?

We are debating if the flood actually happened.

If the flood happened caused by God as stated

It's history. If you can figure out how to go back in time........However, what kind of evidence do miracles leave behind? If you have an answer maybe I can find something.

If the flood killed nearly all animals and plants on the planet then we should see some evidence of it.

And your benchmark for this is what? Has that been the case with all wordwide floods started and ended by God?

If water covered the entire planet then we should see evidence of it in the fields of both geology and cosmology.
I can come up with many more if statements but do not want to create a straw man of what your position actually is.

You already have. I am NOT...and I repeat NOT..arguing that a wordwide flood of any natural catclysmic proportion occurred. There is clearly no scientific evidence or data to back up such an event.

It killed a generation, save for Noah and his family. That was the goal and affect.

Please provide evidence that an entire generation was killed on the entire planet at one time.

The generation has no record. It was destroyed. And even if they hadn't what kind of records did they keep?

Upallnite wrote:

I have read the Bible in many forms. If “read it again” is all you are offering then this is not a debate.

Twobits responded by quoting a large block of scripture with no interpretation or explanation.

We agreed I would use the text as it is written, and then when I do, you cry foul.

I answered them clearly and concise. By elaborating I might be adding to the text, which we agreed I would use.

“it happened when it happened” is not clear or concise.

It is very clear according to the text that it happened when it "came to pass."

I asked in my opening post for your interpretation of the event. Are you unwilling or unable to give your interpretation?

First, you have a problem because of comments about what I think might be errancy and you ask point blank: why then do you believe it? Then, when I DO use the text, you are bothered because I don't add commentary.

Do you not use tools other than the Bible to decide if what the Bible states is accurate?

Like what? Another Bible? A divining rod?

I wouldn't apologize. I could have saved you the time and let you know that there was no global flood in the way you want to assert. In fact, I said that in the previous post.

I have repeatedly asked for your position.

And I have repeated it over and over again. I accept the Biblical report. WE agreed on the New KJV. That is the record.

Please outline the global flood in the way you want to assert.

I did. And when I reprint the NKJV report, you claim it is not my real position. It is my real position.

As a helping hand I am offering a few questions you may want to consider when outlining your view of the global flood.

I am not going to rewrite the KJV account.

What time frame did it occur? I don't know. The record says when "it came to pass." The date is irrelevant to the text.

What effect did it have on plants? I think we agreed they were killed.

What effect did it have on animals and humans? All killed except for the ones on the ark.

What effect did it have on the geology of the planet? I don't know. I would assume not. But that is an assumption. The goal of the flood was to destroy man and beast.

What effect did it have on the trajectory of the planet? No report from text.

What effect did it have on the trajectory of the moon? No report from text.

What effect did it have on the gravitational center of the solar system? No report from text.

What effect did it have on existing infrastructure? No report from text.

What effect did it have on the atmosphere and climate? No report from text



I presume, based on your previous responses that those answers are NOT the ones you want. If I was going to offer an opinion, I would say that if there was an affect on any of the "no report from text" responses, that it was temporal. Plants, like an Olive plant, don't survive under water for extended durations. But it was growing again and full enough to have produced a leaf. So, if the flood did have an affect, it was temporal.

[upallnite]

My response to Twobits position:

What time frame did it occur? I don't know. The record says when "it came to pass." The date is irrelevant to the text.

What effect did it have on plants? I think we agreed they were killed.

What effect did it have on animals and humans? All killed except for the ones on the ark.

What effect did it have on the geology of the planet? I don't know. I would assume not. But that is an assumption. The goal of the flood was to destroy man and beast.

What effect did it have on the trajectory of the planet? No report from text.

What effect did it have on the trajectory of the moon? No report from text.

What effect did it have on the gravitational center of the solar system? No report from text.

What effect did it have on existing infrastructure? No report from text.

What effect did it have on the atmosphere and climate? No report from text

Twobits does not know when the flood happened.
Twobits does not know what effect the flood had on the geology of the planet.
Twobits does not know what effect the flood has on cosmology dealing with the planet.
Twobits does not know what effect the flood had on existing infrastructure.
Twobits thinks the flood killed nearly all plants but has not given any reason to believe it did.
Twobits thinks the flood killed nearly all animals and humans but has not given any reason to believe it did.

It appears that Twobits has come to a debate unprepared.

I presume, based on your previous responses that those answers are NOT the ones you want. If I was going to offer an opinion, I would say that if there was an affect on any of the "no report from text" responses, that it was temporal. Plants, like an Olive plant, don't survive under water for extended durations. But it was growing again and full enough to have produced a leaf. So, if the flood did have an affect, it was temporal.

I do not think temporal means what you think it means.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/temporal
1 a: of or relating to time as opposed to eternity b: of or relating to earthly life c: lay or secular rather than clerical or sacred : civil <lords temporal>
2: of or relating to grammatical tense or a distinction of time
3 a: of or relating to time as distinguished from space b: of or relating to the sequence of time or to a particular time : chronological

I am able to extrapolate a date from the NKJV of the Bible. Are you able to do the same or would you like me to present my method?

Knock yourself out.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noa ... ml#history

Biblical dates (I Kings 6:1, Gal 3:17, various generation lengths given in Genesis) place the Flood 1300 years before Solomon began the first temple. We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C.

Do you except 2250 B.C.E. as an approximate time for the flood?




OFF TOPIC
(This section can be skipped because it offers nothing to the debate. But it is good for entertainment.)

It has to be taken in context of a whole work. No God= no miracles. No God=no flood.

I have not attempted to make an argument that God does not exist.

I didn't say you did.

Then your statement regarding the existence of God was off topic and likely a Red Herring.
Does your preferred form of debating rely on tricking those you debate with or the readers?

My positon, for the third or fourth time is that the text gives no date. So, if I find an arbitrary date then it would NOT agree with my position. It would be a date that someone else came up with. So, on this I will remain true to OUR agreement that I would use the text.

I requested your interpretation in my opening post. I did not limit you to just the words of the Bible. Did you not read my opening post, not understand my opening post, or are you attempting more trickery?

What is the evidence of an event that is being described as a miracle? Don't forget that word. That is important.

I can think of evidence from many different fields of science. Did you come to this debate unprepared or is this another attempt at trickery?

I have stated that the implications could be anywhere from 40 days up to a little over a year. That is the implication from the text.

The text you cited gives numbers. Are you unable to add the numbers up or is this another attempt at trickery?

You are still taking it all out of context and mixing responses together. One says decreased, as in the waters decrased. One says prevailed, as in the possibilityu of the rains still prevailing. I am repeating my self again. Go read the response to you I made before this last one. It says:

Gen7:24 states that the flood was 150 days.
It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth. It wasn't until
Quote:
Gen8:3 states that the flood was 150 days.
That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

I am certain that the readers can tell that 150 days is equal to 150 days. I am also confident that readers will recognize that the words decreased and prevailed create a contradiction. It is apparent to me that you are unwilling to explain the contradiction or attempting trickery.

Theres no self contradiction. Just interpretation contradiction (yours). I must be contradicting whatever you belivee about the flood time...but that is YOUR position. NOT mine.

Stating that you refuse to agree then stating that you do agree is a contradiction. I leave this to the readers to decide how the contradiction looks to them. I see no need to continue with this red herring.

Please explain why the rate of water loss varied at a rate that has never been seen before.

God created this flood.

As per my acceptance of the definition of miracle it is apparent that God creating the flood is established. Are you going to explain or attempt more trickery?

If you feel berated, you need to get a grip on yourself and quit whining for sympathy. You are not being berated.

I am willing to allow the readers to decide if you are attempting to have a civil debate. If you do not like the way it looks then you should have considered the way you phrased it.

If the flood happened caused by God as stated

Believe it or not folks it took Twobits 7 posts to get to this point. Is pretending to be dense a method of trickery you are using in this debate?

If the flood killed nearly all animals and plants on the planet then we should see some evidence of it.

And your benchmark for this is what? Has that been the case with all wordwide floods started and ended by God?

You are the one making the claim that a world wide flood killed nearly all plants and animals on the planet. I am the one asking for evidence. If you have other floods you would like to reference than do so. Otherwise this is just another attempt at trickery.

You already have. I am NOT...and I repeat NOT..arguing that a wordwide flood of any natural catclysmic proportion occurred. There is clearly no scientific evidence or data to back up such an event.

Then what is your reasoning for believing it actually happened? Do you believe the flood happened because you believe it happened?

Please provide evidence that an entire generation was killed on the entire planet at one time.

The generation has no record. It was destroyed. And even if they hadn't what kind of records did they keep?

What generation are you referring to. If you do not know when the event happened then you could not know if any records were destroyed. I think your refusal to submit a date is a form of trickery.

We agreed I would use the text as it is written, and then when I do, you cry foul.

I have repeatedly asked for your interpretation and position. I have not once limited you to just the Bible. Do you not understand the words interpretation and position or is this another attempt at trickery?

It is very clear according to the text that it happened when it "came to pass."

Twobits will not answer when the flood came to pass. Do you not know or is this an attempt at trickery?

First, you have a problem because of comments about what I think might be errancy and you ask point blank: why then do you believe it? Then, when I DO use the text, you are bothered because I don't add commentary.

Twobits believes because the Bible says it happened. I require more than just a claim to believe it actually happened. Twobits, do you believe all claims or is this another attempt at trickery?

Like what? Another Bible? A divining rod?

I asked what tools Twobits uses to decide what the Bible claims is true. Twobits has avoided answering the question.

And I have repeated it over and over again. I accept the Biblical report. WE agreed on the New KJV. That is the record.

Why do you believe the Bible?

I did. And when I reprint the NKJV report, you claim it is not my real position. It is my real position.

Here Twobits admits that he has nothing to offer other than the text of the Bible. Why do you believe the Bible?

[twobitsmedia]

Twobits does not know when the flood happened.
Twobits does not know what effect the flood had on the geology of the planet.
Twobits does not know what effect the flood has on cosmology dealing with the planet.
Twobits does not know what effect the flood had on existing infrastructure.
Twobits thinks the flood killed nearly all plants but has not given any reason to believe it did.
Twobits thinks the flood killed nearly all animals and humans but has not given any reason to believe it did.

It appears that Twobits has come to a debate unprepared.

I am past prepared and have already made my case. You just dont seem to have anything to rebut it. I think you were prepared to debate some other flood. I wil let your purposed miss=statements about my position stand as they are. It makes your bias clear and for the record.

I presume, based on your previous responses that those answers are NOT the ones you want. If I was going to offer an opinion, I would say that if there was an affect on any of the "no report from text" responses, that it was temporal. Plants, like an Olive plant, don't survive under water for extended durations. But it was growing again and full enough to have produced a leaf. So, if the flood did have an affect, it was temporal.

I do not think temporal means what you think it means.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/temporal
1 a: of or relating to time as opposed to eternity b: of or relating to earthly life c: lay or secular rather than clerical or sacred : civil <lords temporal>
2: of or relating to grammatical tense or a distinction of time
3 a: of or relating to time as distinguished from space b: of or relating to the sequence of time or to a particular time : chronological

Thanks for the definition and I used it the way I wanted to use it according to the definition.

I am able to extrapolate a date from the NKJV of the Bible. Are you able to do the same or would you like me to present my method?

Knock yourself out.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noa ... ml#history

Biblical dates (I Kings 6:1, Gal 3:17, various generation lengths given in Genesis) place the Flood 1300 years before Solomon began the first temple. We can construct reliable chronologies for near Eastern history, particularly for Egypt, from many kinds of records from the literate cultures in the near East. These records are independent of, but supported by, dating methods such as dendrochronology and carbon-14. The building of the first temple can be dated to 950 B.C. +/- some small delta, placing the Flood around 2250 B.C.

Do you except 2250 B.C.E. as an approximate time for the flood?

So you really don't have a method, just using someone elses methodology. You can use it, but I would accept little as factual from Talk Origins. They came up with a date so they can refute it based on information about a natural worldwide cataclysmic flood.. How clever. However, they are refuting a natural flood also. The Bible does not make any case for a worldwide natural flood.

It has to be taken in context of a whole work. No God= no miracles. No God=no flood.

I have not attempted to make an argument that God does not exist.

I didn't say you did.

Then your statement regarding the existence of God was off topic and likely a Red Herring.

If it is a red herring, dont reply. Dont wait for the response to your reply before you call it foul. Think ahead a bit.

Does your preferred form of debating rely on tricking those you debate with or the readers?

I am not the one who brought up anything about you believing in God or not. YOU did.

My positon, for the third or fourth time is that the text gives no date. So, if I find an arbitrary date then it would NOT agree with my position. It would be a date that someone else came up with. So, on this I will remain true to OUR agreement that I would use the text.

I requested your interpretation in my opening post. I did not limit you to just the words of the Bible. Did you not read my opening post, not understand my opening post, or are you attempting more trickery?

Why do you want me to use someone eles position and then defend it?

What is the evidence of an event that is being described as a miracle? Don't forget that word. That is important.

I can think of evidence from many different fields of science. Did you come to this debate unprepared or is this another attempt at trickery?

You set up the question: the Biblical flood as it is stated in the Bible. It came out of a debate about miracles. You came up with the title of the debate. Sounds to me like you did not think this through very well. You are not debating the Biblical flood, but some nonexistent scientific version of it.

I have stated that the implications could be anywhere from 40 days up to a little over a year. That is the implication from the text.

The text you cited gives numbers. Are you unable to add the numbers up or is this another attempt at trickery?

I have already answered this many times. You seem to purposely ignore the answers you don't like.

You are still taking it all out of context and mixing responses together. One says decreased, as in the waters decrased. One says prevailed, as in the possibilityu of the rains still prevailing. I am repeating my self again. Go read the response to you I made before this last one. It says:

Gen7:24 states that the flood was 150 days.
It says the waters "prevailed" That word itself might suggest force...as in the waters will still forcing them self on the earth. It wasn't until
Quote:
Gen8:3 states that the flood was 150 days.
That it says the windows of heaven and fountains of the deep were stopped. It also uses the word "decreased" (Gen 8:3) which I don't see as the same thing as
"stopped."

I am certain that the readers can tell that 150 days is equal to 150 days. I am also confident that readers will recognize that the words decreased and prevailed create a contradiction. It is apparent to me that you are unwilling to explain the contradiction or attempting trickery.

I am sure they will see that you are crying foul because you cannot use your preconceived argument material and are now claiming words are being misused when anyone can have access to the text I am using. They just dont have acces to whatever apparently ill-founded information you seem to be holding to.

Theres no self contradiction. Just interpretation contradiction (yours). I must be contradicting whatever you belivee about the flood time...but that is YOUR position. NOT mine.

Stating that you refuse to agree then stating that you do agree is a contradiction. I leave this to the readers to decide how the contradiction looks to them. I see no need to continue with this red herring.

yes "Upallnite red herring = "I got stuff I can't use" Has to be frustrating.

Please explain why the rate of water loss varied at a rate that has never been seen before.

God created this flood.

As per my acceptance of the definition of miracle it is apparent that God creating the flood is established. Are you going to explain or attempt more trickery?

How do you explain "God created a flood?" Gen 7:4 "I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made."

If you feel berated, you need to get a grip on yourself and quit whining for sympathy. You are not being berated.

I am willing to allow the readers to decide if you are attempting to have a civil debate. If you do not like the way it looks then you should have considered the way you phrased it.

I have no problem with the way it looks. You are the one crying that your are being berated.

If the flood happened caused by God as stated

Believe it or not folks it took Twobits 7 posts to get to this point. Is pretending to be dense a method of trickery you are using in this debate?

You are the one that made up the debate question. It is restating your own statement. Do I have to restate everything you assert?

Now let me get this straight....you call me "dense" but claim I am berating You???? You are too funny

If the flood killed nearly all animals and plants on the planet then we should see some evidence of it.

And your benchmark for this is what? Has that been the case with all wordwide floods started and ended by God?

You are the one making the claim that a world wide flood killed nearly all plants and animals on the planet. I am the one asking for evidence. If you have other floods you would like to reference than do so. Otherwise this is just another attempt at trickery.

I have made NO claim about a natural worldwide flood. I am claiming that I accept the Biblical record about a flood which God created and ended. When you can tell me what evidence there would be of such an event, maybe I have some.

You already have. I am NOT...and I repeat NOT..arguing that a wordwide flood of any natural catclysmic proportion occurred. There is clearly no scientific evidence or data to back up such an event.

Then what is your reasoning for believing it actually happened?

I don't believe a natural flood happened. I have said that over and over again. You established the question which was that did a world wide flood occur as stated in the Bible. The Bible flood was NOT a natural event.

Please provide evidence that an entire generation was killed on the entire planet at one time.

The generation has no record. It was destroyed. And even if they hadn't what kind of records did they keep?

What generation are you referring to.

Do I have to repaste the Bible verses again? The generation that God destroyed in the flood. Gen 6:7: So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them

If you do not know when the event happened then you could not know if any records were destroyed. I think your refusal to submit a date is a form of trickery.

It happened when it came to pass....when Moses was 600 years old. (repeating again)

We agreed I would use the text as it is written, and then when I do, you cry foul.

I have repeatedly asked for your interpretation and position. I have not once limited you to just the Bible. Do you not understand the words interpretation and position or is this another attempt at trickery?

What part of MY position is the Biblical text are you not understanding? Why is that so hard to get?

It is very clear according to the text that it happened when it "came to pass."

Twobits will not answer when the flood came to pass. Do you not know or is this an attempt at trickery?

I already repeated several times . You just purposely do not see it. Is that your trickery? Do you think if you keep on asking that you will get another answer? I already told you I don't know the year. You made one up from Talk Origins because you do not like my answer. And now here you claim you do not know what my answer is (again).

First, you have a problem because of comments about what I think might be errancy and you ask point blank: why then do you believe it? Then, when I DO use the text, you are bothered because I don't add commentary.

Twobits believes because the Bible says it happened. I require more than just a claim to believe it actually happened. Twobits, do you believe all claims or is this another attempt at trickery?

I believe the Biblical record.

Like what? Another Bible? A divining rod?

I asked what tools Twobits uses to decide what the Bible claims is true. Twobits has avoided answering the question.

No I have answered many times. you just refuse to listen and want to call all the answers that you do not like "trickery."

And I have repeated it over and over again. I accept the Biblical report. WE agreed on the New KJV. That is the record.

Why do you believe the Bible?

I will refuse to answer this one....understand I AM refusing because why I believe it is irrelevant to the issue of this debate. And I do not care if you call it trickery or not.

I did. And when I reprint the NKJV report, you claim it is not my real position. It is my real position.

Here Twobits admits that he has nothing to offer other than the text of the Bible.

Man, it sure took you long enough to get that to sink in........