"God cannot create a square circle"

[Mageth]

By flat earth, we mean a spherical earth with a relatively flat surface where there are no mountains of any significance.

The writer of the fllood myth is not in the "we" you use. That's Creationist speculation.

We actually do not know what the land surface was like before the flood.

We actually know that there was no such flood. And we actually know to a close approximation what the surface of the earth was like long, long before the time of the alleged flood.

- - - Updated - - -

Taking the account provided in the Bible, there is no reason to think that naturally occurring processes account for the flood. The flood was a supernatural event (or magic in your mind) initiated by God.

There is no reason to believe the account provided in the Bible. The flood is a story...nothing more. Ad so is God.

 

[Mageth]

Leipzig also assumes that Mt Everest existed at that time and the flood waters had to cover it. Did you really buy that assumption?

You earlier cited fossils on Mt. Everest as alleged evidence of the flood:

http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...uare-circle-quot&p=20631&viewfull=1#post20631

So you appear to buy that assumption.

 

[Rhea]

By flat earth, we mean a spherical earth with a relatively flat surface where there are no mountains of any significance. We actually do not know what the land surface was like before the flood. There is no solid dome - I think this idea comes from Jewish speculation.

Now you've trimmed it down to "the fountains of the deep", discounting the "windows" portion of the myth as "Jewish speculation" - failing to note that the "fountains of the deep" notion cited in the myth is based on the same "Jewish speculation" that you here discount.

Yes, rhutchin, please discuss why 'windows" is just speculation and "fountains" is not. Please cite scholarly sources to explain why half of the passage is reliable and the other half is not. In the absence of scholarly sources, please explain how you came to decide. HOW you came to decide, we already know that you did decide, now we are interested to hear HOW you made that decision. And what else in the bible can we dismiss as "Jewish Speculation," such as a major flood event that was physically impossible and left no evidence.

 

[Narapoia]

There is no way for the flood myth to have occurred without magic - and if believers use that as an explanation it is simply the end of the conversation. There is no way you can debate or discuss that which falls outside the normal mechanisms and functioning of the universe, all things become possible, and impossible to understand from our frame of reference.

Taking the account provided in the Bible, there is no reason to think that naturally occurring processes account for the flood. The flood was a supernatural event (or magic in your mind) initiated by God.

Fine, then as I stated in my post that is the end of the discussion. If you genuinely believe that there was a global supernatural flood, that left no trace (again by magic/the supernatural) and was unrecorded by concurrent literate civilisations then we have no common grounds for discussion. We cannot even agree on how long Mt Everest has existed, discussing how an old dude fit millions of animals, insects, fish, birds, bacteria and fungi into a 400 foot long boat and the myriad other physical impossibilities of the story, is an exercise in the surreal.

 

[Keith&Co.]

discussing how an old dude fit millions of animals, insects, fish, birds, bacteria and fungi into a 400 foot long boat

Now now now, he only had to save the creatures that were alive in the Old Testament view of life, those that had spirit.
Those that breathe through their nostrils, in other words.

No insects, no fish, no bacteria, no fungi were required tobe 'saved' by Noah.
Of course, insetivores were...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

In an attempt to support the flood myth, you appeal to the flat earth with a solid dome for a sky model of the earth that the myth relies on. That model is where the fountains of the deep and windows of heaven comes from.

By flat earth, we mean a spherical earth with a relatively flat surface where there are no mountains of any significance. We actually do not know what the land surface was like before the flood. There is no solid dome - I think this idea comes from Jewish speculation.

Jewish Speculation. That is a clever spin of "cited directly from the First Story of Creation". Firmament = Dome -> Can't put a dome over a sphere. I literally love biblical literalism, because it can be literal whenever you need it to be, and not literal at other times (ie speculation or misunderstood). There isn't anything rhutchin can't explain away with the special brand of biblical literalism.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Firmament = Dome -> Can't put a dome over a sphere.

You can if you're God. You do it right after you're finished making the square circle.

 

[Kharakov]

Firmament = Dome -> Can't put a dome over a sphere.

You can if you're God. You do it right after you're finished making the square circle.

a) the square circle thing is an object that is mathematically probable
b) you just make a really big dome- it's not like you need to cover a whole sphere

remember the history lessons they taught you in elementary school? Exact, were they? Or were they approximations aimed at your knowledge level at the time. I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Oh, i love that apology.
See, personally, i'd dismiss the Books because the contents are bronze-age myths made up from ancient ignorance.

The Apology claims that we just have to understand that God gave us a divinely inspired book....full of bronze-age myths, because man's ignorance was too strong for actual education. Even GOD couldn't tell them about the water cycle without inventing windows in the solid sky...

 

[Rhea]

I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Oh, i love that apology.
See, personally, i'd dismiss the Books because the contents are bronze-age myths made up from ancient ignorance.

The Apology claims that we just have to understand that God gave us a divinely inspired book....full of bronze-age myths, because man's ignorance was too strong for actual education. Even GOD couldn't tell them about the water cycle without inventing windows in the solid sky...

And never ONCE thought about coming out with the New Updated Second Edition like Houghton Mifflin figured out.

 

[jonJ]

remember the history lessons they taught you in elementary school? Exact, were they? Or were they approximations aimed at your knowledge level at the time. I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Yes, it is -- given that they were allegedly taught by someone with the ability to make them understand anything and everything he wanted them to know. If you still can't get it right after God has taught you something, what does that suggest about your God?

 

[Mageth]

I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Nonsense!

They were less educated so God taught them imprecise facts? Wouldn't it actually be the case that they were less educated because God didn't teach them precice facts? Wouldn't they have been more educated if God had taught them more precise facts???

You make it sound like God wanted to keep them dumb and ignorant. (And I wouldn't put that past the God of the Bible!)

 

[Kharakov]

I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Oh, i love that apology.
See, personally, i'd dismiss the Books because the contents are bronze-age myths made up from ancient ignorance.

The Apology claims that we just have to understand that God gave us a divinely inspired book....full of bronze-age myths, because man's ignorance was too strong for actual education. Even GOD couldn't tell them about the water cycle without inventing windows in the solid sky...

Ooohhh, I wonder if there is the possibility that God is learning about God's self and how to deal with being God. Probably not though, if it's the strawman God of atheism.

There is also the whole teenager thing. Let's teach children how to destroy the world before we engender a sense of morality within their hearts!

 

[Kharakov]

remember the history lessons they taught you in elementary school? Exact, were they? Or were they approximations aimed at your knowledge level at the time. I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Yes, it is -- given that they were allegedly taught by someone with the ability to make them understand anything and everything he wanted them to know. If you still can't get it right after God has taught you something, what does that suggest about your God?

Umm, that certain things are difficult, even for God?

 

[Kharakov]

I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Nonsense!

They were less educated so God taught them imprecise facts? Wouldn't it actually be the case that they were less educated because God didn't teach them precice facts? Wouldn't they have been more educated if God had taught them more precise facts???

Yeah, which is precisely why you were taught the Taylor series for the exponential function before you were taught to count to 3. Ever notice that people want to play around a bit, relax, not worry about things, take a break in between learning things?

I didn't, which is why I never take a break to do a whole bunch of drugs, look at my collection of awesome videos and masturbate for a few days in a row.

You make it sound like God wanted to keep them dumb and ignorant. (And I wouldn't put that past the God of the Bible!)

I ken now stand under what you say.

I wouldn't either (put it past God). There are so many reasons not to reveal everything about nature to man before man is ready. It's not like mankind has a great track record of never harming someone they had power over. I'd wonder about a parent who handed the keyring to the kingdom to someone who wasn't ready.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Oh, i love that apology.
See, personally, i'd dismiss the Books because the contents are bronze-age myths made up from ancient ignorance.

The Apology claims that we just have to understand that God gave us a divinely inspired book....full of bronze-age myths, because man's ignorance was too strong for actual education. Even GOD couldn't tell them about the water cycle without inventing windows in the solid sky...

Ooohhh, I wonder if there is the possibility that God is learning about God's self and how to deal with being God.

Wonder away, Kharrie. Anything is technically possible. Just of varying plausibility.

After all, it makes sense that an underqualified deity would inform people the full rules of keeping slaves and that infidelity can be proven by inducing an abortion, but not the fact that they live on a sphere that he made? That's just too complicated an idea to express to people who believe Heaven is a cube four times the size of the Earth? Better let them think Earth is a big mud pie spread over the Waters Below, so they don't get any strange ideas.

Probably not though, if it's the strawman God of atheism.

Nope. Just the God of The Books.
And what's actually written in it... As opposed to the fanfiction efforts of his fandom.

There is also the whole teenager thing. Let's teach children how to destroy the world before we engender a sense of morality within their hearts!

A guy that can put morality in fruit is afraid that explaining gravity, the shape of the Earth and the nature of the solar system will give them the atomic bomb before they can eat enough apples?

Heehee! That's a good one.

 

[Rhea]

I wouldn't either (put it past God). There are so many reasons not to reveal everything about nature to man before man is ready.

But not a single reason offered about why s/he/it did not set out a new revised second edition once we discovered the telescope and the microscope?

Do you hear yourself?

 

[Keith&Co.]

I wouldn't either (put it past God). There are so many reasons not to reveal everything about nature to man before man is ready.

But not a single reason offered about why s/he/it did not set out a new revised second edition once we discovered the telescope and the microscope?

Do you hear yourself?

Just like Syed, though, the goal is not to understand God or justify God, per se. It's to present a reasonable (to them) reason that God has for all his works to be indistinguishable from the actions of a godless universe. No knowledge revealed that we didn't or couldn't have figured out ourselves, no stopping gross injustice, no teaching of real morality, no commandments to deal with anything the Prophets had yet to encounter, being it invention, discovery, social advances or whole new nations....

 

[Kharakov]

I too find it absolutely shocking that less educated humans were taught "facts" that were imprecise, and fit in with their ability to comprehend.

Oh, i love that apology.
See, personally, i'd dismiss the Books because the contents are bronze-age myths made up from ancient ignorance.

The Apology claims that we just have to understand that God gave us a divinely inspired book....full of bronze-age myths, because man's ignorance was too strong for actual education. Even GOD couldn't tell them about the water cycle without inventing windows in the solid sky...

Ooohhh, I wonder if there is the possibility that God is learning about God's self and how to deal with being God.

Wonder away, Kharrie. Anything is technically possible. Just of varying plausibility.

I can't believe you made a Kharacature of my name!

After all, it makes sense that an underqualified deity would inform people the full rules of keeping slaves and that infidelity can be proven by inducing an abortion, but not the fact that they live on a sphere that he made?

Yeah. It's so easy to convince people of things when they have the intellectual foundation to understand them. It's not like you could claim God decreed something and write a book about it.

When the tools you have have their own ideas about the nature of reality, you do the best you can with them.

A guy that can put morality in fruit is afraid that explaining gravity, the shape of the Earth and the nature of the solar system will give them the atomic bomb before they can eat enough apples?

Fuck, I hate apples. Well, not hate. But since I was a kid I've disliked eating them. Although they are called Malus Malus, and have that pentagram in them, which is pretty cool. So I suppose I've learned a little bit about morality from apples. Still remember my grandfather telling me about the tree of knowledge after I told him I didn't like eating apples, and feeling happy that someone else didn't like eating apples too.

I do like apple pie, apple sauce, apple cider, etc... just not raw apples. ewww... and I've always stayed on the PC side of things too. Enough of my rant about apples <ewww- so gross>.

Anyway, obviously eating a fucking apple didn't cause people to behave morally. They still have fucked up desires and emotions and need to be worked on. Also, just as obvious, you are limited by the tools you have to accomplish the goals you have.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I don't know about that. I eat apples all the time and I've never raped or murdered anyone. Clearly you little "theory" is baseless.

Therefore, God.