by Qcmbr 118 Replies latest watchtower bible
huffnung, the problem is that if i took out a book on norse mythology and did the same hand-waving "god is allmighty" stuff you just did with the flood, i could proove each and every myth could have happened and left no trace.
so either they all did, or one of us is doing something wrong...
There definitely was a flood of some proportions in that area, we all agree that this is supported by scientific facts. Can you say that as well about norwegian mythology?
hoffnung, the norse myth tells us life began in a process somewhat like abiogenesis. thats what most scientists believe in today. hence its supported by science.
the norse mythology also talk of a great flood. you also talk about a local flood. hence its supported by science.
the norse mythology says our world will perish. science agree. hence its supported by science.
so yah, it seem that some parts of norse mythology is supported by science. other parts are not. but they can be explained by magic and reinterpretation.
when your allowed to quote science when its in support of your myths, but insert magic when its not, everything can be supported. so we can either accept every myth, or reject them.
Well, considering that Norse Mythology came AFTER the Judeo-Christian religions, there shouldn't be to much wonder with the similarities ;)
psac -- thats just one interpretation of history. you got no proof it is so! (i am just being argumentative now).
on a more serious note, if that kind of argument worked, we should worship statues of fat ladies.
The likeliest explanation that I read for the origin of the Noachian Deluge narrative was a sort of racial memory of the conditions found around the Middle East and Asia at the end of the last major Ice Age, around 11,000 years ago.
Actually I am more interested in reading scientific facts that completely rule out the flood, then find it confirmed. It all comes down to what we are willing to believe that is not proven. We all do that to some extent anyway. There would not change much in my opinion whether the flood was local or universal. It could as well be a local dramatic event that was described as divine because people of the time could not explain it.
It does not take away that the issue at stake is here, that God is kalled a liar, using the flood myth as touch stone. If you want to expose him as such, you have to bring real evidence to court. Otherwise the case is dismissed.
on a more serious note, if that kind of argument worked, we should worship statues of fat ladies.
Hey, to each brother their own !
hoffnung:
"Actually I am more interested in reading scientific facts that completely rule out the flood, then find it confirmed"
when you allow yourself to insert "magic" every time the flood crash with reality, you can never rule out the flood. just like you cant rule out any random myth in norse mythology.
"It all comes down to what we are willing to believe that is not proven"
nothing is proven in science. and its a good indication something is not true when it keep referring to magic to fix problems.
" It could as well be a local dramatic event that was described as divine because people of the time could not explain it."
entirely true. i think every flood legend begin that way.
It does not take away that the issue at stake is here, that God is kalled a liar, using the flood myth as touch stone.
who is calling God a liar? it sure cant be any atheists for simple reasons, so it must apparently be the theists who call god a liar. i personally find that strange, but hey, its not my position to judge.
If you want to expose him as such, you have to bring real evidence to court.
wait a second, you think i believe a fictional creature can lie? oh dear lord...
Otherwise the case is dismissed.
i merely pointed out that if your standard of truth in a story was:
you have to accept most of the myths in the norse mythology as actual events or rethink your standards of evidence.
bohm - "...we should worship statues of fat ladies."
Thus saith Sir Mix-a-Lot.
