By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Underwater pryamids/cities give credence to Noah's Flood

axt113 on 10 October 2010
pizzahut451 said:
axt113 said:
pizzahut451 said:
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:


If the story of great flood on mankind for its wickedness is true, why does it matter if the biblical version is wrong or right? The story and the point are true, except for some other details

Funny that you call manking "wicked" and not the deity who killed everybody.

And it's high;y unlikely that any of those stories are true, as people back then had no ideea how big the world truly was (plus, people from different parts fo the world couldn't communicate how they did today, so it's not as if one could know what was going on around the world to begin with).


You're doing this again. I said IF the story is true, im not here to argue if the story is true or made up, all i said that if the actual story is true, than it doesnt matter what version of it it.

Oh and...

IF the story is INDEED true, than the deity (God) can not possbily be wicked, because if we assume that the story is true, we assume that God exists, and that means he cant be wicked because he is omnibenevolenct (perfect goodness). ''Wicked'' is like sinfull, and God cant possibly comitt a sin, since he is above it.


That's ridiculous, if God commits wicked acts, then he is wicked regardless of his power, he would just be perfect evil


Nope, thats impossible. IF He indeed exists, he cant possibly be evli, wicked or sinfull. The power of sin is not above him


Says who?  I say that that we define  whether he is good or evil, therefore if he commits acts that we consider wicked, he is wicked



Rumors indicate that it is planning on following the first approach, sticking a new, motion-sensitive controller onto an existing console. Our perspective is that this is the worst of the three options.

-Clayton Christensen back in 2007 already knew Move would be a bad idea

Around the Network
axt113 on 10 October 2010
pizzahut451 said:
kowhoho said:
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:


If the story of great flood on mankind for its wickedness is true, why does it matter if the biblical version is wrong or right? The story and the point are true, except for some other details

Funny that you call manking "wicked" and not the deity who killed everybody.

And it's high;y unlikely that any of those stories are true, as people back then had no ideea how big the world truly was (plus, people from different parts fo the world couldn't communicate how they did today, so it's not as if one could know what was going on around the world to begin with).


You're doing this again. I said IF the story is true, im not here to argue if the story is true or made up, all i said that if the actual story is true, than it doesnt matter what version of it it.

Oh and...

IF the story is INDEED true, than the deity (God) can not possbily be wicked, because if we assume that the story is true, we assume that God exists, and that means he cant be wicked because he is omnibenevolenct (perfect goodness). ''Wicked'' is like sinfull, and God cant possibly comitt a sin, since he is above it.

Circular logic again.

Just for the sake of quoting this very important post I will explain what sapphi means by "circular logic."

By saying that the truth of the story confirms everything you know about god, you are stating that God logically proves himself. "God is because he is." Makes no sense.

It's like saying, "I know God is real and perfect because God says so."

A statement of logic cannot prove itself. Circular.


What? Is the story is real, than God is real too. And the story itself doesnt confirm everything i know about God. My knowledge of a God unrelated to this story does.

"I know God is real and perfect because God says so."

No, thats not what i meant. I meant, if the story which mentiones God in it IS TRUE , that means that God must be real too. Because if the events in the story are all correct, God sent a big flood on mankind and left only a handfull of men alive. Now ASSUMING this is right, God would have to be real, because he sended a flood on mankind. Whats so hard to understand about this???


Doesn't change that if he sent the flood, then he is not perfect, and is in fact cruel and evil, just him or you saying he is perfectly good, is not evidence of him actually being good



Rumors indicate that it is planning on following the first approach, sticking a new, motion-sensitive controller onto an existing console. Our perspective is that this is the worst of the three options.

-Clayton Christensen back in 2007 already knew Move would be a bad idea

kowhoho on 10 October 2010
pizzahut451 said:
kowhoho said:
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:
sapphi_snake said:
pizzahut451 said:


If the story of great flood on mankind for its wickedness is true, why does it matter if the biblical version is wrong or right? The story and the point are true, except for some other details

Funny that you call manking "wicked" and not the deity who killed everybody.

And it's high;y unlikely that any of those stories are true, as people back then had no ideea how big the world truly was (plus, people from different parts fo the world couldn't communicate how they did today, so it's not as if one could know what was going on around the world to begin with).


You're doing this again. I said IF the story is true, im not here to argue if the story is true or made up, all i said that if the actual story is true, than it doesnt matter what version of it it.

Oh and...

IF the story is INDEED true, than the deity (God) can not possbily be wicked, because if we assume that the story is true, we assume that God exists, and that means he cant be wicked because he is omnibenevolenct (perfect goodness). ''Wicked'' is like sinfull, and God cant possibly comitt a sin, since he is above it.

Circular logic again.

Just for the sake of quoting this very important post I will explain what sapphi means by "circular logic."

By saying that the truth of the story confirms everything you know about god, you are stating that God logically proves himself. "God is because he is." Makes no sense.

It's like saying, "I know God is real and perfect because God says so."

A statement of logic cannot prove itself. Circular.


What? Is the story is real, than God is real too. And the story itself doesnt confirm everything i know about God. My knowledge of a God unrelated to this story does.

"I know God is real and perfect because God says so."

No, thats not what i meant. I meant, if the story which mentiones God in it IS TRUE , that means that God must be real too. Because if the events in the story are all correct, God sent a big flood on mankind and left only a handfull of men alive. Now ASSUMING this is right, God would have to be real, because he sended a flood on mankind. Whats so hard to understand about this???

You're underestimating how useless this statement is. It's about as useful as saying, "If God is real, then God is real."

You're using an already preposterous fairy tale as argumentative ammo to debate the existence of a being which already has a negligible amount of logical support.



I survived the Apocalyps3

kowhoho on 10 October 2010
hatmoza said:

I want to read through the comments, but I know there's going to be a lot of religion basher so I'll save myself the heartache and just carry on without reading them :3

There's a difference between religion bashing and philisophical debate. As long as people keep their wits about them and keep themselves from making things personal, we can learn a lot from discussions like these.

I say you should read this thread; there's been pretty good etiquette thus far.



I survived the Apocalyps3

kowhoho on 10 October 2010
pizzahut451 said:
axt113 said:


That's ridiculous, if God commits wicked acts, then he is wicked regardless of his power, he would just be perfect evil


Nope, thats impossible. IF He indeed exists, he cant possibly be evli, wicked or sinfull. The power of sin is not above him

What does this even mean?



I survived the Apocalyps3

Around the Network
Krstorm on 10 October 2010

Let's just put it this way:

GOD DOES NOT EXIST

Come on people, we're not 5 year olds, we're too old to have imaginary friends, just becaus some book claims to be the truth doesn't make it the truth!

"OMG it's in the bible, that makes it true!!!oneone!!!"

-"Why?"

-"Cuz the bible say so lolol"

Come on!



kowhoho on 10 October 2010
Krstorm said:

Let's just put it this way:

GOD DOES NOT EXIST

Come on people, we're not 5 year olds, we're too old to have imaginary friends, just becaus some book claims to be the truth doesn't make it the truth!

"OMG it's in the bible, that makes it true!!!oneone!!!"

-"Why?"

-"Cuz the bible say so lolol"

Come on!

You may feel that common sense leads you to the practice of atheism, but you cannot state that common sense is the reason god does not exist. Too often common sense can lead you to whatever conclusion you want.

The early bird gets the worm, but why do today what you could leave for tomorrow? :D



I survived the Apocalyps3

hatmoza on 11 October 2010
kowhoho said:
hatmoza said:

I want to read through the comments, but I know there's going to be a lot of religion basher so I'll save myself the heartache and just carry on without reading them :3

There's a difference between religion bashing and philisophical debate. As long as people keep their wits about them and keep themselves from making things personal, we can learn a lot from discussions like these.

I say you should read this thread; there's been pretty good etiquette thus far.

meh, I'm a personal type of guy. Plus, I took philosophy class once and it was boring. Too many people that know a lot of big words and suddenly think they're hot shot thinkers.

I have no place in debates.



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

Pellefant on 11 October 2010

@ OoSnap: I hope every thread you make and has made is true. That would be wicked.



Feylic on 11 October 2010

And Done.