AgentKuo
Regular
Okay, this thread seriously goes too fast for me to follow it all, but I'm gonna give my perspective on three of the major points that people have brought up:
1.The Biblical Flood:
-the flood story predates the Bible by hundreds of years. The first time we see this story is probably in The Epic of Gilgamesh (ancient Mesopotamian mythology). The story was changed from the original mesopotamian one to the Biblical account, with the characters changed, and again changed to include a monotheistic god (Mesopotamian believed in multiple gods). Now because the flood story was around and many different religions and non-religions wrote down an account of it, the possibility that there was an actual flood is very likely. Of course, the flood definitely did not cover the entire earth, and most likely only covered a large portion of land, and because at the time, the world was believed to be flat, and much smaller than we know it is today, the assumption that the whole world was flooded probably seemed very realistic. So that's my take on the flood story.
(I'll also mention that Mesopotamian mythology is one of the biggest precursors, and one of the biggest influences Judaism and Christianity take from -possibly Islam too, but I don't know enough about Islam-)
2.Historical accuracies in the Bible:
-The Bible does have some historical accuracies, there's no question about it. (locations, landmarks, some wars even) However, they are few, and none of the supernatural aspects (god, visions, miracles, etc.), nor the accounts of the life of Christ have any evidence for them. The Bible is not a history book, and it should not be treated as one.
3.The Beginning of the Universe:
-This one I think is kind of pointless to debate. The universe began, that much we know. How it happened we haven't figured out yet. "goddidit" is not an acceptible answer and "sciencprovesit" isn't either.
1.The Biblical Flood:
-the flood story predates the Bible by hundreds of years. The first time we see this story is probably in The Epic of Gilgamesh (ancient Mesopotamian mythology). The story was changed from the original mesopotamian one to the Biblical account, with the characters changed, and again changed to include a monotheistic god (Mesopotamian believed in multiple gods). Now because the flood story was around and many different religions and non-religions wrote down an account of it, the possibility that there was an actual flood is very likely. Of course, the flood definitely did not cover the entire earth, and most likely only covered a large portion of land, and because at the time, the world was believed to be flat, and much smaller than we know it is today, the assumption that the whole world was flooded probably seemed very realistic. So that's my take on the flood story.
(I'll also mention that Mesopotamian mythology is one of the biggest precursors, and one of the biggest influences Judaism and Christianity take from -possibly Islam too, but I don't know enough about Islam-)
2.Historical accuracies in the Bible:
-The Bible does have some historical accuracies, there's no question about it. (locations, landmarks, some wars even) However, they are few, and none of the supernatural aspects (god, visions, miracles, etc.), nor the accounts of the life of Christ have any evidence for them. The Bible is not a history book, and it should not be treated as one.
3.The Beginning of the Universe:
-This one I think is kind of pointless to debate. The universe began, that much we know. How it happened we haven't figured out yet. "goddidit" is not an acceptible answer and "sciencprovesit" isn't either.
Yeah, I know, lol, I made a typo, but no one will tell me how to change the poll, so I had to leave it like that.Btw, AgentKuo: Chrisianity? :]
Last edited: