Just to add to you own argument...
S
Argument against a GLOBAL Flood
by enigma1863 55 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
King Solomon
Think of it this way: if a person had a sufficient handle on science to see the absurdity of the story, they probably wouldn't BE a JW. Hence the scientific logical approach is not going to get very far with someone who doesnt accept science anyway, since they're pre-conditioned to think of science as coming from Satan just to weaken their faith! It's a strong protective mechanism.
Sure, a scientific approach works for YOU ALL, but remember: you are OUT of the JWs likely BECAUSE you could were able to see basic illogical elements, where not everyone can or is willing!
Hence why I think you're better off appealing to most people's fundamental sense of fairness and reasonableness, as that is more universal; or pointing out how God's behavior is inconsistent with subsequent depictions of his claimed traits. But as usual, YMMV, depending on the person, etc. it's defo not "one size fits all".
-
jwfacts
Enigma, I do not belive in a global flood, in fact have a WIP article about Why a Global Flood is Impossible.
The billion person number was from an apologist book, using simple population growth mapping, based on the size of families mentioned in Genesis, that ages listed of people bearing children and the length people lived for. Remember too that fundamentalists like JWs think that prior to Noah humans were closer to perfection and hence not as susceptible to disease. Even if it was still only 10% of that amount, say 10 million people, it would have been too many for Noah to preach to, or to have any chance of entering the ark within the time frames provided.
In reality, back then people did not live up to 969 years of age, population was not 1 billion, but rather estimated to be closer to the 10 million mark, and culture was beginning to thrive, as evidenced by the Pyramids.
-
cedars
I grew sceptical about the global flood story the moment I read that (shock horror!) there simply aren't enough water molecules on the planet to completely cover its land surface. If all the ice sheets melted, the sea levels would rise by 60 meters. That would obviously be catastrophic, but not enough to cover a mountain like Everest which is currently 8,848 meters above sea level.
Cedars
-
slimboyfat
Witnesses have an answer for that one. They claim the earth was flatter when the flood happened.
-
cedars
8,789 metres flatter! lol
Cedars
-
slimboyfat
It doesn't need to be completely flat, just flatter than it is.
I never said it was a good answer, just that it is an answer they have used because they recognise the problem.
-
ambersun
How can believers explain all the ancient cave paintings of extinct animals such as woolly mammoths, saber tooth tigers etc etc? The paintings were done using water soluble materials and would never survive being under water for months on end.
I believe I am right in saying they have had to section some of the famous cave paintings in France away from sight seers as even the moisture from peoples' breath was causing them to fade.
-
slimboyfat
Cave paintings are a big problem for a global flood. I guess they would just claim they were made after the flood and scientists got the dates wrong - which is pretty much their excuse for everything.
-
ambersun
If they were done after the flood, why would people go to all the trouble of painting explicit hunting scenes on cave walls involving how to kill extinct animals? Which ever way you look at it, it doesn't make sense.