Some of us are just wondering what it is about the bible that causes people to believe it. I am amazed at some of the reasons I hear or read by people trying to explain what is obviously wrong.
Any questioning, IMO causes fear for some based on years of believing what is written in the bible. Believing a creator created all life on planet earth then had one person & his family plus 7 pairs of life except those that live in water board a boat similar in size to the Titanic to survive 371 days takes blind faith. Not many would have that same blind faith that the creator would save them if they prayed then stepped in front of a fast moving train.
As I am one who is still sitting on the fence, I am always interested in both sides of religious discussion. If I ever were to accept the fundamentals of religion (Christianity or otherwise) to become a person of faith, I'd likely have to disregard the stories in the Bible. Most of it is just too unbelievable and fantastic for my inquiring mind. I will freely admit to having some degree of envy for those who have blind faith; I often wonder how that happens.
When I was a child, my Atheist Dad took me to a local church where I could get a taste of religion and have the opportunity to make up my own mind about things. Fortunately, I was exposed to a Sunday School teacher who taught me the correct Biblical Christian doctrines. At that time and for the next 30 years, I accepted the Bible and Christianity on blind faith. Similarly, I expect the vast majority of Christians, like most other religious followers, have no basis for their faith other than being raised or indoctrinated into it. It is, sadly, a blind faith - where some have landed into the right camp while many others have not. At 38 years old, a serious relationship with a Catholic girl prompted me to give my own Protestant faith a close look. That study eventually led to a full investigation into Christianity itself, along with the cults and other world religions. The result turned my blind faith in the Bible into a reasoned faith, supported by textual criticism, prophetic, historical, and archaeological evidence. Christian apologetics soon led me to the scientific issues of evolution versus creation, old earth versus new earth, and Noah's global flood versus a regional flood. By studying related physics, cosmological, biological, biochemical, geological, and information science material, I changed many of my misinformed world views and learned to appreciate the compatibility between science and the Bible - particularly with evidence supporting the historical accounts of Genesis. It's still a never ending learning process for me, but the results have been enlightening. I know now that my Christian faith and belief in the Bible is NOT based on blind faith. It's firmly grounded in a preponderance of evidence encompassing a spectrum of scientific disciplines that do in fact lend credence to the scriptures'reliability and authority.
As many of us in our generation I was also raised and "indoctrinated", attending church and Sunday school without fail. Even then, the Bible stories just seemed like fantastic fairy tales to me. My older siblings are firmly ensconced in the Southern Baptist Church; I'm the only heathen in the bunch. I'm afraid I don't see your "preponderance of evidence," @Joseph Carl. If I did so, I'd not still be looking for my answers.
Joseph Carl 1st. IMO your father as an atheist was a good man. His decision to take you to church for exposer to something he didn't believe in made it possible so you could decide for yourself. Skipping the speculation the arc was 371 days afloat & the 700 species of wood boring insects. Can you clarify this sentence in your post Quote "where some have landed into the right camp while many others have not." What is the right camp. Next From your post the total number of species. From the bible the quantity. Quote "It's still a never ending learning process for me," Total # of Species.............1,072,300.................................21,100 Genesis 7:2 King James Version (KJV) 2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. 21,100 X 14 = 295,400 What did you learn. Since the intent was to cleanse the world of what supposedly angered the " creator" . What would the reasoning be to kill the off spring of insects & animals?
Beth, I had hoped to eventually post some of the scientific evidence for creation, but the luke warm number of reviews and disconnected responses to my evolutionary post has discouraged me from spending the large number of hours needed for such a multi thread endeavor. I may get to it in time, but I have a simpler matter to address next, once I get caught up with other threads and Bob's infinite Bible challenges here. Bob, I appreciate your compliment of my Dad. I agree he made a good move back then, but remain saddened with his unbelief to this day. While my Christian friends with good families look forward to a heavenly reunion, I have little hope for the same. The right camp? You know what I'm implying, but probably want me to affirm it. Well, it's a fact that the world's main religions have enough opposing beliefs that it's logically impossible for all of them to be right. Therefore, I'd maintain that they're either all wrong or only one is right. In my view and studies, I'm confident beyond a reasonable doubt that Christianity is the only one true religion. For anyone open to a supernatural creator in the universe, studying the evidence for Christianity should lead them to the right camp. What I learn from your proposed 21,100 x14 = 295,400 species on the ark is that you're intent on justifying your non-belief in the Noah account regardless of the evidence revealed. But for the benefit of others who may follow this discussion, I'll address this point. My previous post presented a study excerpt that assumed species rather than kinds and assumed a number of 21,100 known living species + 4000 potentially extinct species x 2 = a hypothetical 50,000 species on the ark. The additional clean animals were not included, but determined to be relatively small in number. (By the way, the total number of 7 of each kind of clean animals is not clear and there's even uncertainty whether it means 7 of each kind or 7 pairs of each kind.) In any case, this study was intended to demonstrate that the ark was capable of holding an incredibly large number of animals, including a likely number of known species for the time. While it contains useful calculations and conclusions, I believe that other studies assuming kinds rather than species are probably more accurate. Other studies using taxonomic families, or kinds, generally put the total number of animals on the ark between 20,000-35,000 - a number easily held by the ark, allowing also for plenty of room for food, water, and living quarters. Once one correctly interprets the Bible's account of storing thousands of kinds of animals on the ark, rather than millions of species, the reasonableness of the Noah ark account should be more palatable. The previously linked video shows well how this could be easily accomplished. Your question of God's reasoning in destroying the animals and insects along with evil mankind is a theological challenge I've never considered. But since you've actually asked this question twice now, I appreciate that you deem it as a worthwhile obstacle to the Biblical story. From an evolutionist's standpoint, I can appreciate why the destruction of all innocent animal life would seem cruel and unjustified, since animals are as relevant and important as humans. From a Christian perspective, humans are made in the image of God, with a soul, making them far superior and important than any animal life. I can only propose that man's relationship with God was far more important to him than the secondary consequences animals faced because of the flood.
This might frustrate you Joseph Carl. Inventing ways to justify the story is interesting to me. Like reduction of animals to the size of rats. Or having the storage capacity for food and separation of carnivorous animals from herbivores for anywhere from 150 days to 371 days afloat depending on what searches produce for that time. The Biblical data places the Flood at 2304 BC ± 11 years. https://creation.com/the-date-of-noahs-flood The last time all continents were forming one supercontinent was about 250 million years ago. That supercontinent is called Pangaea. The seperation of North and South America from Europa and Africa happened later, around 200 million years ago. https://search.yahoo.com/search;_yl...&fp=1&fr2=rs-bottom,p:s,v:w,m:at-s&fr=yfp-t-s Using 2019 & 2304 BC ± 11 years this comes out to 4323 years since the flood. The "kind" explanation works if we ignore the fact that the continents separated around 200 million years before the " flood". Kind doesn't explain animal life in Australia or Madagascar found no where else in our world. How can "kind" be when the bible story claims all life except on the arc died. Or how the snow leopard lives where it couldn't have evolved from the feline "kind". Quote " While my Christian friends with good families look forward to a heavenly reunion, I have little hope for the same." Whoa! that opened a whole new question. Do you believe when you die you will remain sentient?
Bob, I believe the one study I referenced, using too many species vs a lesser number of kinds, did assume an average animal size of a rat. I think credibility is due to the author's work unless other evidence suggests it's wrong. Truthfully, I'll bet that neither you nor I have a clue of the world's average size of 10-20,000 animal kinds. So, I wouldn't be quick to criticize those who do spend time trying to figure such a calculation out. It's all pretty speculative (but seemingly more possible) when you consider that juveniles were probably taken on board for the post flood mating and speciation purpose. In any case, I think the video's presentation assuming an average animal size of a sheep seems quite reasonable. That's the best example I would leave you with in forming an opinion on the topic. I hope you watched it. I'm pleased to see you read and reference a creation.com article dating the flood based on the Bible and known historical events. It's an interesting assessment but not the only one that's been done. Honestly, the numbers tax my post retirement attention span and it's not an important study area for me. But, I do know that most new earth Christian apologists do place the flood in the 2500BC range, give or take a few hundred years. I understand your challenge (or confusion?) about reconciling such a date with Pangea and the animal movements necessary for the Noah ark account. First, you should recognize that your presumptions about Pangea time frames are not fact, but conclusions based upon evolutionary theory. I know most secular scientists and the unknowing public believe that the earth is 3-4 billion years old, with life being millions of years old. It's assumed everywhere and stated as fact (like the websites you read and reference), but these old ages are based primaril y on circular reasoning when interpreting the supposed, uniformitarian geologic column and on evolutionary assumptions when interpreting radioisotope and ice core sampling data. The whole issue of old earth versus new earth is not yet determined with certainty, and both sides have scientific evidence to support their positions. The lithosphere shows substantial geologic evidence of a major cataclysmic event that created the mountains, ocean floors, and potential land mass shapes. Young earth creation scientists believe this is consistent with the Noah flood account that happened about 4500 years ago. If there was a Pangea, the continuous landmass prior to the flood would have allowed the animals to reach Noah's ark on their own means. During and after the flood, as the topography changed quickly and drastically, temporary land or ice bridges would serve as possible migration routes for the animals leaving the ark. While the details of this spectacular event can only be theorized, it seems likely that both natural and supernatural causes were in play. As for being sentient in heaven I have no idea. The Bible suggests that I'll have a new body in the new world with my existing soul. It's unclear how much consciousness will transcend this life. Thus, I don't understand how I'll recognize loved ones from this life without having other memories too. It's not important for me to understand everything though - particularly supernatural things that are beyond any human comprehension. The important thing is for me to know, love, trust, and accept my Creator here in this temporary life so that I can look forward to the wonderful eternal life that lies ahead.
Trying to keep this short Quote " But, I do know that most new earth Christian apologists do place the flood in the 2500BC range, give or take a few hundred years." Back to the math using your 2500bc range. 2500bc & 2018ad = 4518 years. An omnipotent super natural being created humans in his likeness, wasn't happy with being defied in the garden so killed all living things except what the story of Noah depicts. That leaves Noah & his offspring repopulating the earth. OK so one human kind. Something went wrong again so now there is the story of the Tower of Babel. Out of that one group, one human kind in that 4518 years the various species of mankind evolved. https://www.ancienthistorylists.com/people/7-homo-species-close-present-human-existed-earth/ How does the bible explain the variety of human species that have evolved? As for continents separating, another source. About 650 million years ago – when the first jellyfish evolved – North America, South America and Africa were stuck together as one large continent called Gondwana, with some smaller islands floating on a neighboring continental plate. Over time, these islands collided with the large group of continents and were attached to it in a process called accretion. About 525 million years ago, that land mass broke apart, with North America on one side and South America, Africa and the small island pieces on the other. The two plates drifted apart, forming the Iapetus Ocean. https://phys.org/news/2006-05-continents-geology-picture.html The 4518 math again Repopulating those took place how after the flood supposedly killed all but Noah & his family. Using only Australia & the Aborigine how was that possible if there was no connected land mass. Then there were the animals found no where else not addressed.
What causes people to believe the Bible, is their choice to believe in the author. It isn't written for unbelievers. It would be like a person trying to comprehend physics before they are even sure numbers are important. I wish I could explain it better. The best part is, it's written in layers. So, no matter how many times you read one particular verse , out of nowhere, it suddenly reveals itself as meaning something even deeper. It never stops, it keeps growing with you. It's amazing. But before that time, it's just a book that people usually can't understand. I don't like to debate Biblical points because it becomes a pissing contest. I think if God gave man the right to believe or not believe, then I should respect a person regardless of their choice. It doesn't make people less than or more than either way. It's just a personal choice.
I don't think discussing the bible is useless. This thread for example questions how the story about Noah could be true. To be honest at one time when very young I felt the same comfort in believing the bible stories. Those that cling to that belief and enjoy the comfort they feel, good for them. As I grew older and couldn't reconcile time frames, archaeology, molecular biology and genetics I lost that belief in bible stories. Finding religion as a topic to question how science and faith don't match the stories seemed to me the best way to question. Thankfully Joseph Carl provides input. In order for the bible stories to work discounting fossil remains & dating the age of the earth & universe has to be. I can see fossil remains, I believe the process used to best determine the age of our earth & universe. It comes down to. Does a person believe the earth is billions of years old or 6,000 years. Does a person believe a little over 4,000 years ago all life except what was on an arc & in the water from 150 days to 371 days was deliberately killed. Does a person believe the separation of Africa, So. America & Australia took only a little over 4000 years to happen. Does a person believe all life except what was on an arc & in the water died yet somehow manage to be alive as life as is found in Australia & Madagascar not found anywhere else on planet earth? Does a person believe the offspring of a single family can change in human form from what is depicted as modern man to the variety like Pygmy, Aborigine, Oriental, Negro, Caucasian? The bible condemns homosexuality, does a person believe people choose homosexuality as a way of life? Questioning stories is not a pissing contest it's what people do that genuinely want to know the why of what they have been led to believe. I'm sure there are those that have trouble understanding how so many can have complete faith in what the Quran provides as truths.
@ Bob Kirk , I was responding to a post from Sheldon. I, in no way, meant disrespect to the conversation you were having with @Joseph Carl . He knows a great deal and is an excellent source of information.
Bess, I respect your two points but would clarify the Bible's purpose and audience intentions a bit differently. The Bible is God's message to everyone, including those with an open heart who are seeking him and truth, as well as those who do believe and want to know how to live accordingly. Those with a receptive heart will find the Bible to be an extraordinary instruction manual for understanding the world and making purpose of their lives. And for those who want reasons to justify their faith in the Bible or to witness to unbelievers (as Christians should do), they can readily find abundant scientific, prophetic, historical, and textual evidence to support their Christian faith. To the Atheist and skeptical unbeliever, the Bible provides innumerable questions and challenges on historical accounts, beliefs, and values that only fuel the unbeliever's heart, allowing him to justify his unbelief. The problem isn't the evidence, since both sides share the same evidence. It's the interpretation of the evidence, and the hard hearted unbeliever isn't going to give up his secular world view of things unless an extraordinary event or influential person comes into his life. Bob, I've finally deduced that you're more intent on holding onto secular world view beliefs than seeking any truth in Biblical matters. I say this because you continue to cite and reference evolutionary beliefs, oppose Biblical scripture, and reject any reasonable answers I provide to reconcile perceived difficulties. This is the mentality of Atheists too who spend substantial time purporting thousands of supposed Bible contradictions - even though most of them have been reasonably addressed (on-line and in books) by various apologists. No amount of evidence or explanation is sufficient to change the hardened heart; and thus, debating the issues becomes pointless. I've spent considerable time addressing evolution and Noah's flood, not with the real expectation of changing your beliefs, but with the hope of influencing some others here who might want to know God but are troubled by things they've heard about the Bible - things that they perceive as rediculous or scientifically wrong. For this thread, I've addressed how a reasonable number of animals could have fit into the ark, along with plenty of room for food, storage, and living quarters, and how the animals may have migrated after the flood along likely land or ice bridges as the new continents formed. The scientific feasibility of this has been somewhat covered - adequately at least for any open minded person, though obviously not for a firm unbeliever. To Bess's second point then, I agree that it's time to end this pissing match. I can't help you any more with this issue, but I can assure others that the Bible's flood account does not have any solid scientific evidence discrediting it; in fact, it actually has significant geologic evidence supporting it as a world wide flood and reasonable math and genetics studies showing the feasibility of the Ark, animals, and post flood rehabitation of the world. We cannot reasonably expect to know everything in this matter, but there's no established reason to not trust the Bible in this case as we do with other doctrinal beliefs.
I've provided articles & information that contradict the bible account. Quote "it actually has significant geologic evidence supporting it as a world wide flood and reasonable math and genetics studies showing the feasibility of the Ark, animals, and post flood rehabitation " The web sites showing that would be useful for me to read.