Good reason

[nobspeople]

In a different thread (listed below), when discussing, in part, if the bible is true, TRANSPONDER said " It is a well known argument that asserting what is in the Bible is true because it is in the Bible is a fallacy. A Lawyer would know that a witness statement is not going to be accepted as true just because he or she has said it. Nor of course rejected without good reason."

The above bolded section caused me to think (not claiming this is TRANSPNDER's assertion): is there good reason to think the bible isn't true?

For discussion: Is there good reason (define what is 'good reason' to you) to think the bible is or is not true*?

*TRUE here being used as 'legitimate, real word of God which was written by men, inspired by God' - this would assume everything written in it is true and agreed upon by God - in other words, nothing written is personal opinion of the writer.



Reference viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38540&start=10

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #83]

CONCLUSION : As one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I believe that the authour is not presenting allegory but rather was recording a real historical event.

As a JW, do you believe the event happened some 4,400 years ago (ballpark), as biblical chronology implies, or is the time period undefined or unknown (ie. not defined by biblical chronology)?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #83]

CONCLUSION : As one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I believe that the authour is not presenting allegory but rather was recording a real historical event.

As a JW, do you believe the event happened some 4,400 years ago (ballpark), as biblical chronology implies, or is the time period undefined or unknown (ie. not defined by biblical chronology)?

Yes ... as Steven Jay Gould put it, science and religion are two nonoverlapping magisteria..... I'm asking what theology says....

I take it you are still asking a theological question and will not repond with scientific challenges... I dont mean to preemptively hamstring you but it seems prudent to clarify despite your stated regard for Mr Gould as some jump from one to the other and declare supposed victory by moving goalposts. On the premise the above is quite clear ....


Yes I believe the flood happened 2370 BCE that is to say about four and a half thousand years ago. Bible chronology has dates humans the first himan as being created about 6,000 ago. Do you have a theological (not a scientific) follow up question?




JW

[JoeyKnothead]

Do you have a theological (not a scientific) follow up question?

I remind folks there's a whole nother section of this site devoted to things theological.

[JehovahsWitness]

...I'm asking what theology says (as this is in the Christianity and Apologetics section and not the Science and Religion section which has been quiet lately) about why a flood mechanism was chosen for the destruction and "reset."

I remind folks there's a whole nother section of this site devoted to things theological.

Duly noted joey, thank you.

@ DrNoGods: please see above.





JW

[DrNoGods]

@ DrNoGods: please see above.

I'll remind you of your comment from post 69:

Why a god does or does not do something is called theology not science. You want to talk theology...?

This is what first pushed the discussion towards theology as you dodged any science-related questions on the flood myth by claiming it involved miracles, and that miracles are outside of the realm of science. There is also another section of the forum called Science and Religion that is suitable for discussing the scientific evidence for/against Noah's flood, and where the tall tale has been debunked many times.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #92]

Yes I believe the flood happened 2370 BCE that is to say about four and a half thousand years ago. Bible chronology has dates humans the first himan as being created about 6,000 ago. Do you have a theological (not a scientific) follow up question?

No. But I'm puzzled why are you asking about theological questions after referencing me on JK's comment that those are for another section of the website? And a 6000 year old "creation" is certainly a ridiculous proposition from any science perspective as we know with 100% certainty that this is false. So I'll leave the thread and get back to the real world.

[brunumb]

And a 6000 year old "creation" is certainly a ridiculous proposition from any science perspective as we know with 100% certainty that this is false.

At least among those with an adequate education or at least willing to apply their critical thinking skills without the blinkers imposed by religious dogma.

[JehovahsWitness]

Do you have a theological (not a scientific) follow up question?

I remind folks there's a whole nother section of this site devoted to things theological.

Emphasis MINE

Therefore is also another section of the forum called Science and Religion that is suitable for discussing the scientific evidence for/against Noah's flood ...

....I'm puzzled why are you asking about theological questions after referencing me on JK's comment that those are for another section of the website?

I took it to be an objection by joeyknothead that it was inappropriate to pursue such a discussion here. SEE the post referenced above in blue. For this reason I have chosen to no longer pursue my line of reasoning and refrain from answering any more of your theological questions you may ask.

I will of course welcome moderator input.


Regards,


JW

[Tcg]

May I suggest if there is any confusion as to what is appropriate discussion in any given subforum you call on moderator regulation.

JW

Moderator Comment

May I suggest that you abide by rule #17 which states:

17. Do not comment on any rule infractions made by others. Ignore any rule violations made by others and only respond by reporting it to the moderators.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[JehovahsWitness]

I remind folks there's a whole nother section of this site devoted to things theological.

Emphasis MINE

Thank you joey for drawing this to my attention. I appreciate your reminder.




JW