FxMasterz:

This response is illogical. We were talking about a global flood.

Exactly. It illustrastres the illogicality of your position. Your are saying that despite the fact that diverse cultures have differing flood stories due to being close to large bodies of water they must all refer to a singular event. Even you can see how illogical that is so good on you.

LordReed:


Exactly. It illustrastres the illogicality of your position. Your are saying that despite the fact that diverse cultures have differing flood stories due to being close to large bodies of water they must all refer to a singular event. Even you can see how illogical that is so good on you.

There's falsehood in your statement Cultures holding on to the flood story ate not necessarily situated in proximity to large bodies of water. There are cultures alien to the Bible, whom Moses never knew about, who have references to the man Noah.

These event happened about 5,000 yrs ago. That time the study could only be passed down orally since books were not yet invented. Oral stories would definitely become nyths to people who lives 5,000 yrs after the actual events. But the fact that the story is present in extra-, biblical legends and cultures that are virtually unknown to each other is a pointer to the fact that such a tragedy took place.

Your Nile River refutation stands on a faulty premise.

FxMasterz:


There's falsehood in your statement Cultures holding on to the flood story ate not necessarily situated in proximity to large bodies of water. There are cultures alien to the Bible, whom Moses never knew about, who have references to the man Noah.

These event happened about 5,000 yrs ago. That time the study could only be passed down orally since books were not yet invented. Oral stories would definitely become nyths to people who lives 5,000 yrs after the actual events. But the fact that the story is present in extra-, biblical legends and cultures that are virtually unknown to each other is a pointer to the fact that such a tragedy took place.

Your Nile River refutation stands on a faulty premise.

Name a culture alien to the Bible that mentions Noah in it's own flood story.

LordReed:


Name a culture alien to the Bible that mentions Noah in it's own flood story.

Many bro. Even the Yoruba has a culture of calling someone with a noble character 'Omoluabi' which is a compressed form of the sentence 'Omo ti Noah bi' which means a descendant of Noah.

People like us should not be making absolute statements on events that happened 5,000 yrs ago. It's unwise. Even if we depend on what archeology has found today, do we know what archeology may find tomorrow? Archeology would still make discoveries after we ate long dead.

FxMasterz:

Many bro. Even the Yoruba has a culture of calling someone with a noble character 'Omoluabi' which is a compressed form of the sentence 'Omo ti Noah bi' which means a descendant of Noah.

People like us should not be making absolute statements on events that happened 5,000 yrs ago. It's unwise. Even if we depend on what archeology has found today, do we know what archeology may find tomorrow? Archeology would still make discoveries after we ate long dead.

LMAO! OMFD! That nonsense was taken from a Yoruba story book! Bwahahahahaha! Go read the actual Yoruba flood stories there is no mention of Noah. In fact, lemme help you:

In yet another Yoruba story, Oshun is depicted as the goddess who not only gives life but also takes it. When angered, Oshun may flood Earth or destroy crops by withholding her waters, thereby causing massive droughts. In one myth, Oshun is incensed by her devotees and sends down rain, nearly flooding the world. Yet once she has been appeased, Oshun saves Earth from destruction by calling back the waters.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Oshun

I can bet a million bucks that you cannot name another without these obvious conflations because they didn't! Flood stories are unique to the cultures that birth them. Aside from the very obvious flood and humans (and not always a single family) in the story they barely share any other details. Not all of them have gods involved, not all of them have boats involved, not all of them have animals involved. This idea that disparate flood stories means there was a single flood that drove all the stories is as illogical as my Nile illustration.

FxMasterz & his telegram group Robot Factory or Robot Factory group is a notorious scammer! He has scammed so many people on Nairaland & telegram . Run away from him. He has other monikers. Beware!

Refund my 500k!!

FxMasterz is a fraudster . I'll deal mercilessly with you until your life becomes disgusting to your parents. You wicked polluted son of a criminal. You've bitten more than what you can chew. Just be on the lookout for me

KnownUnknown:


Who’s talktalk2022?

LordReed:


LMAO! OMFD! That nonsense was taken from a Yoruba story book! Bwahahahahaha! Go read the actual Yoruba flood stories there is no mention of Noah. In fact, lemme help you:

In yet another Yoruba story, Oshun is depicted as the goddess who not only gives life but also takes it. When angered, Oshun may flood Earth or destroy crops by withholding her waters, thereby causing massive droughts. In one myth, Oshun is incensed by her devotees and sends down rain, nearly flooding the world. Yet once she has been appeased, Oshun saves Earth from destruction by calling back the waters.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Oshun

I can bet a million bucks that you cannot name another without these obvious conflations because they didn't! Flood stories are unique to the cultures that birth them. Aside from the very obvious flood and humans (and not always a single family) in the story they barely share any other details. Not all of them have gods involved, not all of them have boats involved, not all of them have animals involved. This idea that disparate flood stories means there was a single flood that drove all the stories is as illogical as my Nile illustration.

Tell me whether I mentioned flood in relation to the Yorubas. I only mentioned the name Noah, and you and I know who Noah is.

The Yoruba flood story would be very distorted if there's any, so any reference to that is useless.

Stories become more and more distorted as they age. The only thing you can get from a story of over 5,000yrs is a clue and nothing more then that.

KnownUnknown:


Who’s talktalk2022?

He's a mad son of a criminal whose progenitors are descended from apes.

His stock in trade is to scam you and afterwards blackmail you. A very degenerate soul.

Tell the criminal to return my 200k which he scammed me of.

FxMasterz:

Tell me whether I mentioned flood in relation to the Yorubas. I only mentioned the name Noah, and you and I know who Noah is.

The Yoruba flood story would be very distorted if there's any, so any reference to that is useless.

Stories become more and more distorted as they age. The only thing you can get from a story of over 5,000yrs is a clue and nothing more then that.

Oga Omoluabi is not an acknowledgement of Noah, that nonsense is from a book of funny stories. Name one culture that in your own words: cultures alien to the Bible, who have references to the man Noah.

LordReed:


Oga Omoluabi is not an acknowledgement of Noah, that nonsense is from a book of funny stories. Name one culture that in your own words: cultures alien to the Bible, who have references to the man Noah.

That yoruba story position is your opinion.

There are many such legends. I wouldn't bother myself with them because they still wouldn't profit you.

There's an ongoing archeological effort in the black sea. You may want to read about it through the link below:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Technology/evidence-suggests-biblical-great-flood-noahs-time-happened/story%3fid=17884533

Science generally is on shifting grounds. You can die today hanging your life on the current scientific knowledge or findings. After your death, science would find new things and therefore change position. Meanwhile, you're already a loser.

FxMasterz:

That yoruba story position is your opinion.

There are many such legends. I wouldn't bother myself with them because they still wouldn't profit you.

There's an ongoing archeological effort in the black sea. You may want to read about it through the link below:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/Technology/evidence-suggests-biblical-great-flood-noahs-time-happened/story%3fid=17884533

Science generally is on shifting grounds. You can die today hanging your life on the current scientific knowledge or findings. After your death, science would find new things and therefore change position. Meanwhile, you're already a loser.

Again not a matter of opinion but of facts. The omoluwabi nonsense is from a book of funny Yoruba stories.

You won't because you can't, it doesn't exist.

So a local flood in the Black Sea area is what you bring to support your global flood story. LMAO! For Andromeda's sake it was limited to the Black Sea region, it is not evidence of a global flood.

LoLz @ already a loser. Between me with facts on hand and you with nothing but stories who really is the loser. Bwahahahahaha!

LordReed:


Again not a matter of opinion but of facts. The omoluwabi nonsense is from a book of funny Yoruba stories.

You won't because you can't, it doesn't exist.

So a local flood in the Black Sea area is what you bring to support your global flood story. LMAO! For Andromeda's sake it was limited to the Black Sea region, it is not evidence of a global flood.

LoLz @ already a loser. Between me with facts on hand and you with nothing but stories who really is the loser. Bwahahahahaha!

Go back and read. They never said it was a local flood, did they? There were examples of local floods in the article. The title of the article itself says Evidence that Noah's flood Happened. You guys love deceiving yourselves.

FxMasterz:

Go back and read. They never said it was a local flood, did they? There were examples of local floods in the article. The title of the article itself says Evidence that Noah's flood Happened. You guys love deceiving yourselves.

Yes they did. Right here:

According to a controversial theory proposed by two Columbia University scientists, there really was one in the Black Sea region. They believe that the now-salty Black Sea was once an isolated freshwater lake surrounded by farmland, until it was flooded by an enormous wall of water from the rising Mediterranean Sea.

The one deceiving himself is you.

LordReed:


Yes they did. Right here:

According to a controversial theory proposed by two Columbia University scientists, there really was one in the Black Sea region. They believe that the now-salty Black Sea was once an isolated freshwater lake surrounded by farmland, until it was flooded by an enormous wall of water from the rising Mediterranean Sea.

The one deceiving himself is you.

The writer wrote for the topic and not against the topic.

That 'enormous wall of water from the rising Mediterranean Sea' is what you would fail to see.

No one can unearth flood, whether recent or ancient. What you can see are clues that suggested a flood Happened. And that's exactly what the article set out to achieve. To give us pointers. Rather than argue with me, you'll do well to go argue with the writer against his topic.

FxMasterz:


For where? You've chosen what to believe. There are arguments for and against the topic. You stand for those who argue against and I stand for those who argue for.

These events happened before anyone of us. If you believe the speculators more than the witnesses, that's your own class of wisdom, and I must allow you to explore that to the maximum. So, keep clapping.

Lol. Lets start from here.
1. Who are the spectators of creation and the great flood?
2. What are the arguments 'for' the Bible?

LordReed:


LoLz! Who were the witnesses to the purported Sodom and Gomorrah event that wrote about it?

I asked him the same questions. So I'm waiting for his answer

FxMasterz:

The writer wrote for the topic and not against the topic.

That 'enormous wall of water from the rising Mediterranean Sea' is what you would fail to see.

No one can unearth flood, whether recent or ancient. What you can see are clues that suggested a flood Happened. And that's exactly what the article set out to achieve. To give us pointers. Rather than argue with me, you'll do well to go argue with the writer against his topic.

The writer did not say there was a global flood anywhere in the article nor did it suggest that because there was flood in the Black Sea area that may have been the source of the Noah story therefore it means Noah's flood is confirmed. What you failed to see was this right in the article:

Some of the details of the Noah story seem mythical, so many biblical scholars believe the story of Noah and the Ark was inspired by the legendary flood stories of nearby Mesopotamia, in particular "The Epic of Gilgamesh." These ancient narratives were already being passed down from one generation to the next, centuries before Noah appeared in the Bible.

Read it with your eyes, Noah's story is not the original.

LordReed:


The writer did not say there was a global flood anywhere in the article nor did it suggest that because there was flood in the Black Sea area that may have been the source of the Noah story therefore it means Noah's flood is confirmed. What you failed to see was this right in the article:

Some of the details of the Noah story seem mythical, so many biblical scholars believe the story of Noah and the Ark was inspired by the legendary flood stories of nearby Mesopotamia, in particular "The Epic of Gilgamesh." These ancient narratives were already being passed down from one generation to the next, centuries before Noah appeared in the Bible.

Read it with your eyes, Noah's story is not the original.

The bolded was a Digression in the article referencing what others said. Read objectively with no bias. The writer of the article was pointing out that judging from recent discoveries, the fliood story might be true, and that there's a researcher who is hoping to find something bigger that could ultimately confirm the flood story.

FxMasterz:

The bolded was a Digression in the article referencing what others said. Read objectively with no bias. The writer of the article was pointing out that judging from recent discoveries, the fliood story might be true, and that there's a researcher who is hoping to find something bigger that could ultimately confirm the flood story.

Oh I thought anything the article says is what we are going by. LMAO.

Just mention where in the article they say there was a global flood. Or that the flood in the Black Sea region is the flood of Noah. I'll wait. LoLz.

LordReed:


Oh I thought anything the article says is what we are going by. LMAO.

Just mention where in the article they say there was a global flood. Or that the flood in the Black Sea region is the flood of Noah. I'll wait. LoLz.

How can anyone say some floods are the flood of Noah? The said they found evidences that suggest that Noah's flood happened.

FxMasterz:

How can anyone say some floods are the flood of Noah? The said they found evidences that suggest that Noah's flood happened.

No, they found evidence that suggests the flood could be what was legendised and formed the basis for the stories that serve as the source for the Noah tale. If you are disputing this quote where in the article it says these findings suggest Noah's flood happened.

LordReed:


No, they found evidence that suggests the flood could be what was legendised and formed the basis for the stories that serve as the source for the Noah tale. If you are disputing this quote where in the article it says these findings suggest Noah's flood happened.

You should quote the article to perfectly include these lines bolded above.

FxMasterz:


You should quote the article to perfectly include these lines bolded above.

I quoted it already. You quote where the article says this flood could be Noah's flood.

LordReed:


I quoted it already. You quote where the article says this flood could be Noah's flood.

I have always known atheists to be seriously biased. They cherry pick sentences in articles and distort the context to look as though it's supporting their atheistic fallacy.

FxMasterz:

I have always known atheists to be seriously biased. They cherry pick sentences in articles and distort the context to look as though it's supporting their atheistic fallacy.

LoLz! Like you cherry picking yours right.

From where you stopped:

"It probably was a bad day," Ballard said. "At some magic moment, it broke through and flooded this place violently, and a lot of real estate, 150,000 square kilometers of land, went under."

The theory goes on to suggest that the story of this traumatic event, seared into the collective memory of the survivors, was passed down from generation to generation and eventually inspired the biblical account of Noah.

It DOES NOT say it was Noah's flood or even suggest that it could be. It says that it could be what inspired the legends that eventually inspire the Noah's flood tale.

Even the area the flood is said to have covered 150,000 square kilometers is insignificant compared to the Earth's total area of 510,100,0000 square kilometers. How can it remotely be compared to a global flood?

LordReed:


LoLz! Like you cherry picking yours right.

From where you stopped:

"It probably was a bad day," Ballard said. "At some magic moment, it broke through and flooded this place violently, and a lot of real estate, 150,000 square kilometers of land, went under."

The theory goes on to suggest that the story of this traumatic event, seared into the collective memory of the survivors, was passed down from generation to generation and eventually inspired the biblical account of Noah.

It DOES NOT say it was Noah's flood or even suggest that it could be. It says that it could be what inspired the legends that eventually inspire the Noah's flood tale.

Even the area the flood is said to have covered 150,000 square kilometers is insignificant compared to the Earth's total area of 510,1000,0000 square kilometers. How can it remotely be compared to a global flood?

Chai!

They agreed that a catastrophic event must have happened with the dating of that event going back to about 5,000 BC which is about the same time as the flood of Noah according to the article.

That's further buttresses by the the opinion that says the witnesses of that catastrophic event must have passed down the story to their descendants. They believe that this stories so passed down by the survivors could have influenced the biblical stories of Noah. What could be clearer than this?

We know that the biblical story wasn't influenced externally. It was a divine revelation to Moses. The event was vividly described.

If Noah's flood really happened, then there should be legends preceding the biblical account. If there are no such legends, then the biblical account could be faulted.

The fact that survivors have their own side of the story passed down apart from the Biblical account gives credence to the biblical account. The biblical account provided fuller details so much so that a date could be fixed for the event.

Now, if there are no such legends, atheists would be the first to ask why it is that only the Bible is talking about an event that happened to everybody? Now that there are references to it in other cultures, they've got to change the narrative to ',it could be infiuenced'. They can't even talk in absolutes. Whatever the Bible claims, it does so in absolutes. There's no 'it, may', 'it could' nonesense in any biblical position.

FxMasterz:


Chai!

They agreed that a catastrophic event must have happened with the dating of that event going back to about 5,000 BC which is about the same time as the flood of Noah according to the article.

That's further buttresses by the the opinion that says the witnesses of that catastrophic event must have passed down the story to their descendants. They believe that this stories so passed down by the survivors could have influenced the biblical stories of Noah. What could be clearer than this?

We know that the biblical story wasn't influenced externally. It was a divine revelation to Moses. The event was vividly described.

If Noah's flood really happened, then there should be legends preceding the biblical account. If there are no such legends, then the biblical account could be faulted.

The fact that survivors have their own side of the story passed down apart from the Biblical account gives credence to the biblical account. The biblical account provided fuller details so much so that a date could be fixed for the event.

Now, if there are no such legends, atheists would be the first to ask why it is that only the Bible is talking about an event that happened to everybody? Now that there are references to it in other cultures, they've got to change the narrative to ',it could be infiuenced'. They can't even talk in absolutes. Whatever the Bible claims, it does so in absolutes. There's no 'it, may', 'it could' nonesense in any biblical position.

Bwahahahahaha! The article repeatedly says there were legends preceding the Noah's flood tale and here you are accusing me of cherry picking. LMFAO!

Which other cultures talk about Noah's flood? None. Even Noah's flood is a copy of a different flood story so what are you on about.

Explain how this Black Sea flood covering an area of 150,000 square kilometers can be remotely compared to the Earth's total area of 510,100,000 km². Just make it make sense.

FxMasterz:


Chai!

They agreed that a catastrophic event must have happened with the dating of that event going back to about 5,000 BC which is about the same time as the flood of Noah according to the article.

That's further buttresses by the the opinion that says the witnesses of that catastrophic event must have passed down the story to their descendants. They believe that this stories so passed down by the survivors could have influenced the biblical stories of Noah. What could be clearer than this?

We know that the biblical story wasn't influenced externally. It was a divine revelation to Moses. The event was vividly described.

If Noah's flood really happened, then there should be legends preceding the biblical account. If there are no such legends, then the biblical account could be faulted.

The fact that survivors have their own side of the story passed down apart from the Biblical account gives credence to the biblical account. The biblical account provided fuller details so much so that a date could be fixed for the event.

Now, if there are no such legends, atheists would be the first to ask why it is that only the Bible is talking about an event that happened to everybody? Now that there are references to it in other cultures, they've got to change the narrative to ',it could be infiuenced'. They can't even talk in absolutes. Whatever the Bible claims, it does so in absolutes. There's no 'it, may', 'it could' nonesense in any biblical position.

BTW the estimated date by Christians for Noah's flood is 4004 BCE not 5000 BCE. Some Christians even make it later than that, I have not seen any Christian say it was 5000 BCE. If you put the the date at 5000 BCE then the Earth cannot be 6000 yrs old according to Young Earth Creationist timelines. From Adam to Noah's flood beginning is 1600+. 5000 BCE + 1600 + our current 2023 CE will mean the Earth is 8600 years which by the Bible doesn't make sense.

LordReed:


BTW the estimated date by Christians for Noah's flood is 4004 BCE not 5000 BCE. Some Christians even make it later than that, I have not seen any Christian say it was 5000 BCE. If you put the the date at 5000 BCE then the Earth cannot be 6000 yrs old according to Young Earth Creationist timelines. From Adam to Noah's flood beginning is 1600+. 5000 BCE + 1600 + our current 2023 CE will mean the Earth is 8600 years which by the Bible doesn't make sense.

Irrelevant.

FxMasterz:

Irrelevant.

Bwahahahahaha! Just make it make sense my guy. LMFAO!

LordReed:


Bwahahahahaha! Just make it make sense my guy. LMFAO!

If you're a honourable man, you wouldn't start talking about years when we're talking about floods.

LordReed:


Bwahahahahaha! The article repeatedly says there were legends preceding the Noah's flood tale and here you are accusing me of cherry picking. LMFAO!

Which other cultures talk about Noah's flood? None. Even Noah's flood is a copy of a different flood story so what are you on about.

Explain how this Black Sea flood covering an area of 150,000 square kilometers can be remotely compared to the Earth's total area of 510,100,000 km². Just make it make sense.

A more honorable person would have made a more noble response after I argued that the existence of the legend itself is confirmation and that the Bible painted more details about it.

You should go and ask the writers of the article to examine how the black sea flood covering an area of 150,000 square kilometers could suggest evidence for the Noah flood. At least you know better than those archeologists who made the deduction. Am I the writer of the article?