FxMasterz:

The person who was there before anyone else knew about such an event. Those who wrote about it ever before archeologists discovered it.

FxMasterz:

There's a Witness that has always been there from the beginning. He will be there even after the end.

FxMasterz:

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

FxMasterz:

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?

FxMasterz:

According to you.

FxMasterz:

Are you the reality?

jaephoenix:

Oh your sky daddy. Well, that's interesting. I would have believed you if you can prove that he exists in the first place, but you can't. So your point goes up in smoke

FxMasterz:

According to you. Can you prove that?

FxMasterz:

Using a question to answer a question. I know where He resides.

FxMasterz:

Where are those people today? That's my question.

jaephoenix:

Dead. Your point?

jaephoenix:

Can tou prove the red wicked unicorn exists?

jaephoenix:

Reality is what anyone can see and attest to its existence. Your daddy didn't write nothing

LordReed:


Oga just make it make sense. You can attempt to tap dance your way around the stern facts but facts don't care about your stories. The facts destroy your arguments thoroughly so you refuse to examine them instead you cling to stories. Bwahahahahaha!

FxMasterz:

If there has never been a flood, why would the story be found in other cultures?
.
Remember that, story telling predates book writing. The only way people could pass information to the next generation is by telling stories which could later on be regarded as myths to those who were born thousands of years later.

The Bible gives better clarifications of the story than what those cultures present. In the Bible we have the full details of the event.

First tell me what science must find to prove a flood. The Bible recorded that before the time of the flood, there never had been a rainfall. Grasses were watered by mists. So, let's know the evidence that science wants to see. Is it the ark of Noah that was made of wood? Do you expect such an ark to survive after 5,000 years?

The name Noah is present in some cultures that never read the Bible, and were virtually unknown to Moses.

The fact that there are stories of the flood in more ancient cultures is in itself a proof and not a refutation.

FxMasterz:

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

FxMasterz:

This is absolutely empty. Nothing in reference to the main discourse here. Just a defensive rant.

FxMasterz:

Irrelevant.

FxMasterz:

After you must have proven that He doesn't.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

FxMasterz:

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

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.

FxMasterz:

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

FxMasterz:

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?

FxMasterz:

They're not just dead people but dead nations. Are you looking for testifiers among dead nations?