Re: physics of a mesopotamian flood

Richard Dimery (rjd20@hermes.cam.ac.uk)
Sat, 31 May 1997 10:14:17 +0100 (BST)

> The Bible is a tautalogy. It claims to be God's word based upon its claims
> that it is God inspired and its claim that God doesn't lie. What other
> basis is there for believing the Bible is the word of God? Logically you
> can't say the resurrection because you learn of the resurrection from the
> Bible which claims to be inspired by God and claims that God doesn't lie.
>
> Thus, if God doesn't lie, and He inspires men to write things that appear
> historical but aren't, what does that say about the Bible?

How about prophecy? Doesn't the multitude of fulfilled prophecies in the
NT and history written in the OT and NT imply that there might be
something unusual going on? It really is a huge number of prophecies. And
we do have manuscripts of the OT previous to 1AD, so you can't argue they
were forged. And how about the agreement between so many different authors
in so many different situations and times and styles?

On a related note, a Cambridge atheist geologist I spoke to yesterday
seemed to be under the impression that there was a flood 6ka ago. She was
vehemently opposed to Christianity, but seemed to have been taught this by
an atheistic faculty.

Richard.