Buster Dobb's Ark Theory

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>  BAKKE

>  Needless to say, this begs a much larger question.  To wit, if God is

>  omnipotent and could magically transport a plethora of creatures, why

>  did he need a 600-year-old man to build an ark to protect those same

>  creatures from the flood?  For that matter, why did he need the flood to

>  wipe out all the doomed creatures?  Seems to me that he could have

>  eliminated them "supernaturally" as well.

> =================

> Joe Alward:

> 

> I hope it's not begging the question.  I assume for the sake of argument that

> there is an omnipotent god.  If you mean to say that my statement *leads* to a

> larger question, I agree.


BAKKE
That would be a fair interpretation in this case.  However, I hope that
we realize that the assumption of an omnipotent God (even for the sake
of argument) is often distorted by believers into ultimate support for
inerrancy.  By examining the problems inherent in the very concept of an
omnipotent God, I believe that we can enhance arguments about the
errancy of the Bible.  Gross philosophical and logical errors should be
at least as damning as errors of fact.


> Joe Alward

> Of course, the question Mark asks is completely reasonable, but why

> stop there?  Why not just end the whole Bible debate once and for all and ask,

> Why didn't God just hard-wire into the DNA of every human everything He wished

> for them to know about Him? That way, we wouldn't have needed to give us a

> bible.  Why didn't he do that?  Doesn't the fact that He didn't show that

> there is no omnipotent god?  If there is no omnipotent god, what's the point

> in discussing the Bible?


BAKKE
The point is that God might still exist even if his omnipotence can not
be supported.  In the case of the "animals to the Ark" story, the power
of an omnipotent God was invoked in a defense of the events portrayed in
Genesis.  Therefore, I feel that is reasonable to take that assumption
of omnipotence and show how it doesn't jibe with those events.  If
omnipotence can not be defended, it makes the inerrancy of the story
that much harder to demonstrate.

-- 
Visit "NIGHT OWL MK. II" at: http://home.earthlink.net/~mlbakke1
Featuring:
  BOULDER GAMES -- The Best in Wargames! (A Starting Point Hot Site!)
  Philosophy of Life -- Speak Your Mind! | Register your site with the
  "Grognard: The Collectable Card Game"  | Wargamers' Homepage Listing!

• Previous message: Buster Dobb's Ark Theory
• Next message: (off-topic) Re: Buster Dobb's Ark Theory
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]