the flood story is older then the bible its was taken from a old babylonian story

Especially when one realizes that nearly every culture on this planet has a flood myth of some sort. I personally think it may be a result of the glacial melting at the end of the last ice age but who knows.

yes i think that what it was you can see very old cities in the bottom of the ocean... i think it was a little bit of ending of ice age and continental drift that did it

you are so right.. didnt you actually look that up to see if it was true?

that the flood story is way older then the bible

The timeline of the Bible assumes that the flood story is older than it, seeing as Genesis was written by Moses.

Of course he didn't write the Pentateuch (seeing as the Pentateuch was the Greek translation of the Torah made long after Moses's death), but there is good reason to believe that Moses wrote the Torah. The Torah itself cites Moses as its author (Exodus 17:14, Numbers 33:2). I must admit that this specific piece of evidence can be disputed if you want to argue that the real authors claimed the name of Moses to gain validity. However, that would not explain why the books of Joshua, 1 & 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, and Malachi all cite Moses as the author of the Torah.

Why is extrabiblical evidence required? Even if you deny the doctrine of divine inspiration, you must still admit that the Bible is a collection of historic documents. I have already presented a variety of sources outside the Torah that attribute the writing of the Torah to Moses. The burden of proof is now on you to show why my sources are wrong, and to present your own counter-evidence.

Also, why would authors use the name of Moses to gain authority unless there was some actual Moses figure that the people were familiar with?

I didn't say that the Bible calling itself true makes it true. I said that certain documents, which just so happen to be found in the Bible, attribute the writing of the Torah, which also just so happens to be found in the Bible, to Moses. Even if they are collected under one title, they still remain separate sources. I absolutely agree that circular reasoning is incredibly foolish, but I do not think that this specific case is circular. If you want to present reasons why the evidence I've given is wrong, or if you want to present evidence for your own counter-claim, then maybe this discussion can move forward.

As painful as it is, the point of the flood is to show the atrocity of sin. I myself don't like to think about it either, but the Christian worldview does in fact hold that all of humanity is inherently corrupt and deserving of death. God, being infinitely perfect, is the only one who can justly punish such sin (as shown when Jesus said "let whoever is among you who is without sin throw the first stone").

It is terrible, and I don't like it either. However, it does at least make sense for God to damn us all. What is amazing to me is that He would be willing to spare even a single human being, let alone any and all who confess that Christ is Lord and believe in their hearts that God raised Him from the dead.

God does not damn anyone, we damn ourselves by choosing evil over good. This is our free will, and in choosing evil over good (choosing sin over God), we cut ourselves off from God and thereby consign ourselves to hell. This is where God's mercy comes in: if you repent, you will be forgiven. The ultimate goal is for you to choose God over sin and over yourself. The reward for learning to do this in your lifetime (and it often does take a lifetime to learn, because it can be extremely difficult) is eternity in the presence of God in Heaven.

Because it isn't within our liberty to say who gets punished and who doesn't. That power belongs to God.

The point of the flood was to cleanse the world of sin. He loved his creation to much to kill all of them, so he left foundations for more life. He would've killed everybody if he had no love.

To be blunt: yes. Why? Because he always has a reason. The Bible tells us that mankind was created by God as a special being, made in God's image, to live according to the rules which God has laid down. When mankind breaks those rules judgment follows. Why? Because God, as a result of His holiness and justice, has decreed to punish the wicked and disobedient.

There is a reason babies were killed as well. In so far as sin is a transgression of the law, it is guilt; in so far as it is a principle, it is pollution and defilement. Calvin said, 'The earth was like a wealthy house, well supplied with every kind of provision in abundance and variety. Now, since man has defiled the earth itself with his crimes, and has vilely corrupted all the riches with which it was replenished, the Lord also designed that the monument of his punishment should there be placed: just as if a judge, about to punish a most wicked and nefarious criminal, should, for the sake of greater infamy, command his house to be razed to the foundation. And this all tends to inspire us with a dread of sin; for we may easily infer how great is its atrocity, when the punishment of it is extended even to the brute creation.

You may ask "what about God's mercy?" Well, at the end of the flood came a great promise: it would never happen again. I beleive that that is also a large reason that God flooded the earth.

Who's innocent and who's not is decided by God tho.

Are you allowed to pass judgment on your boss if you don't agree with his decision? Is not your superior allowed to do things that you are not? God is our superior in all things, and therefore, He can do things that we cannot. For humans to stand in judgment of God is blasphemy, just as it would be unacceptable for you to stand in front of your boss and impugn him for being late to work.

Because a benevolent and omniscient being knows what's best for us and knows more than us.

I, too, find it to be repulsive, and that is the point: sin is repulsive. God is infinite; therefore, His standard is infinitely perfect, and any deviation from it is ultimately deserving of infinite punishment. I myself am painfully aware of my own sin and the punishment it deserves, which is why I give thanks that Jesus, the only One who could bear such a weight (because He Himself is also infinite), took upon Himself the wrath that should have been mine.

As for abortion, there are many reasons it is wrong, but for the sake of this discussion I will start by focusing on one reason in particular: humanity belongs to God. In killing another human being, the killer makes the assumption that they have the authority or right to do so. This is essentially defiance, because it is an attempt to exert control over that which God has set aside for Himself.

Now, at first glance such a statement may sound like an argument for anarchy or theocracy. Let me counter-balance that statement by saying that while everything belongs to God, He has chosen to entrust humanity with certain degrees of authority under Him. As such, parents are given authority over their children, and governments over their citizens. Such authority is still under God, and thus may only be wielded within the bounds established by God. Ownership is God's, and humanity is given stewardship.

I take no offense, and I know that you are speaking from a genuine concern. Do let me clarify that I do not believe in the doctrine of total depravity, but rather in an inherit sin nature. The difference is that people have a natural inclination towards evil, rather than being completely incapable of good.

As for the babies who died in the flood, there are two explanations that seem most likely to me. The first being that they were not punished for their actions, but rather for their nature. The second one, which I honestly hope is true but cannot say for certain, is that there is an age of accountability, and those below that age are not held responsible for their actions. If the first is true, then God is still the just judge. If the second one is true, then God would actually have saved the babies by bringing them to paradise in eternity and sparing them from the sins which they would have been raised in.

To be entirely honest, I'm not sure exactly what to think about all of this. I must thank you for bringing this topic to my attention here, where I have time to think and search out sources. If I had been asked about this in a face-to-face scenario, I have absolutely no idea how I would have reacted (probably not very gracefully, to say the least). I intend to search out this matter more fully.

Ah, yes, good reminder that death is not the end, and it is not necessarily a punishment when used by God.

Perhaps it is a punishment? I believe God is both just and merciful, and acts that align with one of those characteristics do not necessarily have to be in conflict with the other

You again. Take your leftist nonsense somewhere else.

How holy.