XPost: alt.religion.jehovahs-witn, alt.bible, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: talk.atheism   
   From: try_not@here.com   
      
   "Elmer Bataitis"  wrote in message   
   news:BCF10B7C.1B5D%nylicens@frontiernet.net...   
   >   
   >   
   > > From: "JISTASKKIN"    
   >   
   > > Well sir, according to the Bible it does put you against God.  The Bible   
   > > makes it very obvious that the Flood was a real historical account,   
   referred   
   > > to as such in many places within scripture.  You have zero scriptural   
   > > grounds for a figurative interpretation.   
   >   
   > Except, of course, that if you accept God as the author of reality, then   
   you   
   > have 100% religious grounds for its figurative interpretation.   
      
   I am not sure what you mean.  If I accept God as the author of reality, then   
   it would make sense to use what he wrote as authoritative.  And His word   
   clearly shows the Flood account is not figurative.   
      
      
      
   >   
   > > If you have a problem with that,   
   > > take it up with God.   
   >   
   > Back at ya   
   >   ;-)   
      
   Been there done that, got the T-shirt.   
   The Flood as a real historical account is consistent within scripture.   
      
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)