Lost Boy

I suspect that there were large floods. My point is there is no evidence of a global flood. I can wrap my head around a flood that made its inhabitants believe the whole world was under water. Of course people back then didn't know that the earth is round.

But then that would be local flooding only. The biblical account claims that the whole earth was covered.

The article clearly states that there is no evidence of a global flood.

So there aren't any good Christian geologists out there that are willing to put their necks out there and share the evidence? Not even byu geologists give any evidence of a global flood. If it happened 7000 years ago, there should be evidence all over the world. There isn't.

I do find that source credible. However, you must not have read the article. It had nothing to do with a global flood.

I can't stop you from interpreting the way you want to. I figure God gave us a brain to solve questions about the world around us. I am sure you have no issue with the science behind the automobile, or iPad, or medicine, etc. Geology is no different. It is observe, hypothesize, and verify. The scientific method is not anti-faith. God is a God of order. He knows the beginning from the end. We live according to his plan. If there was a global flood, I don't believe God would erase scientific evidence of it away. What would be the purpose for doing so?

I cannot find a single credible site that suggests through scientific evidence that there was a global flood.

The only issue there is that there is zero evidence of a great flood. No geological record whatsoever. I am not saying God would not have the power to erase all traces, but in any first person recorded miracle, it has not been the case.

Here is the thing. I can't think of a single miracle recorded by a first person author that couldn't be explained away by natural phenomena. A flood that covered the entire earth cannot be explained by natural phenomena. It could only be accomplished by very unnatural means. This would essentially be proof of God's existence. I personally don't think God gives us any proof of his existence. The best you get is weak evidence. And you get the holy ghost testifying to you. Proof will not be found. Thus faith is required.

I don't care if someone believes it literally or metaphorically. I wasn't there. I can't prove it one way or the other. I do feel that God uses many natural means to achieve his purposes..... things that can easily be explained as a natural occurrence. I feel he is a God of logic and obeys the laws of nature. Being an engineer by trade, I can't explain a flood that covered the entire earth. You would have to have land that is essentially all flat and just above sea level. There isn't enough water on the planet to cover a 1000 ft mountain let alone a 30k tall mountain. So assume the land was flat... ok... Then God made all the mountains in the course of a few Earth days. It does not make any logical sense to me. Could it have been completely covered? I don't know, but science would suggest no. What I don't care for are people that can't open their minds to other possibilities. In other words if I told someone I believe a certain way and they flat out tell me I am wrong.

Do you believe a flood covered the entire Earth? I have never been able to accept this. I could accept that Noah was in a flood and found himself swept out to sea, but a flood that covered all the earth?? No. What is your thought on this?

I used to have lots of chores around the house. Gardening, hauling wood, feeding animals, etc. Most kids don't have that many chores. It wasn't like my dad made up stuff for me to do. They were things that needed to be done. Most families around here don't have that many things for kids to do. A new generation and it is only going to get worse with more and more automation.

You put that contingency on there "who are properly disciplined" Most families I know do not have children that are "properly disciplined"

Works for some.

You seem to think parents would support you on this. I doubt most parents are willing to fight that battle.

You say you have an MBA, but then you said that two job offers were dependent on you finishing your undergrad work. I am completely confused here. Shouldn't your undergrad be finished if you have an MBA?

First, I most certainly hope you expect to gross earn way more than $2400/month. That is less than $30k/year. i was making that before graduating college 25 years ago. As a min, I'd hope you can do at least $50k/year. I would not marry you if you are aiming for a $30k/year job. You can't support a family on that. $50k/year is doable, but pretty tough. So the reason you need to move out is to learn to be on your own. One thing that attracted me to my wife was that she was financially independent. She had no debt and she knew how to live on her own responsibly. Saving money is one thing. Proving that you can make it on your own is far more attractive. Essentially you living at home is hampering your confidence. This is not society frowning on you. It is human instinct in a future mate that is frowning on this. You are making excuses for staying with mommy and daddy. Time to shed the old you and leave that life behind. Show the world that you can make it. BTW, here is a very simple budget based on $50k and two people. The first is if you rent an apartment. The next is if you buy a house. Hopefully this is no shock to you because you have run the numbers and already know this. At $50k/year, it will be tough buying a house. Things become much harder if you haven't learned to live within your means. Hint... Living at home does not teach you to live within your means. A high school dropout can do that. Rent Apartment $ 50,000 $ 4,167 Rent $ 1,000 $ 3,167 Car $ 400 $ 2,767 Food $ 400 $ 2,367 Misc $ 400 $ 1,967 tax $ 833 $ 1,133 tithing $ 417 $ 717 401k $ 292 $ 425 Buy a Home $ 50,000 $ 4,167 Mortgage $ 1,200 $ 2,967 Utilities $ 350 $ 2,617 Car $ 400 $ 2,217 Food $ 400 $ 1,817 Misc $ 400 $ 1,417 tax $ 833 $ 583 tithing $ 417 $ 167 401k $ 292 $ (125)

That can happen as well.

Sure, but if you are the type that tends to fall asleep during a meeting, a better talk certainly helps keep you awake.....😃

Perhaps. Perhaps I want both. I agree that method and pattern alone are not enough. The talk needs to be prepared by the help of the spirit and given by the spirit. But I contend that if people don't have a basic understanding of how to give a talk, the fear of giving the talk gets in the way of preparing with spirit.

Good link. I am not suggesting the church can ensure good talks. But they could do a bit more coaching. And sure it would be done at the local level.

I'll take French Vanilla, please. Apparently the First Presidency don't find it a top priority, but I figured maybe someone here might know why? Perhaps not. Instead, it appears that people would rather attack me for bringing up the topic, suggesting that I'm not being a team player, etc. You're a complainer for mentioning it, etc. Whatever.

I have no issue helping those in my sphere of influence, and I do, but my efforts are ineffective when trying to change a large organization.

I will disagree in this instance. There is a time and place for complaint. If no one complains then leaders don't know there are issues. Me complaining here is all but useless, but it still doesn't answer my question why they church doesn't take a more active role in providing education in church speaking. Sure, there are many that wouldn't use the information, but I think there are many that would benefit from it.

That is all well and good and I do offer help from time to time. But somethings work far better from the top down. I see this as one of them.