Christianity debate.

Ok, so i will discuss on the ark and flood momentarily, but i first one to bring up the arguement my opponent makes about all powerful. I recently came across a piece of information that is very good at explaining the matter of being all knowing and all powerful is contradictory. Ill simplify, god made us in his image, we have free will so he does as well. here is the piece of information. "First, God is not "stuck" having to do that action. God **already knows** what action he will freely choose to take. The inability to change one's mind over time does not exclude omnipotence. Second, "all powerful" itself means "power over all other things that exist" - not "the power to do anything". For example: if God is all-powerful, logically he cannot create a being that is more powerful than himself. If he could, logically he would not be all-powerful; instead, the hypothetical being would be all-powerful. However, the second consideration is minor in the face of the first. God knows what he will freely choose to do in the future; he is not in any way controlled by that knowledge, as his future choices are still free-will choices. Practical example: at a certain sub shop, customers are offered white or wheat bread. You have tried the wheat bread and dislike its flavor intensely, but you are very fond of the white bread at that sub shop. You KNOW the next time that you go to that shop to buy your own lunch that you will order a white bread sub for yourself. That day arrives: you enter the shop and the server asks you, "White or wheat bread". Your foreknowledge does not in ANY way limit your free will; you are still at that moment able to choose either variety of bread. Foreknowledge does NOT limit one's ability (or power) to make a choice or to act." If this does not explain the all knowing all powerful argument my opponent makes then i will keep elaborating on the subject further. Now on to the flood, i warn you the following statement is long that i found from grandcanyonflood.com to view the pictures please go to <http://grandcanyonflood.com...; to view them for i was not able to post the pictures. "(3) This is not a "story" like "Goldilocks and the Three Bears" or "The Three Little Pigs". No, this Flood actually happened, with an incredible amount of physical evidence which can still be seen throughout the world today, showing that it did indeed happen. This scientific evidence is also well documented. The huge weight of scientific evidence just cannot be simply ignored, as if this were just some kind of "Children's Story". There are whole books describing some of the voluminous scientific data proving that the Flood of Noah's day was a fact, and not a mere "children's story". At the top of this page is a photograph of the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. Please note the obvious: that there is shockingly little erosion on the top "rim" of the Grand Canyon, (a canyon which was supposedly formed hundreds of millions of years ago through the gradual natural processes of erosion). If you will look again at the above photograph, you might notice that the sides of the Grand Canyon go almost straight up and down. (In fact, they actually do go straight up and down in quite a few places along the canyon.) If gradual natural processes of erosion formed this Grand Canyon, and not Noah's Flood, then the top edge (or "rim") should be rounded, and not an edge at all, since the gradual processes of erosion always tend to round out sharp edges, not create them. In fact, after hundreds of millions of years, these same processes of erosion, (which those who believe "The Story of Evolution" claim formed the Grand Canyon), would have turned any such edges that might have once existed into gradual slopes. Here above is another photograph which I took of the Grand Canyon. Now consider the actual material that this canyon is made up of. For the most part, it is sandstone or other fine material such as is formed through the depositing of layers of volcanic ash. (Many of the layers of the Grand Canyon were in fact formed through such volcanic ash deposits.) In this photo above, you can see a tree growing in the foreground at the left, next to the very edge of the Grand Canyon. This photo was taken from the very edge of the rim of the Grand Canyon, looking down into the canyon at about sunset. Normally, the roots of vegetation, (such as can be seen in this photograph), tend to quickly break up such soft rock formations, hastening the natural processes of erosion caused by wind, rain and snow. You can actually see the effects of such erosion in this picture, with many small pieces of rock next to the tree's roots having been broken off from the main rock surface. You can also see just how steep the sides of the canyon really are by looking at the darkened facing cliff to the left of center in this picture, and noting its almost vertical edge. Here is another picture of the top edge, or "rim" of the Grand Canyon. I found that while I was standing on the rim of the Grand Canyon, I could actually place the tip of my shoe over the "edge" of the Grand Canyon, with the back of my shoe firmly standing on the flat rim surface. The front of my shoe was hanging over an edge that went straight down for hundreds of feet! If natural erosion over many millions of years' time had formed The Grand Canyon, then there should not be any such edge at all for me to hang the front part of my shoes over. (By the way, as can clearly be seen in the above photograph, the radius of this edge at the rim of the Canyon under my shoe was only about two inches at this section of the rim, testifying that the Grand Canyon could therefore only be a few thousand years old at most, not the hundreds of millions of years claimed by those who believe "The Story of Evolution".) Above is another photo of the Grand Canyon for you to consider. The Grand Canyon is about a mile deep from the rim at the top to the Colorado River way down at the bottom. Although magnified in this telephoto image, the Colorado River actually looks very small from the top rim of the Grand Canyon. From the rim, the Colorado River in fact looks like a small bluish-black line way down at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. No, I am sorry, but this tiny little river at the bottom of the Grand Canyon could not have carved out a huge canyon a mile deep and many miles wide right out of solid rock! This is just common sense. Now here above is another picture of the Grand Canyon. I call it the "Slice of Cake". The right photo is a close-up of the same view as the left picture. The left photo covers about thirty feet vertically from the bottom of the picture to the rim edge and the right picture about six feet. Erosion of this edge is only a few inches in radius, as can be clearly seen in the right photo by the scant amount of erosion at the left edge of the rim. The angle of the top of this edge is only about 30 degrees from side. Also, both sides of this "knife edge" rock formation drop down for hundreds of feet. Now, you tell me. How could, as evolutionists claim, this "crisp" and "sharp" geological feature have been cut right out of solid rock over "millions of years through steady, gradual processes operating over very long time periods of thousands or millions of years" sadly i was not able to post all of the site because it was longer then the characters i have. so if you want to see the rest please go to the website listed above.