Noahs Ark

[sandy whitelinger]

Science, physics, and mathematics as well as rational thinking has proven that Noah's Flood could never have happened at all. It could have been a local flood. I think it was not only a local flood but perhaps a blanding of legends of other post-Ice Age local floods. That is not the point in a religious discussion. The story, fictional as it was was incredibly IMMORAL.

1. Injustice: God murders all humans (men, women, children, babies, infants, and foetuses in pregnant women.) Why? Some adults had sinned in some way. That shows God to not be just but a cosmic killer alien of monstrous hate.

2. Injustice: God murders all non-human animals (a million million, non-human mammals, reptiles, birds, amphibians (all destroyed by salt water), fresh water fish, crustaceans, and smaller creatures.) This would have been an extinction event worse than the Permian Mass Extinction 251.4 million years ago in which 96% of all animal life died.

3. What sin could adult men possibly commit that warrented the deaths of millions or so women, children, babies, and foetuses plus a million million non-human animals?

What is so wrong with the story of Noah's Flood is not the fictional magic of how God murdered everyone but the immorality of the story. It is evil in its content and ideology.

Your knowledge of the Bible is laking judging by this post and I doubt you care to be corrected.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I knew that's what you were saying earlier. You know as well as I do that was a typo. And I know the Bible doesn't say how the animals got where they are today. I will say it again I CAN READ!!!!! When trying to participate in a debate, you don't further your point by regurgitating information: "well the bible says this"...I know it says that, that's what we are discussing. "well it says this too"....I KNOW!! How about using your brain, and making a hypothesis about what YOU think happened. That's kind the whole point of a religious debate forum. If you want to debate what the scripture itself means, then go post on the scriptural debates section.

I think I am going to be brave now and give it one more try...(pointless though it is)
sandy IN YOUR OPINION how did the animals get to their various indigenous regions?

My opinion is irrelevant to the discussion of what the Bible says. going further than that is to be engaging in doubtful disputations. I do find your seeming agitation and persistance mildly amusing though.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Then define Firmament and define Heaven. Are you capable of doing that?

Here are some hints. The "Firmament" is supposed to be the supposed visible arch of the sky where "heaven" is the sky. At least those are the definitions when I look them up.

We know you can "read" the bible and we know the bible says this and the bible says that...we want to know what (you think) it means.

This is why we asked....for the definition of "Window of Heaven". I suspect that back then they simply saw it raining but didn't know what made it rain and where rain water came from and because they didn't have an understanding they believed their god opened a window from the sky thus making it rain. Shucks, they probably looked up at the sky, saw that it was blue like water thus making the assumption that the sky constantly held a layer of water above it

Firmament: visible arch of the earth bordering on space
Heaven: visible sky

Genesis 1 defines the firmament as where the sun moon and stars are. Any other definition is not Biblically accurate. Since you claim to be able to read, you can read that in the first chapter of the KJV. How people "saw" it is irrelevant to what the Bible actually says. As to what heaven is, I say it is what God created on the first day and is outside the universe as we know it. As to what the windows of heaven are, I'd say it is a way of saying that the extra water came from heaven and not the earth or the 'open firmament of heaven" which is the sky as described in Genesis 1 KJV.

 

[Bware]

This question is irrelevant.

Actually what you quoted was a question Sandy.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I've said it before, those who ignore the facts when it conflicts with their beliefs show a weakness in their faith.
If you are afraid to accept the obvious truth, then you are afraid of losing your faith.

You show an ignorance of what Biblical faith is.

 

[richardlowellt]

So the only evidence you have is myths? With, on the other side, all of geology, archeology, hydrology, boat-building, ancient history, biology and paleontology?

VARVES?

How about those Egyptians, eh? Also the Sumerians, Chinese and Harrapans of India. Good swimmers, all.

Not only good swimmers, but able to hold their breath for a very long time.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Actually what you quoted was a question Sandy.

Which is why I said that the "question" (which you so observantly said I quoted) is irrelevant.

 

[richardlowellt]

Your knowledge of the Bible is laking judging by this post and I doubt you care to be corrected.

Then please show all of us were he is wrong, exactly where is his judgment lacking? He has listed three instances that are in fact immoral concerning the flood, please address those three points, why are they NOT immoral?

 

[richardlowellt]

My opinion is irrelevant to the discussion of what the Bible says. going further than that is to be engaging in doubtful disputations. I do find your seeming agitation and persistance mildly amusing though.

In other words you have absolutely no voice of your own, you appear to be no more than a parrot regurgitating biblical dogma. Do you not think it close minded to not even consider other possible alternatives to what the bible says? I don't think anyone is agitated over your inability to answer simple question, maybe a bit bewildered.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Then please show all of us were he is wrong, exactly where is his judgment lacking? He has listed three instances that are in fact immoral concerning the flood, please address those three points, why are they NOT immoral?

to put it simply it was not the sin of one or a few humans that led to the flood. there is no biblical basis for that thought. There is also no Biblical basis for the death of an animal to be considered "murder."

 

[richardlowellt]

[

QUOTE=sandy whitelinger;1698308]You show an ignorance of what Biblical faith is.

[/QUOTE]Could you point out to me the difference between biblical faith and close mindedness, thanks.

 

[Bware]

Then define Firmament and define Heaven. Are you capable of doing that?

Here are some hints. The "Firmament" is supposed to be the supposed visible arch of the sky where "heaven" is the sky. At least those are the definitions when I look them up.

We know you can "read" the bible and we know the bible says this and the bible says that...we want to know what (you think) it means.

This is why we asked....for the definition of "Window of Heaven". I suspect that back then they simply saw it raining but didn't know what made it rain and where rain water came from and because they didn't have an understanding they believed their god opened a window from the sky thus making it rain. Shucks, they probably looked up at the sky, saw that it was blue like water thus making the assumption that the sky constantly held a layer of water above it

Firmament: visible arch of the earth bordering on space
Heaven: visible sky

I wouldn't even bother trying to debate with sandy man, she is the most frustrating person to debate with. She responds to everything with "the bible says" and she won't formulate her own opinions on anything. You might as well be talking to a wall. I put her on my ignore list already, I would recommend doing the same.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Could you point out to me the difference between biblical faith and close mindedness, thanks.

Biblical faith is defined in the book of Hebrews as the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. It would seen to me that the very nature of that definition requires open-mindedness as to where only accepting what is right in front of your face requires only close-mindedness.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I wouldn't even bother trying to debate with sandy man, she is the most frustrating person to debate with. She responds to everything with "the bible says" and she won't formulate her own opinions on anything. You might as well be talking to a wall. I put her on my ignore list already, I would recommend doing the same.

First of all, what you fail to recognize is that I only entered into this discussion in order to correct some Biblical misconceptions (for example, where the extra water for the flood came from), If you wish to try and disprove the bible then at least try and disprove an accurate Biblical view. It is others, like you, who wish to try and engage me in what I think to be unassociated discusions to that premise.

Also what drives you crazier is that you fail to understand what I mean when I say that I do not try and reconcile Biblical history and natural history, despite your repeated attempts to try and get me to do otherwise. Your decision to put me on you ignore list, to me, shows more close-mindedness on your part than mine. There is no one on my ignore list.

 

[Autodidact]

I agree. Talking to Sandy is a waste of time.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I agree. Talking to Sandy is a waste of time.

Only because I refuse to play by your rules. I am no less inflexible than you are.

 

[Bware]

I agree. Talking to Sandy is a waste of time.

Yeah it's the same way with FFH. Although I don't seem to ever argue with FFH really, what's the point in arguing with someone who is certifiable? :areyoucra

 

[averageJOE]

Let's approach this story from a different angle and talk about how Noah and his family populated the entire earth. The whole silly Flood story - SkepticReport

If we create a simple formula using today’s population of ~6 billion, and figure in the starting population (8 individuals), and the starting time (4360 YBP), we get an annual growth rate of about 0.0047. Since that IS what happened, according to creationists, and it IS the only possible explanation for today’s human population then…

1. At Christ’s death there were only about half a million people in the whole world!
2. At the time the Israelites entered Canaan, (about 1180 BCE) we get a world population of 2024! By the time you divide that up between Egypt, Canaan, the rest of the world, and Israel, that leaves maybe 6 or 7 people for the Israelite army!
3. If we go back to the time that the Jews were expelled from Egypt, in 1560 BCE, we get a world population of only 340 people!
4. In 2300 BCE there were only about 10 people on Earth! How did fewer than a dozen people build the pyramids?

We are talking about rapid human reproduction here! And this is all assuming not a single baby had a birth defect that prevented it from reproducing. Also, families would not have been able to stay together very long. From one generation to the next they would have to constantly pick up and leave.

 

[Bware]

Let's approach this story from a different angle and talk about how Noah and his family populated the entire earth. The whole silly Flood story - SkepticReport


If we create a simple formula using today’s population of ~6 billion, and figure in the starting population (8 individuals), and the starting time (4360 YBP), we get an annual growth rate of about 0.0047. Since that IS what happened, according to creationists, and it IS the only possible explanation for today’s human population then…

1. At Christ’s death there were only about half a million people in the whole world!
2. At the time the Israelites entered Canaan, (about 1180 BCE) we get a world population of 2024! By the time you divide that up between Egypt, Canaan, the rest of the world, and Israel, that leaves maybe 6 or 7 people for the Israelite army!
3. If we go back to the time that the Jews were expelled from Egypt, in 1560 BCE, we get a world population of only 340 people!
4. In 2300 BCE there were only about 10 people on Earth! How did fewer than a dozen people build the pyramids?

We are talking about rapid human reproduction here! And this is all assuming not a single baby had a birth defect that prevented it from reproducing. Also, families would not have been able to stay together very long. From one generation to the next they would have to constantly pick up and leave.

You know this is a really good point. I don't think anyone has mentioned this point yet. I have beat the wooden boat thing to death, that's for sure.
There is a perfectly good explanation for the rapid repopulation of the earth though you know. Cloning. I mean think about it, Noah and god were buddies, how else was he supposed to repopulate the earth quick enough to make it look like no flood ever happened? How else was he supposed to make people doubt? I mean Noah and God wouldn't want people to actually BELIEVE in God, he had to make them question (you know free will and all). This would explain why we can't find ANY evidence AT ALL of the WWF. It's because Godhidit.

 

[averageJOE]

You know this is a really good point. I don't think anyone has mentioned this point yet. I have beat the wooden boat thing to death, that's for sure.
There is a perfectly good explanation for the rapid repopulation of the earth though you know. Cloning. I mean think about it, Noah and god were buddies, how else was he supposed to repopulate the earth quick enough to make it look like no flood ever happened? How else was he supposed to make people doubt? I mean Noah and God wouldn't want people to actually BELIEVE in God, he had to make them question (you know free will and all). This would explain why we can't find ANY evidence AT ALL of the WWF. It's because Godhidit.

Yeah, cloning would be the only logical answer. But I'd like to hear some religious explainations on this subjuct. We've talked about the ark, the earth, the animals, the water, now I think it would be cool to talk about this.