Noahs Ark

[Kilgore Trout]

"I will continue to post them until flood proponents stop ignoring them."

The definition of insanity is.......

"such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility"

Once again - the dictionary is a valuable resource when it comes to defining words.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

How does one manage to spew such persistently petty and inane polemic? Given ...

Welcome to "Paths Less Taken - NOAA at the Ends of the Earth"
​

Shall we now ridicule the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration? After all: "If they new the earth was spherical they'd know it has no end." Good grief! :slap:

Wow, Jay made a funny.:no:

 

[sandy whitelinger]

"such unsoundness of mind or lack of understanding as prevents one from having the mental capacity required by law to enter into a particular relationship, status, or transaction or as removes one from criminal or civil responsibility"

Once again - the dictionary is a valuable resource when it comes to defining words.

So is Google Einstein

You also forgot this part: "extreme folly or unreasonableness."

 

[Kilgore Trout]

So is Google Einstein

That's just stubborness, not insanity. Einstein was a theoretical physicist, not a linguist.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

You would think so but they didn't....and I answered these in a bunch of posts.....

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/science-vs-religion/80788-noahs-ark-38.html#post1686261

And, as I have pointed out, we have references like these;

Daniel 4:11
Upon my bed this is what I saw; there was a tree at the center of the earth, and its height was great. The tree grew great and strong, its top reached to heaven, and it was visible to the ends of the whole earth.

Isaiah 40:22
he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in

If they are under the impression the whole earth was spherical then how would a tent cover it? No they saw their world in a 360 degree view. One can see how their god could spread his tent over the whole circle if you see in a 360 degree world view.

Job 38:13
That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?

What "ends of the earth"? If they new the earth was spherical they'd know it has no end. How do you shake one off or out of the earth unless you assume it's flat?

Job 11:9
Its measure is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea.

Deu 13:7
Any of the gods of the peoples that are around you, whether near you or far away from you, from one end of the earth to the other

Josh 10:12-13
On the day when the LORD gave the Amorites over to the Israelites, Joshua spoke to the LORD; and he said in the sight of Israel, "Sun, stand still at Gibeon, and Moon, in the valley of Aijalon." And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in midheaven, and did not hurry to set for about a whole day.

The verse above is a clear sign the people in your bible didn't know what they were talking about. The thought was that the earth was the center of the universe and the sun and moon revolved around it. Obviously they were in error.

Please see previous post #831.

I think you already know that the 4th chapter of Daniel deals with a dream (vs 5) that the king had as visions in his head (verse 10) in his bed. Daniel gives the interpretation starting at verse 20.

Ends or extremities of the earth can refer to directions of North, East, West, South.

Isaiah 40:22 (40:18-24) is showing how foolish to make idols that any idol could be a fitting representation of God who holds sway over the heavens. How does God 'spread out the heavens' but in the sense that inside this figurative 'tent' dwells the sun from whose light all can benefit.

Job 38:13 (38:12-18) Doesn't God ask Job what effect light has on the day?
Can any human command or control night or daylight? Morning light holds sway on the ends of the earth in that light covers in all directions (NEWS) that it touches. At Job (24:13-17) it was already brought to our attention that criminals may act under cover of darkness but dawn's light helps expose or disperse them. So, the wicked are shaken out by the morning's light.
In mentioning the future, Proverbs (2:21,22) by saying 'cut off' and 'rooted out' shows removal of the wicked while the upright 'remain' on earth. In the end the wicked will not inhabit earth as Proverbs (10:30) says, but be destroyed as Psalm (92:7) says forever.

Job 11:9 starting at verse 7 Zophar asks Job questions. Can you find out the deep things of God? Doesn't verse 9 indicate how deep God's measure?

Deut 13:7 (13:6-9) earth can also be land. From one end of the land to the other end they were not to violate God's principle about false gods no matter where on earth. NEWS. (Psalm 37:11,29)

Joshua 10:12,13 How could such a phenomenon (sunlight and moonlight) be possible but that it could have appeared that way to the people. (They saw). As Creator, couldn't He refract the light's rays in such a way to make light continue to shine?

As Revelation is highly symbolic not everything in Scripture is literal.
None of Jesus parables or illustrations were literal.

If you said the sun rose this morning, wouldn't the person know what you meant? By context we can often see what the Bible writers meant.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Who are you talking to and what are you talking about?

Hello-flood. Didn't happen?

Reply to post # 829

 

[freethinker44]

Also, Jesus never existed, he was actually a metaphor for an increasing resentment to the roman government at the time.

Also, the flood never happened either, it was a metaphor for man flooding himself with evil and instead of dying out in a worldwide drowning which didn't happen, humans instead became more civilized.

The second coming of jesus is also just a metaphor, it really means that the panda bear will drive itself to extinction if they don't learn to have sex with eachother.

Also, job never existed, instead, his story was a metaphor for gambling addiction.

When the man let the city rape his daughters to protect the two angels visiting him... that happened, true story.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The daughters were not raped. Lot already know the men at his door wanted the male visitors.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Also, Jesus never existed, ...

Silly mantra ...

 

[freethinker44]

The daughters were not raped. Lot already know the men at his door wanted the male visitors.

I'm sorry you right, Lot only offered his daughters to be raped by the crowd of men, this is different from letting men rape your daughters. But then now that I look at it, it becomes clear that this also was a metaphor. Lot didn't offer his daughters to be raped, he offered to let them be figuratively raped or something. It's a metaphor for education.

 

[Autodidact]

Reply to post # 829

So you are completely unable to refute the many scientific impossibilities to a global flood less than 10,000 years ago?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Ends or extremities of the earth can refer to directions of North, East, West, South.

Like a compass right....?...:sarcastic

Joshua 10:12,13 How could such a phenomenon (sunlight and moonlight) be possible but that it could have appeared that way to the people. (They saw). As Creator, couldn't He refract the light's rays in such a way to make light continue to shine?

Nope....:sorry1:

 

[Autodidact]

The only possible refutation to these many scientific impossibilities is God-magic. But if God-magic is real, then science is impossible. If God can arbitrarily suspend and violate the laws of physics, it becomes impossible to do science, which is based on an expectation of predictability and uniformity in fundamental laws. URA: Do you think science is impossible?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

URA, I think Auto has offered you a False Dilemma. Either God is true or science is true. If science is true then God is false. If God is true then science is false. This is a logical fallacy.

 

[Autodidact]

Sandy is mistaken, I have not posed any such false dilemma, as I have not offered as one of the options the existence of God. On the contrary, I posit for the purpose of this thread that God does exist and created the world. The only question we are discussing is: how? Did he do it by indecipherable god-magic, or by natural means susceptible to science. Science is either possible, or it is not. Is it? What is your position?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Sandy is not mistaken. It is unreasonable to believe that there is a God who does not have the power to do miracles. To present this God as contradiction to science in which either science or God are only possible is indeed a false dilemma. Science follows the rules of the natural world. The God who is capable of miracles is not bound by the nautural world.

 

[Autodidact]

Sandy: Stop it. If you want to talk to me, then apologize for posting for the sole purpose of annoying me, and tell me you will not troll me in future. Otherwise I'm not interested in talking to people who are not sincerely engaged, but whose sole goal is to annoy.

I have given you many opportunities to demonstrate a shred of sincerity. Each time you have responded by posting with the goal of irritating. I'm not interested in more irritation. Leave me the heck alone.

If you want to respond to URA, feel free. But please stop talking to me.

I hate using ignore, but will do so if you don't stop stalking me.

And learn some manners.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Sandy: Stop it. If you want to talk to me, then apologize for posting for the sole purpose of annoying me, and tell me you will not troll me in future. Otherwise I'm not interested in talking to people who are not sincerely engaged, but whose sole goal is to annoy.

I have given you many opportunities to demonstrate a shred of sincerity. Each time you have responded by posting with the goal of irritating. I'm not interested in more irritation. Leave me the heck alone.

If you want to respond to URA, feel free. But please stop talking to me.

I hate using ignore, but will do so if you don't stop stalking me.

And learn some manners.

I'm sorry, if you are going to post a logical fallacy I'm going to comment on it. Put me on your ignore list since you just can't help but respond. I'll still point out what I believe to be faults in your posts.

As to trying to annoy you. First you are in charge of that, not me. Second I've pointed out on more than one occasion as to why I've followe dhte course I've followed (and you fail to recognize it) and continued to butt in where you we not invited. Yet you try and call me rude. As I have stated before, your sense of what is rude is screwed.

Stalking, how amusing.

 

[darkendless]

Sandy is not mistaken. It is unreasonable to believe that there is a God who does not have the power to do miracles. To present this God as contradiction to science in which either science or God are only possible is indeed a false dilemma. Science follows the rules of the natural world. The God who is capable of miracles is not bound by the nautural world.

If you believe in God, you don't have to participate in this thread because you already know God can do what he wants. Therefore, whats the point in even addressing science which, compared to God is relatively useless?

Its unreasonable to believe God can perform miracles because we never see such miracles. There are always better explanations but people are lazy and have faith, so they ignore common sense in order to attribute things to their God.

The problem with you Godly's is every time something is to hard to rationalize you instantly attribute it to God. I've seen it so often and it contributes to the reason why the human race is killing each other and slowly sarving. We're lazy, we think God is magically going to save us from laziness, and we think God is not bound by the laws of nature which is of course absurd because the laws of nature have never been broken.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Fallacy...Shmallaceeeeeee.....

Let's not get too far off track here.

For those that posit a WWF...What evidence to do have to show that the supposed event happened?

I have testable scientific data that suggest the event never happened and the claims made, no matter how detailed they were, were false.

Because you have people like this spewing junk science (fiction)
YouTube - proof of the great flood
:biglaugh: