That Boat Don't Float!!

[SkyWriting]

So the Ark had no keel, because there is no keel mentioned.But the animals hibernated, even if hibernation is not mentioned.
Some people might call that "making up stuff".

They can say that all right.

 

[Catherineanne]

This forum IS for Scientific discussion of Christian topics so your comments are noted to be in opposition to the forums intention.

Excuse me if I do not lose any sleep over that comment.

It is no surprise that you bring the same degree of intellectual rigour to your analysis of my posts that you bring to the Bible.

In other words, you start from what is written, and then make up anything that happens to suit your own particular agenda, and then condemn me not for what is written, but for your interpretation. You then pronounce judgement from on high on the basis of your own personal opinion rather than on what is evidenced.

The best I can say about this approach is that you are at least consistent.

 

[Catherineanne]

Originally Posted by Catherineanne

It is as nonsensical as trying to argue what kind of wood the Greeks used to construct their horse, whether they used screws, nails or wood glue, and whether they varnished it when they had finished. None of that matters.
​

Seems you didn't read what this discussion is about either. Both the OP or the passage referred to.
The kind of wood used is listed, as is the finishing process used on the wood.
Because this thread is about the Bible and the story of the Ark,
it matters. Even when you feel, deep in your heart, it doesn't.

My reference is to Homer's Iliad. Perhaps you have not heard of it?

 

[SkyWriting]

As for the literal reading of the bible in q here, literal reading is the way to avoid knowing what it really means. "god is a rock" does not mean limestone, diorite, fledspar of gneiss. Or any other kind of rock.

It may mean that. I couldn't find your example quote that you used to illustrated your point. There IS a process for understanding what a word means and pulling it out of it's context is opposite that prodedure.

its particularly tough to do literal reading without even knowing what the words themselves mean. English is my second language, so maybe that is why i take its usage and meaning so seriously.

A person who keeps misusing a word, like, say "disingenuous" even after being told it makes no sense as he used it is obviously on thin ice trying to interpret what each word in the bible literally means.

I only used it once. Thanks for your concern. My stand is the normal process for interpretation. To use the MOST literal interpretation as the default understanding, until contextual clues indicate otherwise.

For example, if a passage is located in a passage of poetry, one can expect non-literal usage of words. If a passage is located in a documentary, or descriptive passage, paragraph, or book, then the literal interpretation is the default.
If the reading is" I was just up on that hill and talked to God. God is a rock."
Then the literal understanding is best.
If the passage is " I really like God. God is a Rock." Then an emotional interpretation MAY be better than the literal version. Still, the literal version may likely offer insight in the future and should not be discarded out of hand.

 

[SkyWriting]

My reference is to Homer's Iliad. Perhaps you have not heard of it?

There are 100 references to water in the Iliad.
But he never mentions Noah or the Ark.

 

[Catherineanne]

There are 100 references to water in the Iliad.
But he never mentions Noah or the Ark.

And as we listen very carefully, the sound of a 747 is heard in the sky, far above SWs head.

 

[SkyWriting]

1. yes, i believe you dont know any historical or other kind of geology. others do; there are many good indicators of where sea level was at different times, and also for the size of the mountains.

A. I don't know when the Flood occurred.

2. there was no flood to melt ice layers. there certainly is no evidence to be found of such a flood. not in the ice, not nowhere. none. the work with ice cores is not easy; neither is going to the moon, or heart surgery. Being hard doesnt make it wrong.

The ice on greenland btw is about 2 miles thick, antarctica thicker. so your "flood" would have had to be deeper than that.

If there was a flood tomorrow, the water would have to be 2 miles deep.

5 "we know" this? Who are we and how can you possibly claim to "know"?
( little weird, alleging that science oversteps from conjecture to stating facts, when you can say something like "we know" based on nothing.)

We "know" this about the story under discussion.
I don't "Know" any of the facts in this story in the scientific sense just as I don't "Know" you in the Biblical sense.

 

[SkyWriting]

...Forget the theology, forget the dogma, forget the divisions. THIS is the only gospel that matters...

“We can truly care for a needy world with the things we throw away.” That simple statement sums up the vision of Pastor Wendell Mettey, who founded Matthew 25: Ministries

I can find no statements that suggest he agrees with your exclusion of the rest of the Gospels. Very likely, he'd disagree.

 

[Catherineanne]

“We can truly care for a needy world with the things we throw away.” That simple statement sums up the vision of Pastor Wendell Mettey, who founded Matthew 25: Ministries

I can find no statements that suggest he agrees with your exclusion of the rest of the Gospels. Very likely, he'd disagree.

Perhaps you did not look closely enough at who these good people are. They are not excluding anything, and neither am I. They are fulfilling the gospel in fulfilling Matthew 25.

Who is Matthew 25: Ministries?
M25M is a non-denominational, ecumenical, interfaith ministry which provides humanitarian aid to those in need regardless of their religious tradition or political persuasion.

'The gospel' is not the same as 'the Gospels'.

I excluded nothing; I gave a passage from Matthew which summarises the whole gospel.

Here is the way Christ himself explains it in Matthew 22:

Jesus replied, "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

In saying this, he does not exclude the rest of Torah; he summarises it, to show us what really matters.

 

[Tomatoman]

Ca:

Jesus replied, "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment.

I've never understood this. Why should God care what we think of him? Why the hell would he care whether we thought he existed or not? And why on earth would he punish people for not believing in him. It's ridiculous. Especially as he has given us precisely zero evidence of his existence. Peculiar sort of god. Sounds more like an insecure human prone to tantrums, don't you think?

If there is a god it is obvious that he never made any such commandment. He would be bigger than that.

 

[Catherineanne]

Ca:


I've never understood this. Why should God care what we think of him? Why the hell would he care whether we thought he existed or not? And why on earth would he punish people for not believing in him. It's ridiculous. Especially as he has given us precisely zero evidence of his existence. Peculiar sort of god. Sounds more like an insecure human prone to tantrums, don't you think?

If there is a god it is obvious that he never made any such commandment. He would be bigger than that.

If you read that commandment in the light of Matthew 25 it might become clearer. Our love for God is expressed by our love for those around us; it is not some sterile kind of worship to a supreme Narcissist, but an expression of unity with our brothers and sisters.

It actually makes no difference to God whether we love him or not. It makes a difference to us.

 

[Tomatoman]

OK, that's fair enough.

 

[SkyWriting]

And as we listen very carefully, the sound of a 747 is heard in the sky, far above SWs head.

I was thinking you were high & tripping. Yes, have a nice flight. Our conversations are over.

 

[SkyWriting]

And yet, creationists want me to believe that a 450 ft. (minimum)* vessel of ALL wood construction (no steel bracings, etc. like in the Wyoming) was able to withstand a storm of 40 days and then remain at sea for almost a year, manned by only eight people, without the efficient pumps of the turn of the century, caulked with nothing more than "pitch inside and out".

Not to mention the overwhelming necessity of the limited crew to feed and water thousands of animals and to muck out thousands of pens (and then carry the result of the mucking up two decks in order to throw it overboard). When was there time for pumping (24 hours a day if the above is any indication) and the constant re-caulking in a futile attempt to stem the flow.
-
*And I got that 450 minimum figure from numerous sources, including a number of different creationist ones. It was said to be 300 cubits, and depending on which cubit you use, the length ranges from 450 feet to over 500 feet.

There is no Storm in the story.
There was no leaking in the story.
There is no wind in the story.
It's doesn't say the animals were awake for the voyage or that food was stored on board for the voyage or that the humans needed to do anything.

They didn't even close the door behind themselves after they got in.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

There is no Storm in the story.
There was no leaking in the story.
There is no wind in the story.
It's doesn't say the animals were awake for the voyage or that food was stored on board for the voyage or that the humans needed to do anything.

They didn't even close the door behind themselves after they got in.

So the fountains of the great deep opened without making any waves in water that gushed out of them. Maybe, but according the story there was wind.
Genesis 8

1 And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged.
2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained.

 

[LittleNipper]

Ca:


I've never understood this. Why should God care what we think of him? Why the hell would he care whether we thought he existed or not? And why on earth would he punish people for not believing in him. It's ridiculous. Especially as he has given us precisely zero evidence of his existence. Peculiar sort of god. Sounds more like an insecure human prone to tantrums, don't you think?

If there is a god it is obvious that he never made any such commandment. He would be bigger than that.

I exist, and so GOD must exist, because Adam was created in GOD's likeness. GOD doesn't punish people because they area threat to HIM but because wicked people are a threat to HIS chosen. When one dies he either goes to be with GOD or he gets the wish and is placed to exist by himself.

 

[Hespera]

I exist, and so GOD must exist, because Adam was created in GOD's likeness. GOD doesn't punish people because they area threat to HIM but because wicked people are a threat to HIS chosen. When one dies he either goes to be with GOD or he gets the wish and is placed to exist by himself.

Well! We have all heard of "I think therefore i am." But now we have
"I exist therefore God exists".

How could Descartes have missed that?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Well! We have all heard of "I think therefore i am." But now we have
"I exist therefore God exists".

How could Descartes have missed that?

Decartes was humble enough to not make God dependant on himself.

 

[Orogeny]

I exist, and so GOD must exist

By this logic, when you die, god will no longer exist. Again following your logic, god did not exist before you were conceived, which means that god, and the universe, are only as old as the length of time since your conception. You've essentially stated that god's existance is wholy reliant on you, from which follows the conclusion that you are in fact god. Care to retract?

 

[SkyWriting]

So the fountains of the great deep opened without making any waves in water that gushed out of them. Maybe, but according the story there was wind.
Genesis 8

Yaah.....IF there was any explosive outpouring of water, under water, it might hardly be noticed on the surface. Of the 196 million square miles, the Ark sat on only one of them and may have avoided any gushing. On the other hand, I can see a geyser opening under the Ark, lifting it 1000's of feet into the air, and it crashing down into splinters with animals impaled on sticks.

But the story just doesn't read that way.

I stand corrected.
There was wind. But according to the story, it didn't cause any waves that cracked the Ark in two, nor did it overturn the Ark in a huge gust and dump all the occupants out to drown.