New series by Aron Ra: Why there was no Noachian Flood

[Subduction Zone]

How's de Nile this time a year?

Oh my, the irony. The King of de Nile askes me how his river is

This is why I don't think you're qualified to speak for Aron Ra.

Who said that I was speaking for Aron? We are simply trying to discuss the video which shows why meteorology alone refutes your flood myth

You put up a dynamite video of his, but you defend rebuttals with your own style of posting.

There have been no rebuttals. Haven't you been paying attention? You can't defend a myth by using a myth. that is all that has happened do far by your side.

I'd rather see what Mr. Ra has to say.

Then post on his video the way that you said that you would. Don't discuss it here. Aron has better things to do.

This thread isn't about you.

Then why are you the only one that is trying to make it about me? Stick to the subject at hand please.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What are his main points?

Fair question. This video dealt largely with only where the water would have to have come from. Even conservatively the flood would have required another ocean of water. It showed how water from any of the creationist sources would have more than cooked Noah and family. Underground water would come out as superheated steam. Anything from space would have become steam on impact. That is a good enough starting point right there.

 

[AV1611VET]

That is a good enough starting point right there.

Well ... of course!

Start with the points science can pwn.

Let's see science pwn this scenario:

This 'other ocean of water' arrives as a giant ice cube or snowball.

It starts orbiting the earth in a concentric orbit, getting lower and lower, while melting and raining water on it.

Of course, I'm sure you'll spark that an object in a concentric downward spiral would lose mass and therefore lose its eccentricity and should actually start to spiral outward.

But remember, this ice cube has been programmed to follow instructions.

Go.

Let's see your best science argue this scenario.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Let me repeat the point in a simple version:

Genesis explains the universe.
Noah's Flood explains the earth.
The Gospel explains individual human being.

I have no idea why did you pull the Gospel into this thread.

That really didn't answer my question.

You made the claim that Genesis is the most important book in the Bible in regards to the universe and the earth. I addressed that Jesus is more important.

Because the Gospel isn't about "individual human beings", it's about the Incarnation of the Logos, God made man, for our salvation--for the salvation of the whole world, and the redemption and renewal of all creation. The Gospel isn't about individual souls going to heaven when we die, it is about God encountering His creation in the Hypostatic Union of God and Man in the Person of Jesus, overcoming the powers of sin, death, hell, and the devil and in Him and by Him bringing redemption and restoration to the entirety of God's creation. The Christian hope is the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting in the Age to Come--that life everlasting in the Age to Come is right here on terra firma, Earth.

That's why I asked you to explain what you think the Gospel is, because it seems to me that you can't know what it is when you think Genesis is more important than the Story of Jesus and what Jesus has done.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Subduction Zone]

The usual bologna:

1. too many miracles required to orchestrate the Flood
2. earth would boil, Ark would burn
3. atmospheric pressure prevents a water canopy
4. Mount Ararat is a volcano
5. yadda yadda

He talks about how he contemplated doing a video on the Flood before, but assumed adults were smart enough to realize the Flood couldn't happen as documented.

But someone wrote a book detailing four different ways the Flood could have occurred scientifically, and he shoots down each method equally scientifically.

And for that, he gets kudos from me.

He needs Jesus Christ, and I pray he finds Him before it's too late.

How was anything in the video bologna at all? You can't even say when your version of God quite using magic. The flood fails on all levels. It fails scientifically. It fails morally. It fails logically. Why should anyone believe the flood myth?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well ... of course!

Start with the points science can pwn.

Let's see science pwn this scenario:

This 'other ocean of water' arrives as a giant ice cube or snowball.

It starts orbiting the earth in a concentric orbit, getting lower and lower, while melting and raining water on it.

Of course, I'm sure you'll spark that an object in a concentric downward spiral would lose mass and therefore lose its eccentricity and should actually start to spiral outward.

But remember, this ice cube has been programmed to follow instructions.

Go.

Let's see your best science argue this scenario.

First orbits don't work that way. Second there is still so much energy in that ice that and it would still cook Noah and company even with your scenario. You seem to have no idea at all how much energy it takes to put an object into orbit. Just as much energy would be released when it came back down.[/QUOTE]

 

[AV1611VET]

How was anything in the video bologna at all?

I am not going to rehash points I made against the video with you.

Especially if I think Aron Ra would address them in a more mature manner.

I will, however, acquiesce and make this one point over, just to see how you respond:

For the second time, this video addresses the earth as having continents ... plural ... more than one; and Noah lived thousands of miles away from Mesopotamia -- on the same continent.

That continent can be called Pangaea, Godwana, or whatever.

The Bible calls it Eden.

There -- I actually addressed two of my previous points.

Again though, I don't think you're qualified to answer my rebuttals.

 

[AV1611VET]

First orbits don't work that way.

No kidding!?

There are a lot of things in the Bible that "don't work that way."

We call them miracles.

Just out of curiosity, how much energy would be required to Rapture every Christian around the globe?

I realize bodies don't "work that way" and suddenly ascend skyward ... but humor me.

(Better yet, I think I'll make it into a challenge thread to see if science can even touch something that monumental.)

Mr. Ra liked talking about jewels in that video.

Do you?

 

[Speedwell]

I am not going to rehash points I made against the video with you.

Especially if I think Aron Ra would address them in a more mature manner.

I will, however, acquiesce and make this one point over, just to see how you respond:

For the second time, this video addresses the earth as having continents ... plural ... more than one; and Noah lived thousands of miles away from Mesopotamia -- on the same continent.

That continent can be called Pangaea, Godwana, or whatever.

The Bible calls it Eden.

There -- I actually addressed two of my previous points.

Again though, I don't think you're qualified to answer my rebuttals.

very good, but your answer raises some questions which you should be able to address. According to your scenario, the breaking up of Pangaea into our present continents took place during a few weeks during 2400 BC instead of over a period of 175 million years as conventional geologists believe. Where did the energy come from for this rapid movement? Why is there no evidence of it?

 

[AV1611VET]

very good, but your answer raises some questions which you should be able to address. According to your scenario, the breaking up of Pangaea into our present continents took place during a few weeks during 2400 BC instead of over a period of 175 million years as conventional geologists believe. Where did the energy come from for this rapid movement? Why is there no evidence of it?

-- I give up.

This is hopeless.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am not going to rehash points I made against the video with you.

You made no points. So that might be a wise move on your part for once.

Especially if I think Aron Ra would address them in a more mature manner.

Once again, if anyone has not been mature it has been you. You keep making promises but you never seem to keep them.

I will, however, acquiesce and make this one point over, just to see how you respond:

For the second time, this video addresses the earth as having continents ... plural ... more than one; and Noah lived thousands of miles away from Mesopotamia -- on the same continent.

Right, we know that the Earth has had the same continents for many millions of years. If you did not notice this is a series. He will deal with that nonsense in another video. This one concentrated on meteorology.

That continent can be called Pangaea, Godwana, or whatever.

Wrong again, see above.

The Bible calls it Eden.

And that is only your interpretation of the Bible, it is worth nothing in a debate. You need evidence, not your personal prejudices if you want to debate here.

There -- I actually addressed two of my previous points.

Again though, I don't think you're qualified to answer my rebuttals.

Please, you made no rebuttals. Why do you keep making false claims? Now if you could ask questions politely and properly they will be answered.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No kidding!?

There are a lot of things in the Bible that "don't work that way."

We call them miracles.

Yes, a word synonymous with magic. Also the number and extent of miracles drops with mans ability to observe and record them. That should tell you something about them.

Just out of curiosity, how much energy would be required to Rapture every Christian around the globe?

Improper question Try again.

 

[Strathos]

I think you guys are talking past each other. Let me try to cut straight to the heart of the matter.

Yes, you can handwave any scientific objections to a global flood by invoking divine intervention. However, this ignores two important points:

1. Many creationists (who are presumably the ones the video is meant to refute) do not resort to this, and instead try to claim the flood was scientifically and physically possible according to the known laws of physics, and claim it left tangible geological evidence behind.

2. For many of us, the objection to the global flood claim is not based on what we believe God could or could not do, but rather what He would or would not do. I don't believe in a lying God, such as one who would write an entire false history into the very fabric of His creation.

 

[juvenissun]

Because the Gospel isn't about "individual human beings", it's about the Incarnation of the Logos, God made man, for our salvation--for the salvation of the whole world, and the redemption and renewal of all creation.

No. The Gospel only saves people. It does not save the earth and the universe. It does not even save animals.

 

[AV1611VET]

At 02:40 Mr. Ra says the Flood defies the laws of physics and is therefore physically impossible!

 

[Subduction Zone]

At 02:40 Mr. Ra says the Flood defies the laws of physics and is therefore physically impossible!

Do you think that you scored some sort of point there?

The problem with the supposed endless miracles that you believe in still does not explain the evidence. The evidence clearly says that there was no flood. And since your version of God would have had to create that evidence then you are in effect calling God a liar.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you think that you scored some sort of point there?

Yes.

The problem with the supposed endless miracles that you believe in still does not explain the evidence.

What evidence?

You mean the White Cliffs of Dover? meandering rivers?

The evidence clearly says that there was no flood.

You need evidence to tell you that?

I thought Mr. Ra said it best when he made it plain that the Flood would have been physically impossible.

He saying it couldn't happen, even if it wanted to; whereas you're saying it didn't happen because you don't see evidence for it.

And since your version of God would have had to create that evidence then you are in effect calling God a liar.

What evidence?

The White Cliffs of Dover that He swept up during cleanup? the meandering rivers He ordered to etch a serpentine design in the landscape?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes.

You didn't.

What evidence?

I can see from the rest of your post that evidence is a concept that you do not understand.

You mean the White Cliffs of Dover? meandering rivers?You need evidence to tell you that?

Those are all evidence that tell us that no flood occurred.

I thought Mr. Ra said it best when he made it plain that the Flood would have been physically impossible.

Correct, it is physically impossible. Some creationists, and I know that you don't like them, try to claim that it was. Now they are obviously wrong, but they realized one thing that you don't. You are in effect calling God a liar.

He saying it couldn't happen, even if it wanted to; whereas you're saying it didn't happen because you don't see evidence for it.What evidence?

I see that your reading comprehension problems are rising up again. We are both saying the same thing.

The White Cliffs of Dover that He swept up during cleanup? the meandering rivers He ordered to etch a serpentine design in the landscape?

Why on Earth would he "sweep up? Why would he etch false patterns into rivers? What we see tells us that there was no food. In fact the Bible even tells us that there was no flood when it says that God is not the creator of confusion. You are stating that God went out of his way to confuse people. Again, in effect calling him a liar.


Other creationists can see that. That is why they are desperate to explain the flood. And it can't be done.

 

[AV1611VET]

We are both saying the same thing.

No, you're not.

He's at the front of the bus saying the Flood could not occur; you're at the back of the bus saying the Flood did not occur.

Do you see the difference?

Why on Earth would he "sweep up?

What reason did I give?

"Clean up! Aisle three!"

(That's "three" -- as in third planet from the sun. Get it?)

Why would he etch false patterns into rivers?

He didn't etch false patterns into rivers.

He ordered a second ocean of water to leave the earth at various "siphoning points" along predetermined paths, and in so doing, it etched serpentine paths in the earth, exposing Satan as the culprit.

What we see tells us that there was no food.

It's what you don't see that counts when discussing a global flood, orchestrated by a miracle.

In fact the Bible even tells us that there was no flood when it says that God is not the creator of confusion.

Yes, and that tells me where your confusion is coming from.

You are stating that God went out of his way to confuse people.

Meandering rivers say differently.

Again, in effect calling him a liar.

You're entitled to your opinion.

Other creationists can see that. That is why they are desperate to explain the flood.

The Flood was already explained in Writing.

Complete with names and time stamps.

And it can't be done.

Ya ... I think the word Aron used was "impossible."

The Flood couldn't be done on its own.

It needed outside help.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, you're not.

He's at the front of the bus saying the Flood could not occur; you're at the back of the bus saying the Flood did not occur.

Do you see the difference?

There is none. The result is the same, that is what matters.

What reason did I give?

"Clean up! Aisle three!"

(That's "three" -- as in third planet from the sun. Get it?)

So you are admitting utter failure. You have no reason either biblical nor scientific. In other words it didn't happen.

He didn't etch false patterns into rivers.

Make up your mind. You said that he did. You may not have understood it when you said it, but that is what you did.

He ordered a second ocean of water to leave the earth at various "siphoning points" along predetermined paths, and in so doing, it etched serpentine paths in the earth, exposing Satan as the culprit.

Sorry, that is pure make believe nonsense that is not supported by either the Bible or evidence again. So once again you are in effect calling God a liar by doing so.

It's what you don't see that counts when discussing a global flood, orchestrated by a miracle.

Try again in English.

Yes, and that tells me where your confusion is coming from.

Please don't make false claims about me. You and I both know that I am not the confused one here. You keep trying to claim that not only is God a liar, but that he is the author of confusion too.

Meandering rivers say differently.

Nope, if anything meandering rivers tell us that there was no flood. See you are the confused one here.

You're entitled to your opinion.

Wrong again. I can support my claims it is more than apparent that you cannot.

The Flood was already explained in Writing.

No, that is merely tribal lore and nothing more.

Complete with names and time stamps.

Nope, now you are relying on the failed work of Ussher.

Ya ... I think the word Aron used was "impossible."

The Flood couldn't be done on its own.

It needed outside help.

The Flood simply did not happen. It did not "need" any help if the even was fictional in the first place.