Noah's Ark

[Obliquinaut]

At best the story is a morality tale. That still makes it "profitable to learn from". But it clearly was not meant to be taken literally. Most Christians seem to know this and it poses no problems for their personal beliefs.

I am fascinated at how anathema the idea of taking a story as an allegory is for some people. There really are some fantastically beautiful allegories in the Bible that when someone tries to turn them into literal "reportings" turns them into hilariously silly stories.

As an atheist there really are some things I can take from the Bible that is good and sometimes quite beautiful, but if someone tries to tell me that it really was a literal walkin' talkin' snake or a giant aircraft carrier full of animals a couple thousand years ago it makes it seem silly.

 

[Obliquinaut]

Sounds again like someone doesn't believe the CREATOR YHWH.

The minute I see some stuff from the actual Creator of the Universe (as opposed to say, what some dude somewhere WROTE claiming it is the word of the Creator of the Universe) then we'll be onto something!

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

The minute I see some stuff from the actual Creator of the Universe (as opposed to say, what some dude somewhere WROTE claiming it is the word of the Creator of the Universe) then we'll be onto something!

Don't tell a lie now.

He already answered you in His Word.

YHWH says you have no excuse, period. (neither does nay, anyone, anywhere) ...

 

[Kenny'sID]

Oh please. You can't both act as if you understand the sciences and then play ignorant when convenient. A mark that shows massive amounts of flowing water. We have evidence of smaller older floods. A worldwide flood would have "overwritten" the record

The marine fossils are that mark, and nothing you said there is good reason to believe it is not. You really are disappointing me here. I expected your stuff to fall apart before we even started this but I had no idea it was going to be this bad.

Testable? what testable, open your eyes an look.

No pretending, try again.

Not sure why you're afraid to answer the question but you have made it clear you are.

If you don't have a testable hypothesis by definition you do not have evidence.

Does "seeing" marine fossils high in mountains meet that criteria. I mean what other test do you need? you aren't doing well at all here if you think I'm going to allow the term "testable" to dismiss important evidence at your convenience.

Fine, prove me wrong.

Prove me wrong.

And I explained why that was wrong. Now you are just repeating refuted claims. If you did not understand you should have asked politely and properly.

You haven't refuted anything, it's all in your mind. If your argument was going to go this badly you should have at least had the good graces to bow out and not waste the readers time. In doing so you would have garnered a lot more respect than you are losing with these pathetic "because I say I'm right and your wrong" way of dealing with this.

When you have something substantial that there is no reasonable argument against, let me know, otherwise, well, does "waste of time" ring a bell?

 

[Kenny'sID]

he minute I see some stuff from the actual Creator of the Universe (as opposed to say, what some dude somewhere WROTE claiming it is the word of the Creator of the Universe) then we'll be onto something!

At the very least it's a reasonable assumption...beats the heck out of all from nothing for no reason... we all just sort of came into being.


I'd be embarrassed to claim the latter.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

The marine fossils are that mark, and nothing you said there is good reason to believe it is not. You really are disappointing me here. I expected your stuff to fall apart before we even started this but I had no idea it was going to be this bad.

The marine evidence substantiates the flood entirely, world wide.

Expecting anyone who denies the flood to have anything credible is a set up for being disappointed - in the meetings of believers following Jesus, such talk is not even permitted ot be entertained, as there is no substance to it, and it only fosters arguments and mindless disputes like the debates over geneologies YHWH warns NOT to engage in, period, because they have no good effect, no good results.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Expecting anyone who denies the flood to have anything credible is a set up for being disappointed

No kidding, and I had no idea just how disappointing I would be with the contrary argument here...I guess with all the build up I expected something at least...oh well.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sounds like someone doesn't believe the CREATOR YHWH.

Even when I was a Christian I did not take the Genesis stories seriously.

Or were you talking about AV?

 

[Obliquinaut]

At the very least it's a reasonable assumption...beats the heck out of all from nothing for no reason... we all just sort of came into being.

Why?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The marine evidence substantiates the flood entirely, world wide.

Expecting anyone who denies the flood to have anything credible is a set up for being disappointed - in the meetings of believers following Jesus, such talk is not even permitted ot be entertained, as there is no substance to it, and it only fosters arguments and mindless disputes like the debates over geneologies YHWH warns NOT to engage in, period, because they have no good effect, no good results.

Sorry but they do the opposite.

You need to do more than merely scratch the surface. If the fossils were from life at the time of the flood there would have been only one very thin layer of fossils. That is not what we see.

And please, if anyone is in for a surprise it is the literalists. Seriously do you believe that God made the world or not? If you believe that he was ultimately responsible then you should pay attention to what the world tells us.

I always thought that it was the height of blasphemy when creationists try to tell God how he made the world.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No kidding, and I had no idea just how disappointing I would be with the contrary argument here...I guess with all the build up I expected something at least...oh well.

But it seems that way only because you insulate yourself from learning.

You make gross errors and then ignore the corrections. Putting your fingers in your ears and shouting does not mean that you won the debate.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Even when I was a Christian I did not take the Genesis stories seriously.

That only shows that you "had the form of religion, but denied the power thereof"... i.e. not in truth , but only for show.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Sorry but they do the opposite.

Sorry is right.
Everything does provide proof/ evidence of the worldwide flood,

exactly as YHWH says it happened.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sounds again like someone doesn't believe the CREATOR YHWH.

One does not have to take the parts of the Bible that are obviously not meant to be read literally as if it happened. Do you not understand the concept of a morality tale? Why do you insist on telling God how he made the world?

 

[Obliquinaut]

Does "seeing" marine fossils high in mountains meet that criteria.

Seeing fossils high up in a mountain in an OCEANIC LAYER indicates to me that that rock was once under the ocean, NOT that the ocean rose up over the rock. Do you think the animals just "burrowed into" solid rock when the water got high?

Or do you think that once sediment was deposited on the top of some high mountain and the water went away it just magically turned into solid rock? How does that work?

When you have something substantial that there is no reasonable argument against, let me know, otherwise, well, does "waste of time" ring a bell?

Why not trust the fruits of the science that gives you all the little metals in that computer you typed on? Hint: it's old-earth geology. It's the same geology that rose from the ashes of the former "Noachian Flood" geology that was abandoned by geologists about 3 centuries ago.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That only shows that you "had the form of religion, but denied the power thereof"... i.e. not in truth , but only for show.

Whoa! That is crossing the line here. You cannot say whether I was a true Christian or not any more than I can say whether you are a true Christian or not right now.

There is no "denying the power" when one can see that the world, which was supposedly made by God, tells us a different story than the Bible does.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sorry is right.
Everything does provide proof/ evidence of the worldwide flood,

exactly as YHWH says it happened.

Wrong again, and you, like other literalitsts, do not seem to understand that concept of evidence. You made an error. I pointed out your error. Did you understand the correction?

It is quite the opposite. All of the sciences tell us how there never was a worldwide flood. You can't just barely scratch the surface and jump to conclusions. You need to look at all of the evidence out there.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you believe that he was ultimately responsible then you should pay attention to what the world tells us.

I'll pass.

If what the world tells us isn't what the Bible tells us, the world is lying.

The world seems to keep telling us she's on the brink of cancelling our next birthday if we don't toe the line.

This is in contradiction to what the Bible tells us.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'll pass.

If what the world tells us isn't what the Bible tells us, the world is lying.

Or, and this is much more likely, you are not reading the Bible correctly. You do not realize it, but since in your beliefs God made the world you just called God a liar.

The world seems to keep telling us she's on the brink of cancelling our next birthday if we don't toe the line.

Nope, that is not the case. You are misunderstanding the writings of others at best.

This is in contradiction to what the Bible tells us.

Well, at least the Bible may be right in that. I would like to know where you got your last claim came from.

 

[AV1611VET]

Or, and this is much more likely, you are not reading the Bible correctly.

Your world is nothing more than a crystal ball.

Ask your crystal ball how we got our moon.