Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bible Humper · 11-22-2002, 09:09 PM

Quote:

The word of God is evidence enough. The egyptian and chinese accounts of history were obviously wrong and so that is why they were punished in such a way. God was obviously setting an example.

TROLL ALERT!!!!!

Nobody panic, everybody just please evacuate in a calm and orderly manner. Thank you.

Frivolous · 11-22-2002, 09:13 PM

Hehe. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

I will now justify my beliefs by attempting to discredit the act of discrediting christianity.

Why can't you just leave us and our beliefs alone? Is it because you are feeling guilty because there really might be a Creator?

[ November 22, 2002: Message edited by: Frivolous ]

ashibaka · 11-22-2002, 09:15 PM

Quote:

The egyptian and chinese accounts of history were obviously wrong and so that is why they were punished in such a way.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[ November 22, 2002: Message edited by: ashibaka ]

Frivolous · 11-22-2002, 09:44 PM

I am prepared to go through the logistics of the Ark and also i support the bugs being on the Ark.

But alas, i must work now...
see all you happy chappies soon. And chappettes.

David Bowden · 11-22-2002, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Frivolous:
I will now justify my beliefs by attempting to discredit the act of discrediting christianity.

I'm sure I'm not the only one here who'd be mildly entertained to read how you'd "discredit" any act of discrediting. We might even do you the favor of debunking your discrediting...

Quote:

Originally posted by Frivolous:
Why can't you just leave us and our beliefs alone?

Among other reasons: Believers try to shape the society we live in according to their (often contradictory or unsupportable) convictions. Some of those convictions merely go against the grain of the values unbelievers espouse, and some we find so utterly repugnant that thorough and energetic debunking is warranted. In our more or less open society, we have the right, if not the responsibility, to apply criticism where it's due.

Quote:

Originally posted by Frivolous:
Is it because you are feeling guilty because there really might be a Creator?

Do theists argue on this board because they feel guilty because their creeds might actually be silly?

A reasonable case for a Creator would be welcome on these boards. We'd feel guilty only if we let any of the unreasonable ones go undebunked.

Last I checked, the score is...

Reasonable cases presented for a Creator: 0%
Unreasonable (and debunked) cases: 100%

You're of course welcome to try and break that embarassing losing streak for theism. Do you know God better than any of our previous resident apologists did?

-David

PS - something I posted to another Noah thread that never got addressed:

I'm still trying to figure out how humans could develop such diverse characteristics as we have now, just a few thousand years after the gene pool was supposedly cut down to only a handful of reproducing couples.

Evidence from the last couple of thousand years (artwork from East and South Asia and the Middle East; written descriptions in Greek and Roman historians and other documents) demonstrates that "racial characteristics" have remained fairly constant since recorded history began, implying that human looks don't change rapidly.

Yet, because distinct groups of traits, like those appearing in contemporary humans, were clearly present in ancient times, humanity must have become very diversified from the "look" of Noah and his family, and then "settled" into a variety of patterns - an incredible rate of change, and an astounding cessation of change - if the flood occured within the span indicated by traditional Bible timelines (less than 10,000 years ago).

So: How long ago did the flood happen? What color was Noah? When (and why) did the various different "looks" of humanity start to appear? Would you expect anthropologists to confirm your answers?

[ November 23, 2002: Message edited by: David Bowden ]

Biff the unclean · 11-22-2002, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Frivolous:
I am prepared to go through the logistics of the Ark and also i support the bugs being on the Ark.

Speaking of bugs, which one of Noahs crew had gonorrhea?
'Cause if they were all moral people favored by God, and gonorrhea can't exist outside of the human body why didn't the gonorrhea drown with the sinners?
There are numerous nasty venereal "bugs" that must have a human host to live. Who got to be their ark?

Frivolous · 11-23-2002, 03:18 AM

Quote:

Among other reasons: Believers try to shape the society we live in according to their (often contradictory or unsupportable) convictions. Some of those convictions merely go against the grain of the values unbelievers espouse, and some we find so utterly repugnant that thorough and energetic debunking is warranted. In our more or less open society, we have the right, if not the responsibility, to apply criticism where it's due.

i agree that some Christians are stubborn when exposed to new and foreign ideas, but not all of us impose our ideas on others.

I do not know God as well as some but i am prepared to break the losing streak for theists

With such a diverse and large amount of genetic information within each of our cells, i find it not that hard to believe that different characteristics we see today could have arised from recessive traits in Noah's genes. After all, so much of the human genome we know nothing about.

I dont know when the flood happened or what Noah looked like, nor do i think it necessary to be a core component of the story.

The artwork may not be accurate because how can we be sure that carbon dating is entirely correct, after all has anybody owned a piece of organic fibre long enough to prove it? Carbon dating is a very recent technique, and works on the basis of extrapolations that may not be entirely accurate

Daniel_AnglumTM · 11-23-2002, 03:55 AM

The reason that i dont even entertain Noahs Flood is because there is simply no extra-Biblical evidence of a world wide flood, and to make such a claim requires more than a few chapters in the most Mythical part of a Mythical book.

Kosh · 11-23-2002, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Frivolous:
I believe the biblical account of Noahs ark to be accurate if not entirely historically correct. I have read through some other debates on this and i feel that it would be inappropriate for me to just jump in, so i have started this new thread. Why is the Ark so hard to believe?

'Cuz even Amie couldn't prove the Noah's ark story!

Sojourner553 · 11-23-2002, 09:24 AM

Frivolous:

for starters, there is no ARCHEOLOGICAL evidence to support that the ENTIRE world was inundated with a flood while humans were on it. Some of the oldest civilizations such as the Chinese and Egyptian civilizations have no historical record of such an event.

Of course there were some areas of the world that experienced many floods. The Babylonians (located between the Tigras and Euphrates Rivers) did experience frequent flooding. Many historians believe the Old Testament story of the flood originated from an EARLIER Babylonian myth of a world flood:

Quote:

--The Flood

The land of Mesopotamia was a flat alluvial plain laid down by the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers. Unlike the Nile in Egypt whose inundations were cyclical and predictable, flooding was often both violent and unpredictable. The early Sumerian myths tell of a great Flood unleashed by a god. This earlier story of a flood was borrowed and elaborated on by the Babylonians, into at least two versions. In one version, the hero is named Atrahasis (meaning "the exceedingly wise"). In the other version, the hero is identified as Gilgamesh, who was a king in southern Babylonia.

In all these versions of the flood, one of the gods becomes angry and
determines to destroy the earth with a flood. (Unlike in the Genesis version, the god is NOT angry because the people have sinned--but instead is angered because human civilization was too noisy--making it difficult for him to sleep.) Another god comes to the rescue by directing one man to built a large boat to save his family and the animals from the ensuing flood.

The Genesis version is believed to be more recent--dated by many scholars from around the 10th century B.C.E. One interesting similarity between the Genesis flood story and the older Sumarian/Babylonian versions, is that both tell how a dove was used to detect land. In the EPIC OF GILGAMESH, this scene is narrated as follows:

"For a fifth day and a sixth day the mountains of Nisir held up the ship and did not let it waver. When the seventh day came, I sent forth a dove and let it loose. The dove flew away and shortly returned; she had seen no resting place and so she came back."

(Of course, although the story of Noah's ark also employs a dove in a similar manner, possibly this was just a coincidence--That is, sending
doves out from boats, as a test for land, may have been a common practice throughout this area of the ancient world.)

<a href="http://mac-2001.com/philo/crit/MYSTERY.TXT" target="_blank">http://mac-2001.com/philo/crit/MYSTERY.TXT</a>

Even a number of Jews/Christians believe stories such as the Flood were myths.

The Story of Noah's ark and the Flood have created a number of scientific challenges for Creationists:

Scientists estimate there are about 100 million species in the world. A large proportion of these are bugs (twenty percent of the 100 million species are beetles!) It would be physically impossible to build an arc (of the dimensions given in the Old Testament) to hold all these.
Don’t forget too – that the OT states there were six of each species in one verse – which biblical literalists have reconciled (with the other verse stating there were TWO of each kind) to mean the other four were consumed as food. This means the original stock on the ark was even larger.

Here are some more reasons:

Quote:

“*Religious theologians have struggled for centuries to "scientifically" explain how an ark could have been constructed to hold EVERY known species of animals on the earth--while maintaining temperature, food, and waste control for them.

*How did the animals from around the world migrate to and from the Ark?
--Kangaroos and koala bears exist only in Australia, and penguins and polar bears live in cold climates. There is no evidence of these animals ever being present in the Middle East. Were they supernaturally transported from their native habitats to the Ark, and then back again following the Flood, with no traces left that they were ever present in the Middle East?

--And what would the koala bear have eaten on the ark? Koala bears only eat eucalyptus tree leaves, which are indigenous to Australia and Indonesia alone. (There are many other examples such as panda bears only eating from the bamboo
tree indigenous around China).

*Scientists agree that there were large floods in local, regional areas, but find no evidence for covering the ENTIRE earth. Where did all the water go after the Flood receded if it indeed covered the entire surface of the Earth? (Some creationists have speculated there must be deep seas of water hidden within deep fissures of the earth that no one has located yet.

*Certain cultures (such as the Egyptians) that have carefully preserved their history, maintain no records of a large flood.

*If the Flood was truly meant to destroy "all flesh that moved upon the
earth", why weren't fishes and sea mammals--such as dolphins and whales-destroyed as well? (Note, some translations of the Genesis story imply that God "only" wanted to destroy "all flesh that moved upon the LAND".)”

<a href="http://mac-2001.com/philo/crit/SCIENCE.TXT" target="_blank">http://mac-2001.com/philo/crit/SCIENCE.TXT</a>

!

While you are at it, why not answer some of these OTHER stories in the bible that scientists view as MYTHS:

� The earth was created before the sun, moon, and other planets and stars. (ie the Earth was created on Day 1, and the rest on Day 4) See Genesis Chapter 1
� The earth is flat
� The earth is stationary in space and the sun and the rest of the planets revolve around it. Galileo got in trouble for questioning this verse.
� Why are 100% of all mental diseases in the New Testament attributed to DEMONS as opposed to natural causes? (Hint: Because this superstition was shared with essentially all ancient people of this time, with a few exceptions such as Hippocrates.)

I invite you to answer these objections to the Flood story with some OBJECTIVITY AND RATIONALITY this time!#@

Thank you

Sojourner

11-22-2002, 09:13 PM	#12
Frivolous Regular Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 101	Hehe. Be afraid. Be very afraid. I will now justify my beliefs by attempting to discredit the act of discrediting christianity. Why can't you just leave us and our beliefs alone? Is it because you are feeling guilty because there really might be a Creator? [ November 22, 2002: Message edited by: Frivolous ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-22-2002, 09:44 PM	#14
Frivolous Regular Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 101	I am prepared to go through the logistics of the Ark and also i support the bugs being on the Ark. But alas, i must work now... see all you happy chappies soon. And chappettes.

11-23-2002, 03:55 AM	#18
Daniel_AnglumTM Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Somewhere in the Suburban Jungle of London Posts: 34	The reason that i dont even entertain Noahs Flood is because there is simply no extra-Biblical evidence of a world wide flood, and to make such a claim requires more than a few chapters in the most Mythical part of a Mythical book.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.