Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But Eusebous, There are no 'facts'. There is the unworkable story in the Bible and the 'facts' are whether it can work or not. We refer to archeology, prehistory, biology, ship-building and agriculture to see whether the story can possibly work. Those are the only 'facts' we have to work with.
But it had to have worked because it did.
Funny that you go to texts outside the Bible and say there must have been a flood . . . somewhere . . . but you won't go to the ancient texts we call "the Bible" and say: Aha! here it is! A world-wide flood and a huge ship saving 8 people! No, that would be below you.
Quote:
You put up a spirited defence, which is always a pleasure to read, but it is improvising ad hoc explanations to get over the problems and those, too, have in the past had 'facts' raised to find them wanting. The idea that crops or even grass would grow through the mud - deposits (remember Bible literalism argues that the flood deposits are huge, because of course they were actually laid down over millions of years) was raised last time we debated and you seem to be ignoring this previous objection in favour of accusing us of just unsupported incredulity or referring to previous disproofs which you claim we never gave. And here, there were objections raised about the delay in producing any bushes or trees which you dismissed on the flimsiest of grounds - 'who can say that they didn't grow in days back then?' Since what we can recover of trees, bushes, seeds and pollen of the time - organically preserved, in some cases, suggests that they were no different to the plants we have now, your suggestion is without credibility.
We dealt here with the metalworking and I gave 'facts' to support my contention that the genesis reference to metalworking is anachronistic. I also pointed out that the materials supposed to be used in the Ark point clearly to the same construction methods of the mesopotamian 'ark' story.
Moses got the story right. The Mesopotamian's didn't.
You gave actual facts? Wow! I must have missed them. Hmm, no one ever thought the ancients were very smart people. Yet we've found a computer they devised: Mediterranean Mystery Solved: An Ancient Artifact Counts | Edutopia
I'd love to see you try to create the same computer with its very accurate gears etc.
Quote:
These are facts and you only response is to appeal to some mysterious unknown technology of which there is no archaeological trace and suggestions that plant life had some magical quality now lost.
Sorry, but your opinions are not facts.
Quote:
We produce 'facts'. You produce faith -based denial. I know you don't agree, but please, don't be dishonest about us.
That is your opinion as are your "facts."
Quote:
Now, if you are looking at the 'facts' as regards the claim that the ark has been found, this HAS been debated at length with the late, great C34, to whom you are indeed a worthy successor.
The fact is that we were or I was -puzzled by the claim that a large wooden structure was found up on Ararat (1) and the blurry pictures of what could be a sliding chunk of snow or ice and frankly unconvincing picture purporting to show a huge hole in a rock wall did not help. The interior photos were stunning, but then the straw and spider - webs didn't seem quite right for a millennia old wooden structure even above the snow -line.
Then the doubts about the artefacts came out, the shouts of doubt and the ongoing silence. Now even Christians and creationists regard this NAMI find as a fraud.
What people regard and what is actually true are two different things. The majority of Christians don't believe God will save all mankind. But it is very clearly written that He will. So you can't go by a fallacy of argument called "bandwagon" or "ad populum" and expect it to lend credence to your side.
Quote:
The articles don't add much to the original stories other than yet more doubters, but checking, publication, research and confirmation is not to hand. Until it is, it looks like our original unworthy suspicions that the whole thing was faked are right on the money.
(1) we ...let's make that "We"...can quickly disposed of the boat - shaped rock outcrop at a relatively low level. This is no more Noah's ark than I am Noah.
Tell that to the government over there that has researched the ark. I'm sure they will believe you.
Irrelevant until you prove this "ship" was Noah's. Telling me you know of ancient documents that connects these dots does not impress me. Explain to me or show how the documents prove Noah used that "ship."
Why don't you take a trip over to where it rested.
Why don't you take a trip over to where it rested.
Eusebius, I'm a Christian, but the only thing you've convinced me of in this argument is that you are persistent.
There may have been a Noah and there may have been an ark. But there is no way two of every living creature got on it, there is now way the entire world as we know it today was flooded, and there is no way it walked up the side of a mountain. The stories of floods were probably sound, but over the centuries they grew way beyond what they were. Just like the story of Davy Crockett (to whom my wife is related) became far greater than the David Crockett of history.
Now there are a lot of people willing to cash in on that ark story, so it is told and retold. The "artifact" stories have abounded for centuries, from Jesus' robe to the chalice used at the Last Supper and many others. None of them have been true, but there have been hundreds of thousands if not millions of people who were willing to believe them. Searches were instituted and I think, in some instances, violence was perpetrated in order to discover the "relic" or "artifact."
The attempt is made by carnal Christians who wish to move faith in God from the spiritual to the concrete. The only concrete thing a man of God can have is the faith in his own heart.
Wouldn't people be willing to tell the tale of a "real" ark on a mountain in order to get tourists, to build hotels and sell "modern" relics at the site? Of course, they would.
You are not going to make "believers" of any non-believer by holding on to this myth literally--- and I hold myths to be quite important as they often bring attention to things greater than we understand---the myth of the ark is about God rescuing some from a world gone mad. But trying to make it literally alive just makes Christians look foolish, and doesn't do a thing to bring anyone closer to God.
I am still trying to figure out why the Bible is not considered a Historical document as it is the best represented of any ancient document ...
It also asks us to hate our families, commands us to beat our slaves and is seems rather fond of talking donkeys. Just a personal note here, but I tend to think it would likely not be an ideal choice.
Eusebius, I'm a Christian, but the only thing you've convinced me of in this argument is that you are persistent.
There may have been a Noah and there may have been an ark. But there is no way two of every living creature got on it, there is now way the entire world as we know it today was flooded, and there is no way it walked up the side of a mountain. The stories of floods were probably sound, but over the centuries they grew way beyond what they were. Just like the story of Davy Crockett (to whom my wife is related) became far greater than the David Crockett of history.
Now there are a lot of people willing to cash in on that ark story, so it is told and retold. The "artifact" stories have abounded for centuries, from Jesus' robe to the chalice used at the Last Supper and many others. None of them have been true, but there have been hundreds of thousands if not millions of people who were willing to believe them. Searches were instituted and I think, in some instances, violence was perpetrated in order to discover the "relic" or "artifact."
The attempt is made by carnal Christians who wish to move faith in God from the spiritual to the concrete. The only concrete thing a man of God can have is the faith in his own heart.
Wouldn't people be willing to tell the tale of a "real" ark on a mountain in order to get tourists, to build hotels and sell "modern" relics at the site? Of course, they would.
You are not going to make "believers" of any non-believer by holding on to this myth literally--- and I hold myths to be quite important as they often bring attention to things greater than we understand---the myth of the ark is about God rescuing some from a world gone mad. But trying to make it literally alive just makes Christians look foolish, and doesn't do a thing to bring anyone closer to God.
Dear Wardendresden,
What do you mean there may have been a Noah? He is in the genealogies both of the Old Testament and New Testament.
Also, you have to proooooooooove that the historic account of Noah, the ark, the animals, the flood are all the result of story telling gone awry. Just because there are cases where a story gets bent out of shape from it's original story does not prove to be the case with Genesis. Why did they never get the genealogies wrong in Genesis? Because they wrote them down from the get go just like the account of Noah etc.
It also asks us to hate our families, commands us to beat our slaves and is seems rather fond of talking donkeys. Just a personal note here, but I tend to think it would likely not be an ideal choice.
You don't believe God is powerful enough to open the mouth of a donkey? Ever watch Mr. Ed the talking horse on t.v.?
"Hate" is not what we think it to be thousands of years removed from when the Bible was written. Jesus was not telling His disciples to LITERALLY hate their wives, children, mother and father. He was telling them to give precedence to what He was doing or they couldn't be His disciples.
In Romans it is stated "Jacob I love yet Esau I hate." But God cannot literally hate in the sense we hate. It is just that He gave precedence to Jacob in blessing him. Later on though God blessed Esau greatly.
Eusebius, I'm a Christian, but the only thing you've convinced me of in this argument is that you are persistent.
He's persistent at ignoring the obvious and the facts. I'm still waiting for him to tell me why my link to a journal has so many flaws. He says he didn't know where to begin. I actually believe that he doesn't know where to begin, but not the way he thinks.
Ok I watched the first seven minutes of this clip but I had to pause it and go ahead and make this post. I did that because Dr. Snelling was talking about how the same types of soil and similar fossils in different continents proves that there must've been a flood. I think what he means to say is that these similarities contribute to the theory of continental drift (or plate tectonics). For example, geologists have traced a mountain range that runs from the southeastern U.S., Canada, under the ocean, and eventually the northern part of Ireland and the UK. This particular continuous mountain range can't be explained by the flood, but rather the fact that these continents were once touching each other. Plate Tectonics is a widely accepted scientific theory.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There are no 'facts'. There is the unworkable story in the Bible and the 'facts' are whether it can work or not. We refer to archeology, prehistory, biology, ship-building and agriculture to see whether the story can possibly work. Those are the only 'facts' we have to work with.
