Did a World-Wide Flood in Noah's day Happen? (America, ghost, bible)

[rifleman]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Thanks. I never intended to give up. Is your recent outrageous post the result of being drunk?

Q: Oh? What's outrageous about it? That I insist you prove your own statements with the equations you have suddenly found so very dependable and worthy of pointing out? Or that you stop pulling unproven and outrageous things out of thin air (like that all the food was Freeze-Dried by little OLD Noah pre-flood, along with the necessary H2O to reconstitute it? Or that he supplied enough facilities, containing the proper temp & salinity water, with sufficient room, for the thousands of whales dolphins, seals,sea-lions and porcupines that God mandated be in board?)

As well, you of course know that all the shark species require constant forward movement, they having no functioning buccal cavity pump like all the much more modern fishes, (and this key differential ability has now been traced back to a particular and exact break-point in their Evolutionary history, btw...) so that they must constantly force, by forward motion, salt water through, across and then out of their primitive gills in order to gather sufficient air on which to live.

Next Intro Bio Q: do you know the sole and limited function of "air" for most all living, breathing animals? Just curious, since this is such a simple & basic question...

So .. so... soooo... what exactly, was so frickin' OUTRAGEOUS? Perhaps its you and your pesky and intolerantly stubborn mindset that fits that particular word, huh?

So... go on.. go ahead! Puh-Leeeze! Search, read, theorize, hypothesize and finally present to me/us... that Missing Link equation that proves we didn't evolve at all. That basic population dynamics can attribute it all to really hungry (if you get my drift..) teen hot-bods, all ripe & ready to "repro" the entire planet, but not with reproductive Barby Doll Clones!

No problem huh? Just find & point out the just slightly complex pop-dynamics equation in which several (not all of the insistent and unpredictable variables. But even if the equations contain just a few of the known variables, like weather, disease, desire & intent, politics, geography, climate changes that affected the availability of food [drought, downpours, tsunamis, earthquakes, floods, snow storms, typhoons, tornados, invasion by other tribes who wanted what you happened to have...][/i], you've got quite the problem to deal with, mathematically. As in: such wildly over-enthusiastic and pie-in-the-sky population numbers are simply not reproducible. Just like in a classic Scientific Study: you put forth an hypothesis, you tested, and you have to accept that your hypothesis was completely wrong. It need refinement or complete rejection.

WELL.... Wow, huh? You get to feel the rejection that all of us honest scientists feel many times over! And yet, we still don't give up! "Onward Knowledge Soldiers, marching as to war, with the Book of Knowledge, holding as Before!" Catchy litle tune; I'm thinking you know it, so why not sing along next time?

All of these natural interruptions and disasters and implausibilities of yours, just hand-wavingly dismissed aas though tehy were just put on hold by your particular stubborn and arrogant (and Felony One murderous...) God? Apparently NOT, according to all the world history books you so also so fervently rely on.

NOTE: You really have to get all your stories straight and lined up, duck-like, Eusebius, else you are, do I have to say it? DOOMED on this one, to a totally ABJECT EPIC FAIL. I mean, factually, you already have already acheived this famous status, but still, why not cememnt it in place once & for all? So other scholars in the distant future can come to these archived posts and read a total transcript of how utterly thoughtless and structurally illogical some theists could be in the face of the final loss of their spiritual epicenters.

Originally Posted by mikebnllnb

Nothing more than myths and legends.

What makes you think people lived longer lives in the ancient past? Primitive people lived shorter lives not longer ones.

Intelligent debate with you is pointless. Your positions are 10lbs of stupid in a 5lb bag.

A bag with sooo many holes in it to boot... all that stuff he depends on is simultaneously leaking out the bottom!

Yeah; quite sad, actually. And yet, this guy is the dedicated spokes-model for Christianity. I'd have at least nominated someone with a functioning and not-so-egotistical brain.... or a brain that is engagable from time to time! This bit of frustration now on it's 1280th + post...... this is all too easy!

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

.

Hermann Gunkel wrote:


Hermann Gunkel was wrong. There were three families which re-kick-started the re-population of the
earth after the world-wide flood. Not just one family.

Hermann Gunkel was not wrong. You need to go back and read that again if you're having trouble understanding that sentence. Hermann Gunkel, writing in the late 1800s - early 1900s, had a far greater command of the Biblical material than you've demonstrated so far. If you're having trouble "getting" his reference, the fault lies with you.

Gunkel commented on why the idea of a Biblical Flood as historical was no longer tenable, even back when he was writing:

In former times, before the deciphering of
hieroglyphs and cuneiform writing, it was possible
for Israelitic tradition to be regarded as so old that
it did not seem absurd to look to it for such reminiscences
of prehistoric ages; but now when creation
has widened so mightily in our view, when we see
that the People of Israel is one of the youngest in
the group to which it belongs, there is an end of all
such conjectures. Between the origin of the primitive
races of southwestern Asia and the appearance
of the People of Israel upon the stage of life had
rolled unnumbered millenniums; hence there is no
room for serious discussion over historical traditions
said to be possessed by Israel regarding those
primitive times.
(Legends of Genesis, p. 6)

And this was even before the full dechipherment of Sumerian was completed, which increased that gap even further.

You're over a hundred years behind on your facts, Eusebius. The scientific justifications for the Biblical Flood are not even needed, for the criterion of historical credibility no longer makes it out of the initial textual stage.

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

All you need to do is take the genealogies back to Noah and then Noah to Adam to form the proper timeline thus making it historical and not mythical.

One can do the same thing with other people's genealogical lists (you think the Israelites were the only ones that kept those?), and they reach the same absurd lengths of time AND more! I guess those 20,000 + lifespans of some of those kings are "historical" because I can make a timeline out of them....

You have THE worst reasoning skills, Eusebius. THE worst. Posters spend half their time explaining to you simple reasoning flaws you make. And then you keep making them, over and over and over.

But then again - we all work with what we got. Some of us are more blessed than others, I suppose. Try doing that thing again. Maybe that will help get a point across, rather than actual reasoning.

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by whoppers

Hermann Gunkel was not wrong. You need to go back and read that again if you're having trouble understanding that sentence. Hermann Gunkel, writing in the late 1800s - early 1900s, had a far greater command of the Biblical material than you've demonstrated so far. If you're having trouble "getting" his reference, the fault lies with you.

Gunkel commented on why the idea of a Biblical Flood as historical was no longer tenable, even back when he was writing:

In former times, before the deciphering of
hieroglyphs and cuneiform writing, it was possible
for Israelitic tradition to be regarded as so old that
it did not seem absurd to look to it for such reminiscences
of prehistoric ages; but now when creation
has widened so mightily in our view, when we see
that the People of Israel is one of the youngest in
the group to which it belongs, there is an end of all
such conjectures. Between the origin of the primitive
races of southwestern Asia and the appearance
of the People of Israel upon the stage of life had
rolled unnumbered millenniums; hence there is no
room for serious discussion over historical traditions
said to be possessed by Israel regarding those
primitive times.
(Legends of Genesis, p. 6)

And this was even before the full dechipherment of Sumerian was completed, which increased that gap even further.

You're over a hundred years behind on your facts, Eusebius. The scientific justifications for the Biblical Flood are not even needed, for the criterion of historical credibility no longer makes it out of the initial textual stage.

Well of course the people OF ISRAEL is one of the youngest in the group to which it belongs! Jacob was re-named "Israel" by God. And so the 12 sons of Israel which became the 12 tribes of Israel are not as old a group as the other nations. But what Gunkel fails to see is that Jacob's lineage goes back to Adam.

whoppers, you have THE worst reasoning skills of anyone I ever met. The worst!

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Well of course the people OF ISRAEL is one of the youngest in the group to which it belongs! Jacob was re-named "Israel" by God. And so the 12 sons of Israel which became the 12 tribes of Israel are not as old a group as the other nations. But what Gunkel fails to see is that Jacob's lineage goes back to Adam.

whoppers, you have THE worst reasoning skills of anyone I ever met. The worst!

I see your cleverness reaches the intellectual heights of a parrot.

He is talking about Israelite tradition AS A WHOLE as represented in the Israelite literature that became the Hebrew Bible, as produced by Israelite scribes. Again, you need to either read it again or increase your reading comprehension skills - which are atrocious. Misunderstanding what a biblical scholar has written only shows one thing: that you have a reading comprehension problem. I'm quite certain that everyone else who read that post understood exactly what it meant.

Let me break it down for you in another form: out of all the Semitic cultures in the ancient Near East, the Israelites are one of the last ones to come into existence, along with their Sacred Scripture.

Try again - you have failed to grasp the concept.

[Rafius]

I'm thinking there is a clue in the name "Eusebius".

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

Well of course the people OF ISRAEL is one of the youngest in the group to which it belongs! Jacob was re-named "Israel" by God. And so the 12 sons of Israel which became the 12 tribes of Israel are not as old a group as the other nations. But what Gunkel fails to see is that Jacob's lineage goes back to Adam.

In your world and right along your beliefs, are there other lineages that go to someone other than Adam?

whoppers, you have THE worst reasoning skills of anyone I ever met. The worst!

You're into reasoning skills evaluation as much as I'm a scholar of the Bible.

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by whoppers

I see your cleverness reaches the intellectual heights of a parrot.

He is talking about Israelite tradition AS A WHOLE as represented in the Israelite literature that became the Hebrew Bible, as produced by Israelite scribes. Again, you need to either read it again or increase your reading comprehension skills - which are atrocious. Misunderstanding what a biblical scholar has written only shows one thing: that you have a reading comprehension problem. I'm quite certain that everyone else who read that post understood exactly what it meant.

Let me break it down for you in another form: out of all the Semitic cultures in the ancient Near East, the Israelites are one of the last ones to come into existence, along with their Sacred Scripture.

Try again - you have failed to grasp the concept.

The last post you posted in quoting Gunkel said nothing such as you intimate above. I suggest YOU get another line of work other than telling people how to increase their comprehension skills.

[Eusebius]

Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost

In your world and right along your beliefs, are there other lineages that go to someone other than Adam?

The Bible does not take your lineage back to the chimpanzee. It only takes mine to a very intelligent man named Adam. It can't go beyond Adam because evolution only exists in the mind of the uninformed.

You're into reasoning skills evaluation as much as I'm a scholar of the Bible.

O.K.

[MG120]

Originally Posted by Eusebius

The Bible does not take your lineage back to the chimpanzee. It only takes mine to a very intelligent man named Adam. It can't go beyond Adam because evolution only exists in the mind of the uninformed.

So, let me get this straight....the basis of this discussion has "evolved" so that all of humanity as we now know it can be traced back to Noah and his family, post flood?

And from Noah's family back to Adam and Eve?

I think Rifle had it right, it would require an impossibly high mutation rate to account for all of the observed variations, let alone those unobserved.

Besides, if I remember my fairy tales correctly, Adam and Eve had Cain and Able. Cain killed Able. Cain was cast out of the garden, Cain wandered the lands. Adam and Eve had Seth. And then Cain found a wife...huh? where? Seth married...again..huh? Where did all these women come from if Adam and Eve are the beginning of the geneological line?

Man, just thinking about that has all kinds of bad connotations.......