Did Noah's Ark really exit? (New information) (Jewish, believers, perspective)
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.
1. You have no evidence that Pangea existed then, even contrary to the evidence that it broke apart approx. 200 millions years ago.
2. If it was local, then it could not be the biblical account which explains that in Genesis 7.
19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. 20 The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered. 21 And all flesh died that moved on the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man.
1. Science has proved the existence of Pangea and it is in the bible.
2. Science has proved that there was a huge flood in that area that ancients could have seen as global and therefore recorded it as such...Even Josephus records the barbarian histories as speaking of a flood that took out everything...So it is not just recorded in the bible
Have you actually seen Saturn?...Or are you believing in it because someone else has claimed that they had seen it?...
Richard, if that's all you've got, "You don't know because you weren't there.", then you should call it quits. Many other theists, with much more intellectual arguments, have failed to prove the Great Flood occurred. You're really making your side look silly.
1. Science has proved the existence of Pangea and it is in the bible.
2. Science has proved that there was a huge flood in that area that ancients could have seen as global and therefore recorded it as such...Even Josephus records the barbarian histories as speaking of a flood that took out everything...So it is not just recorded in the bible
Yes, science has proved Pangea, but....wait for it....., it split apart 200 million years ago. Are you suggesting the Great Flood occurred more than 200 million years ago?
Yes science has proved there was a huge flood in the region, but nothing on the scale that the Bible claims, that would kill all creatures on Earth, in effect a reboot for Earth. If the flood killed everyone and everything on Earth, who, other those in the Ark could have recorded it? Unless of course they were the barbarians you speak of.
BTW, if Pangea is described in the Bible, it happened at the creation, BEFORE THE FLOOD.
The theists need to have the flood as a reality. It is after all a foundational teaching of their silly doctrine and w/o it being in the sequence of events, the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. All evidence suggests there was never a global flood, we have a very old earth proven in many ways I have already listed. So no I did not have to be there. When you have a tree and you core it and count over 6000 rings with no evidence of a year under water (they would have died anyway). In the same way, Ice cores date back even further. We all know ICE floats unless you chill your drinks with small rocks you freeze, you should know this. You should have learned by grade 7 that water expands when it is beyond freezing point and that is why it floats.
70000 years divided by 6000 = 11667. That is how much older Antarctic ice cores are proportionally to the biblical timeline or simply 64000 years older than the bible. You cannot refute that.
Sure apologists now rewrite the account to a local flood but that is NOT what is itinerantly written now is it?
Even with the flood localised, a boat of that size, made only from wood, would never be seaworthy. It is appeal to magic all the way.
Capt Noah and his motley crew would have perished just like all the rest.
The lists of evidence science has at its fingertips refutes each and every creationist claim. A single pair of any critter would not be able to repopulate a species likewise 3 pairs of human breeders. Not to mention, we are still discovering new species daily and naming them.
These are mere stories of folklore and have no bearing as to what happens in the real world discovered and explained by secular science.
As it is with science, if we get it wrong the first time, it can be fixed. By now the church should have at least added footnotes everywhere it talks of the seed on man b/c we only discovered the ladies contribution (which btw is 100% compared to man's 1 in 300,000) in the 19th century. They should have by now updated texts that equate the menstrual cloths of women (aka used sanitary towels) to the unrighteousness of mankind.
This is what is so wrong with religion and the babble, it never gets updated b/c of this stupid inerrant POV. The quran is even worse suggesting the seed of man emanates from his spine.
But to admit these ME desert dwellers were wrong, well then the whole ponzi scheme fails. Very sad.
Have you ever read Dr. Henry Morris' book entitled "Genesis"?...He explains thing from a scientific view.
Have you ever read Dr. Henry Morris' book entitled "Genesis"?...He explains thing from a scientific view.
Henry Morris took some fragmentary ideas floating around amongst a few backwater fundamentalists and turned them into a system that claims to be scientific.....An empty claim since they have not and cannot can be tested and verified using the scientific method....Face facts man, a global flood is not only impossible it is a ridiculous premise.
I have done my research, and I am confident the flood myth in the bible is just that, a myth.
Science has already proved that there was an enormous flood in that area that could have possibly been the catalyst for the flood account in Genesis...A flood of such magnitude that those involved in it would have thought the world was being flooded....The problem with fundamentalists is that they believe that the whole bible was written by HaShem and that it is all literal...I think man wrote about what he experienced from his own perspective individually unlike the 613 Commandments that I have no problem believing were transmitted orally from HaShem through Moses to Israel and recorded...Even in the NT common sense tells you that those letters were written by men recording their experiences; the best that the best that they knew how...although I am beginning to suspect that Paul might have been an interloper...
Which is usually what people with a very weak argument say. "I can't prove my point, so I will fall back to that old chestnut of saying you don't know because you weren't there". I mean we go with your line of argument then we can basically discount any science or historical event before the 20th century. I believe that fire breathing unicorns with wizards road with Hannibal's army, and because you weren't there, then you can't prove they didn't .
Scientists and Religionists both have their own agendas...Science has also proved that the Dietary Laws have merit...How did they know this 6000 years ago?...Unicorns are recorded in the bible...Belief in something without empirical evidence just because it was recorded by someone whether it be science or religion is just plain foolish...Even the ten plagues of Egypt have been scientifically proven through objective research...Like I said earlier, do your research...
Have you actually seen Saturn?...Or are you believing in it because someone else has claimed that they had seen it?...
Yes, I actually have. Many thousands have from Galileo to a schoolboy with a 8 - incher yesterday in his backyard.
But after that and the discovery by Herschel of Uranus, there was supposition of another planet and calculations (perturbations in the orbit of Uranus) seemed to show that it had to be there and (so the story goes - there are queries about it) the position of Neptune was predicted and a telescope was turned to that point and...there it was.
The point is that evidence is often compelling without actual 'Before yore werry eyes' proof of the kind that theist apologists so often demand before they will accept anything that seems to undercut religion (religious claims they will accept as life -changing fact without any evidence and in spite of the evidence very often).
The evidence of past times, if one applies the detective work of the kind that we rely on to secure convictions in crimes when nobody was actually there to see it (that is, almost all of them) is reliable data for looking at the claims of Genesis and finding them utterly without merit, credibility or hisorical reliability.
Call them symbolic or metaphor if you like. Those are merely the same as saying 'not true'.
And trying to massage the Bible script to make it fit the discoveries of science is what you do here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965
1. Science has proved the existence of Pangea and it is in the bible.
2. Science has proved that there was a huge flood in that area that ancients could have seen as global and therefore recorded it as such...Even Josephus records the barbarian histories as speaking of a flood that took out everything...So it is not just recorded in the bible
I suppose you are taking Genesis 2.10 -14 as 'Pangea', though the mention of Tigris and Euphrates rather suggests that the writers of the Bible were drawing on Mesopotamian texts as they did for the flood and Ark and indeed the nativity of Moses (who I suspect might have actually been Pharaoh Amose 1).
Science has proven a flood of the Neolithic times in the Black Sea area and indeed the melting of the ice cap at the end of the ice age could have caused a lot of local floods that would account for why there are so many flood legends and also why Egypt and China do not have one. And of course the Mesopotamian original on which Noah is evidently based was very much a local storm flooding the land between the rivers, not a rising of the sea.
This is not science proving the Bible because these floods (while providing separate legends, which are quite unrelated to the Noachian flood -legend) are all non -global and saying that they seemed global to the poor buggers caught up in them, is not the point.
The point is that the purpose of the biblical flood was God's method of wiping out all creation other than a selected breeding group and rather inadequate pair of each kind of animal (I think you'd need plants and fish, too, but that's somewhat arguable) and local flooding, leaving people alive, never mind critters, completely discredits the point of the story. Even if there is some morsel of truth in the Flood story (as there is in the prophecies or Daniel, Babylon and Tyre) the point intended to tell us something about God, his plans and his deeds utterly fails and it is god -claims of the Bible rather than the history, that is under discussion.
Josephus is an invaluable historian for his time, but he had to go back to earlier documents for his previous history and that is open to question, such as his account of the Hyksos invasion or his records of Moses or Joseph in Egypt (As I recall he interprets Manetho pretty freely with a view to validating Judaism as having a venerable history) and of course, when he writes of the flood, he is in the realm of mythology, as indeed many historians are when they go back that far.
How then, can we know anything? It is archaeological and historical research. At one time the exodus and conquest was considered reliable, give or take some supernatural tales, but archaeological work and evaluation of old stelae and papyri has thrown utter doubt on Exodus, Conquest and the whole world as described in the Bible, prior to the collapse in the (what..12th c BC?), which saw the end of Canaan, and the emergence of Ammon, Moab, Edom, Philistia and indeed Israel.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-16-2013 at 07:42 AM..
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.
.
