ThickStemz
Well-Known Member
They didn't walk. They flew. This was before flightless birds evolved, idgit
Jesus Myth & Why It Endures
- Thread starter Dalek Supreme
- Start date
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
but the dinosaurs were before then, did they fit on the ark too? What about the ten or so different types of prehistoric man? No?
not to mention how it's physically impossible for the PLANET to gain water in order to flood anything, there is a finite amount of water on the planet, it doesn't eb and flow like that.
but I suppose that was divine intervention, and then the water magically disappeared after.
totally makes sense to me.
I sure hope after we melt the poles that maybe those magical drains will relieve some of our water, so, well, you know, those people in Italy, florida, and the multiple Bahamas/carribean islands won't be under water anymore. but hey, maybe mankind is giving ourselves it's own flood?
between that and the global warming..overpopulation and mother nature IS going to find a way to eliminate or drasticly reduce our numbers, just wait and see, it'll happen in your kids' lifetime, i'd guess.
schnooby
Well-Known Member
can i also laugh at the elementary school level composition, grammar and spelling of the meme?
not to mention like most memes its retardedly over simplified and ignores some obvious caveats to the flood story those who believe the story are well aware of.
try again.
schnooby
Well-Known Member
you need some imagination and do a bit more reading before you pretend to know where water can or needs to come from or go..
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184564-scientists-discover-an-ocean-400-miles-beneath-our-feet-that-could-fill-our-oceans-three-times-over
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
hahaha, the amount of disrespect is strong in this one.
ok man, you are totally right... there is a lake of water in the earths mantle, that's just hanging out. And it came out like a snail from it's shell when god commanded it so.
so let me ask you something, smartguy.
since you caught me in a surly mood i'll engage.
what happens when you take that water from the earth?
does it become empty?
so how does physics work there?
Hmmm... perhaps you need to open a book before you even think twice about questioning my scientific aptitude..
I guaran-fuckin-tee if you wanna get into a scientific debate with me? Publicly no less?
I am here.
fire away
besides.. your link proved what I said, the earth has a FINITE amount of water.
but I give you credit, where credit is due, I do, in fact ,"need some imagination"
but I sure as shit don't need to do more reading. I got that down, I own more books on physics than you have probably ever seen.
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
enlighten us of said "caveats"
Please.
the caveat being that it's a mythical story?
or since you already riled me up, perhaps i'll go another route, one directed towards your argument/belief.
Shall We?
1.How did all the germs and disease that MUST live on human hosts live through the flood?
Well-known examples include measles, pneumococcal pneumonia, leprosy, typhus, typhoid fever, small pox, poliomyelitis, syphilis, and gonorrhea. The scientific creationists insist on a completed creation, in which the creator worked but six days and has been resting ever since. Thus, between them, Adam and Eve had to have been created with every disease and had to have passed them all to their children. Later, somebody must have carried them onto Noah's ark.
wow, betcha never thought of that didja?
2. What about cave formations? Ones that can be carbon dated and that have been formed over yrs and yrs rock strata containing trilobites are overturned, the trilobites that are usually found belly down in the rock will now be found belly up. Other things which show geologists and paleontologists which way is up include worm and brachiopod burrows, footprints, fossilized mud cracks, raindrop craters, graded bedding, and similar evidences.
It is really creationists who have no explanation for such strata. Could the flood suddenly reverse the laws of gravity and lay up sediments and fossils instead of laying them down? Upside-down sediments are clearly a problem for the creation model. This isn't surprising, however, given that right-side-up sediments seem to be a problem for it, too.
3. Marine Fossils, The continents are, on an average, covered with sedimentary rock to a depth of about one mile. Some of the rock (chalk, for instance) is essentially 100 percent fossils and many limestones also contain high percentages of marine fossils. On the other hand, some rock is barren. Suppose that, on an average, marine fossils comprise 0.1 percent of the volume of the rock. If all of the fossilized animals could be resurrected, they would cover the entire planet to a depth of at least 1.5 feet. What did they eat?
Creationists can't appeal to the tropical paradise they imagine existed below the pre-Flood canopy, because the laws of thermodynamics prohibit the earth from supporting that much animal biomass. The first law says that energy can't be created, so the animals would have to get their energy from the sun. The second law limits the efficiency with which solar energy can be converted into food. The amount of solar energy available is not nearly sufficient.
You want to continue this? Cuz it's slow at my shop, and I got nothing better to do
schnooby
Well-Known Member
sure ill bite but i cant guarantee a prompt response toevery point.
First lets agree that creation narratives, whether they are deistic or athiestic etc depend on some assumptions. In order for there to be an argument there must be premises presented then proven by data which are as free from biased interpretation as possible.
As for me i do not believe completely unbiased analysis can take place......this is a personal a priori belief based on how i view human behavior. ...so please allow me that much.
First lets talk about the flood story. There is not ONE universally agreed version to which all believers stipulate......obviously this could lead to a splintered discussion, therefore we will have to agree to discuss mainly ONE version of the narative. Since you are putting the onus on me to argue against your points perhaps you can allow me to use my personal understanding of the flood story as a reference point for my rebuttals.
My version of the flood story is as follows.
God "created" the earth and all the life on it in 6 days then rested on the 7th. You characterize God as having rested "ever since", citing unspecified creation scientists. What biblical justification is there for believing that after the 7th day God ceased all creative activity or intervention in the affairs of earth? None. There is none because the bible does not tell such a story of the creators involvement in human affairs and even nature.
Its worth mentioning again, i do not, and need not be an expert on every variation or nuance of what "other" people believe about the flood story. I happen to think most people are quite wrong and confused about the flood story and its details.
So.....if we can allow for the possibility, even a likelihood that God did not cease involvement in the goings on of earth then we can have a real discusssion. If however you refuse to grant me that option there is no need for further discussion. I will continue my reply assuming its ok with you that we pretend god continued to be involved with all life on earth.
So god made adam and eve. Before adam and eve ate of the tree of forbidden knowledge it is said they lived in an idyllic paradise free of death and violence. We may safely assume or read into the brief bibliical narrative that if there was no death that this probably only meant death of creatures and life forms which had some kind of metaphysical, spiritual value. Saying it another way the absence of death need only refer to the death of lifeforms which we might reasonably assume were considered sentient or having a metaphysical value or spiritual worth such that hurting of consuming them would represent some kind of wrongful act. We are led to believe or told that as far as we know there was no death or violence, but we are not given extremely specific information about the permutations of that regarding things which we even now do not consider to be alive, like viruses, or living things which have no consciousness or spiritual value in the ethical context of how to treat them, like bacteria, spores, etc.
So i hope you are beginning to see that if you want to wade into the deep water of how religious stories might interface with modern science you are going to HAVE to let go of childish caricatures and oversimplifications such as often been perpetrated even by professed believers in the biblical account of creation, the flood, and other stories.
So, again your thesis is BASED on certain assumptions you have made about how god created all things and how he continued to be involved in human history and nature. I cannot have a conversation or argument about what everybody else says happened. I CAN have a conversation about what the bible actually says or perhaps allude to. However in such discussions as these it is absolutely critical that each party admit to which narratives, models, interpretations, etc they are depending on to buttress their positions.
schnooby
Well-Known Member
Going forward......if we stipulate to what the barebones story the bible actually tells us, it means we must read into the story perhaps more than we should be reasonably allowed given the stark lack of detail about things like microbiological phenomenae. Thus this discussion almost reuuires an undue quantity of theorizing and speculation.
So going back to your first point.yes i have thought about the existence of the things you mentioned.....its not quite the gotcha you might have hoped it was. The fact of the matter is this. If we pretend there was a god who created paradise and then humans fucked it up by disobeying and eating from the forbidden tree, then we can also pretend there would have been some severe consequences to their disobedience, especially since they were specifically warned not to touch or eat of it ". Does the bible bear this out?
..."but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."
Genesis 2:17
So then, God said that if they ate the fruit they would die. Notice what it doesnt say: when or how. Just that one example of missing information should give people like you some cause for pause before jumping on some wacky bandwagon someone else built about how god couldnt have done something about "the way things are" after adam and eve sinned. This just represents a severe lack of imagination and reveals a giddy, presumptuous anxiousness to use specious interpretations of the bible to somehow prove its rediculous because of what some dumb unimaginative people think its saying.
Sometimes the beauty of a thing is in what it doesnt say.....and one of the things the bible does well, to the consternation of many, is that it leaves out alot of detail about certain things. But absence of proof is not proof of absence..as the story of sin illustrates quite well.
So......the bible says eden was perfect and without death......and that god had decreed only one thing forbidden......and that if trespassed would mean death.
So was there death? Yes......there was death. How did god implement the sentence of death? Did he behead or run throuh or crucify or poison adam and eve? No. What did he do?
think.
He who created the operating model of how all living things coexisted under ONE set of conditions, had out of necessity to create a DIFFERENT model of how living things would interact after the sentence of death was given.
Now.....was that really so hard?
The bible owes no one a detailed explanation into every aspect of how things are or how they were done. We are told what we need to know, and using a bit of fairly normal intuitive and imaginative processes we can infer that this creator, who created the garden perfect, had to out of necessity CHANGE the model of HOW nature works in order to carry out the sentence of death for transgressing his command.
Now, notice, it doesnt matter if we LIKE the story or AGREE with the story, but if we are going to argue about what the bible means when it says something we need to use a little common sense and assume that if theres a creator who does things orderly and with all the proper underpinnings in which things must work together to exist.....then this same being would most certainly have not left the consequences of sin to some random accidental series of events.
It is worth mentioning that AFTER the flood god specifically ordered noah to eat flesh for the first time.....and the reason in this case was actually given.........to shorten mans life.
Ill get to your other points later.....
So going back to your first point.yes i have thought about the existence of the things you mentioned.....its not quite the gotcha you might have hoped it was. The fact of the matter is this. If we pretend there was a god who created paradise and then humans fucked it up by disobeying and eating from the forbidden tree, then we can also pretend there would have been some severe consequences to their disobedience, especially since they were specifically warned not to touch or eat of it ". Does the bible bear this out?
..."but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."
Genesis 2:17
So then, God said that if they ate the fruit they would die. Notice what it doesnt say: when or how. Just that one example of missing information should give people like you some cause for pause before jumping on some wacky bandwagon someone else built about how god couldnt have done something about "the way things are" after adam and eve sinned. This just represents a severe lack of imagination and reveals a giddy, presumptuous anxiousness to use specious interpretations of the bible to somehow prove its rediculous because of what some dumb unimaginative people think its saying.
Sometimes the beauty of a thing is in what it doesnt say.....and one of the things the bible does well, to the consternation of many, is that it leaves out alot of detail about certain things. But absence of proof is not proof of absence..as the story of sin illustrates quite well.
So......the bible says eden was perfect and without death......and that god had decreed only one thing forbidden......and that if trespassed would mean death.
So was there death? Yes......there was death. How did god implement the sentence of death? Did he behead or run throuh or crucify or poison adam and eve? No. What did he do?
think.
He who created the operating model of how all living things coexisted under ONE set of conditions, had out of necessity to create a DIFFERENT model of how living things would interact after the sentence of death was given.
Now.....was that really so hard?
The bible owes no one a detailed explanation into every aspect of how things are or how they were done. We are told what we need to know, and using a bit of fairly normal intuitive and imaginative processes we can infer that this creator, who created the garden perfect, had to out of necessity CHANGE the model of HOW nature works in order to carry out the sentence of death for transgressing his command.
Now, notice, it doesnt matter if we LIKE the story or AGREE with the story, but if we are going to argue about what the bible means when it says something we need to use a little common sense and assume that if theres a creator who does things orderly and with all the proper underpinnings in which things must work together to exist.....then this same being would most certainly have not left the consequences of sin to some random accidental series of events.
It is worth mentioning that AFTER the flood god specifically ordered noah to eat flesh for the first time.....and the reason in this case was actually given.........to shorten mans life.
Ill get to your other points later.....
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
well, I appreciate the response, being a lil more respectful.
but you still didn't explain anything, also I was always curiouss what exactly a "day" was to "god".
24hrs? An earth day? So the 24 hrs day was prior to the sun being made?
On which planet?
seems kinda silly to preface a days work to an immortal omnipotent god.. not to mention the "rest" needed on the seventh day.
I do find your argument very intriguing and ironic
"So, again your thesis is BASED on certain assumptions you have made about how god created all things and how he continued to be involved in human history and nature. I cannot have a conversation or argument about what everybody else says happened. I CAN have a conversation about what the bible actually says or perhaps allude to. However in such discussions as these it is absolutely critical that each party admit to which narratives, models, interpretations, etc they are depending on to buttress their positions"
reason being is that's typically the argument made towards religious folk that are selectively obtuse to science.
for the record I was raised a Baptist Christian, went to church, youth, etc for 4 nights a week for the first part of my life.
so i'm hardly ignorant to the parables.
Oh, another thing.. the "flood" described was eerily similar to many, many others, in other cultures
the Sumerian Flood, found in the "Epic Ziusudra"
like most of the biblical stories, they aren't originals..
Slipup420
Member
If god created the Earth 6000 years ago ??? where did the Dinosaurs roam in this equation and why has not Your god come down to save all the christians being Slaughtered by Muslim Are you aware there are more Mosque;s in UK then there are churches ?? if your god loves you so much how come your prayers have yet to be answered ???
also if money is the root of all evil why do churches ask for it
also if money is the root of all evil why do churches ask for it
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
what are you arguing?
that the bible said stuff in it?
I said the noahs ark is NOT something that factually happened, and you are arguing odd, and un-relative points to this.
I care not about adam and eve, the creation story, nor eating flesh for the first time (really?, with the DENTAL make up that we have??)
I was curious about the "caveats" you mentioned, the ones relative to the" noahs ark fable"
that was my argument, the rest about the history of the bible is not only superfluous but not relative
don't make me bust out my "argument-ending-meme"... cuz ii will...
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
ohhhhh man... and NOW your true colors have shown...
Fuck me running..
First.... the earth is WAAAAAAY more than 6000 yrs old.
you are on the cusp of ignore-ment.. feels like the flat-earth thread...
arguing with you is lowering my IQ already..
I feel like this kid here..
Slipup420
Member
True colors in the bible does it not say its 6000 years old ?? i do not believe in any gods nor jesus or any religion i believe in do on to others as they do onto you end of story, The bible is a Joke your born you live when you die that is it nothing more that is it that is all
schnooby
Well-Known Member
the appeals you are making are in part depending on the bibke story being true. You are using what you think is an absurdity in the story to discount the veracity of the story.....thats an appeal to absurdity and is a logical fallacy.
if you are going to use a meme which relies on stupid caricatures pretending to be biblical truth, to redicule the bible and christianity, then you are committing intellectual suicide. Its not intellectually honest or even logical to try to argue against something by using a distorted definition of that something and compare it to another cartoonish reductionist prop to discredit the first thing.
Let me try to say it another way. Youre using a meme which represents a certain VERSION of the belief in the biblical flood and casting THAT version as absurd. Well the truth is your (that) version IS absurd because its not even based on good, sound exegesis of the scriptures.
Then you asked about microbiological organisms and that somehow bringing that to bear on the genesis account would make it look like the bible doesnt allow for that or that i hadnt thought of it. Brother, let me tell you something......theres almost nothing related to this existence in regards to creation and god etc that i havent thought of.......just somethin to keep under yer hat....
You asked me what am i arguing. Well, im arguing against the points you raised, what else? If what you want to do is dictate the terms of the argument such that only certain references can be allowed or are relevant then we have no legitimate argument. You sir, decided to post jn a religious thread, assuming that discussions would reference all manner of evidence, narrative, opinion, etc. If you are not interested in hearing them i dont know why you are here. To find more reasons to buttress your confirmation bias?
My caveats to the ark story, belatedly, as follows.
Not all species that exist today existed back then. Referring back to the meme this is a false assumption made in order to redicule the idea its possible to build a boat capable of holding parental genetic stock for major branches of the animal kingdom (genus vs species)
All sea life could be protecteed in the sea.
Dinosaurs are not mentioned as one of the animals god created.
Antedeluvians were probably all giants and much stronger and smarter making them capable of great feats of science and engineering even back then. The bible says they lived almost 1000 years. Its unlikely that beings with such long lifespans would be as small as we are today. The common sense reasoning here would be to assume that beings who lived nearly 1000 years were similarly superior to modern man in every other way.
As giants with long life spans it would have been practically easy to build a giant floating craft using woods much stronger than exist today and with building techniques as mysterious but undeniable as those used to construct the pyramids.
The water issue is easy. The interior of the earth likely has more empty spaces than solid spaces......where more than enough water to account for the flood could be stored or transported through various natural mechanisms.
Caves. I dont know much about geology or palentology. Im not an expert in the fossil record.
J do know that most science uses an analytical template often called "uniformitarianism" through which to view the evidence and data they collect.
What things like massive flooding and catastrophic events like mt st helens show us....is under certain circumsances catastrophic events can shape the earth very quickly and violently, not needing millions of years to build up small layers or condense minerals in columns or stalagmites/tites etc.
Carbon dating is known to have serious consistency/age limitations.....probly dont want to open that can of worms here.....but safe to say carbon dating relies on a theeory of uniformity of conditions which as i said above doesnt play nice with catastrophism or other possible conditions that existed only for a time under very different circumstances. For example some creationists believe in the vapor shell theory (the windows of heaven) and believe theres evidence that the magnetosphere was exponentially more powerful (non judaic mythos agrees), and that barometric pressure was much greater (makes sense because we know dinos would not be able to breathe in our current atmospheric pressure). Bizarre atmospheric differences between a preflood world and NOW create horrible accuracy complications for all dating techniques.
I feel like im wandering now.....too late and im stoned.....ill try this again later
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
ahh man... ok, we are going to have to just disagree on this, you are selectively overlooking the things i'm saying.
and the sheer fact that you don't believe in dinosaurs is just silly.
and the water thing?
you don't seem to understand gravity, and the earths molten rock. it simply CANNOT be empty, air isn't heavier or more dense than rock, or water, so that simply cannot happen.
you did point out your limited knowledge on geology and paleontology and perhaps that's why your views are a lil skewed.
and the magnetosphere is indeed fluctuating and changing polarity, hence the weakness and strength of it, but that's all proven with carbon dating, sooooo...
greasemonkeymann
Well-Known Member
you do know I am an ATHEIST... right?
are you asking me to prove that the earth IS 6000 yrs old?
Maybe you simply are misunderstanding me?
ThickStemz
Well-Known Member
The bible doesn't teach a 6 thousand year old birth. Some people read things in the bible and interpreted a 6 thousand year old earth.
Were clearly hundreds of thousands of years old
schnooby
Well-Known Member
no, i do believe in dinosaurs i just dont believe in general they were gods creations. There is anecdotal evidence which crosses many ancient mythos that bizarre creatures have existed which were hybrids or genetically manipulated and i believe the reason why dinosaurs were not saved through the flood is either due to their rogue genetics or that they would have no place in the post flood world.
molten rock. You do know that estimates of the earths crust thickness are anywhere between 20 and 30 miles which is more than enough room to store our current ocean many times over. The molten rock i think you must be referring to only occur where plates slip, or where volcanic activity happens and all of those represent very small footprints compared to the entire surface area and depth of the crust. As for gravity and the mechanisms which could cause water to move in and out of the crust we know there are forces which can easily overcome gravity under certain conditions, pressure differentials, voids or spaces created by cataclysmic crustal displacement or perhaps other methods. Ithink its naive to assume we understand something we werent even there to see and since flood mythos crosses numerous cultures it would be highly ignorant to categorically dismiss the entirety of those ancient tales as nothing more than the product of a cross cultural hoax or delusion.