Total posts: 10
Posted in:
-->
@RoderickSpode
The first step is to understand that transporting animals on a boat is a common thing. And that animals will disperse from captivity to an ideal location with an environment that suits their needs and preferences.From there, the logistics have got to be so complex, so many factors, I don't think it's wise to write it off as a fairy tale.
But not so many animals from all parts of the world. Even if one were to accept that continental drift still had not occurred 4000 years ago it would be absurd to think that a pair of penguins and a pair of kangaroos walked off the Ark and migrated to their designated countries without procreating along the way.
Ethong's account, by the way, was that subterranean water trapped in porous rock somehow bubbled up through the ground which is a geological impossibility.
There has not been one account of the flood nor Noah's Arc that has been reasonably proved. In fact, most have been completely disproven as hoaxes. For example, the so-called discovery of the skeletal remains of the Arc found at the foot of Mt Ararat. It was well documented and filmed. It turned out that the Turkish Tourist Commission paid some Kurdish tribesmen to lug quantities of fossilised wood from the Dead Sea and bury them at the site in order to attract more tourism.
Of course, "scientists" took the bait and carbon-dated the "evidence" ok but of course, the scam was realised....oh, and the "scientists" just happened to belong to the Noah's Arc Society based in Hong Kong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rosends
Just imagine the ark was a TARDIS.
I would say that makes more sense.
However, the writers of the Bible (and many other accounts circulating around the time) could have dispensed with the building of an almighty Ark and simply write that Noah knocked up a wooden booth.
It would have suited Noah since he was known to be an alcoholic and did not have much in the way of hired hands to help him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The Bible never claimed 2000 BC, what verse are you referring to?
No, there is no verse in the Bible that states the (alleged) flood occurred in 2000 BC. But through totalling the timelines of generations from Adam and Eve through to Noah and his (alleged) age at the time, the accurate figure of 2000 years can be deduced.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Similarly, one is not required to believe the Bible's account of creation as a literal account.but you aren't required to believe in the Noah's Ark account as a literal account.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
its regional and was scientifically proven
Completely wrong. You quoted from the Hindustan times which stated:
could have been an actual event caused by unprecedented worldwide floods triggered in Canada in 6000 BC, says a new theory.
The article is also inaccurate and contradicts itself:
a remnant of which is today's Lake Winnipeg - suddenly burst its banks 8,000 years ago, triggering worldwide deluge.
Whichever time you believe it would be inconsistent with most reports that flood occurred some 4000 years ago.
The report did not conclude that the flood was scientifically proven and its chronology is completely skewed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
I'm a human being and you do yourself no favour by continuing in this fashion.No you aren't, you're a banned multi accounter with no respect for the topics at hand. You keep getting banned because you are an angry bigot, you're not here for discussion but preaching. Now get lost.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Lol number one you aren't a valid member, two... don't butt into my discussions with other valid members and three I'll address you as needed. I've been more than willing to address your nonsense over the years, only to be met with bigotry and anger. You don't ask questions, you come to this subject with preconceived ideas and some grudge you have about religion. Grow up. If you want a mature discussion you have failed big time, now go to another forum and practice your behavior and maybe somewhere down the line we could have a grown up chat.
I am a valid member and I have never displayed bigotry and this is an open forum.
I think what is of concern is the type of behaviour that you erroneously accuse others of is exactly what you have just done here.
There are three others in this forum who have quite legitimately questioned your habit of deceptively dodging issues.
I would suggest that you make an attempt to moderating your own behaviour and refrain from making vitriolic slurs and personal attacks on others.
Created:
Posted in:
This is indeed a very painful video for anyone of faith to watch.
We are looking at someone here who is uttering the metaphorical phrases quite commonly heard in churches yet seems to be convinced that what he knows is quite literal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mdh2000
Both I and A Troubled Man have asked the same question in this and other topics and Eternal VW knows full well that he has no rational answer, let alone an answer that is reasoned or valid.This is the crux of your argument. So I ask (with every hope that you'll answer) why does any feature developed by natural processes show an intelligence was necessary?
I'm afraid that it is simply a characteristic of creationists who will not pull the needle out of the stuck groove of thinking that all this had to be created.
What they will not accept is the overwhelming evidence and the facts proving that life was anything but created and in fact, there is no purpose to life whatsoever.
The very premise that "life is too complex" is self-defeating and doomed to failure since the creator of life would have to be even more complex and would have to have been created.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Not on the clear instructions of The Christ they haven't.
And that can be construed in many ways just as Muslims can say the same thing about Muhammed.
I am fully conversant with the Bible and in particular the New Testament:
For example, Luke 12:45-47). Paul warns the Corinthians, that as their “father,” he might return to them “with a rod,” presumably to beat them (1Cor 4:21). In Gal 5:12, Paul expresses the wish that those who disagree with him on the matter of circumcision might “castrate themselves.”
Well yes, you may say they are not instructions from Jesus but then Jesus did pretty much threaten doom and gloom upon his return (e.g. Matthew 14) and we could go into how the New Testament ends in Revelations with pages bursting with gruesome scenes of cosmic battles, plagues, and bloodshed.
Then we could look at how Christians tend to translate the word "jihad" as meaning violence or war, but to any peace-loving Muslim the word means "struggle".
My point is that both religions are good and bad and certainly in the mainstream context, Muslims and Christians are peace-loving. It is the extremist elements in both cases who will interpret the teachings of Muhammed and Jesus for their own nefarious ends.
Oh, and for years I had to personally dodge the brutal killing and violence of the IRA virtually on my doorstep. Talking to those Republicans and they will all tell you that what they do is in the name of Jesus Christ.
But to declare "my religious idol is better and more peace-loving than yours" is nothing but pure introspective bias.
Created: