The Genesis Conflict - 102 - A Universal Flood

[Iridescence]

Ridiculous...

Besides the dubious evidence presented, the story in Genesis 6-9 is just plain silly.

To start with, if the way that animals survived was by taking a pair of every species, you would need to have a boat big enough to contain one million terrestrial animal species. And you would need hundreds of people to tend to them, and lots of space for one years worth of food for them. You see the logistical problem.

Yet we are to believe that 8 people tended to 2 million animals in a huge boat. (By way of comparison, Brookfeild Zoo in Chicago has a staff of 400 people to tend to only a few thousand animals.)

Of course, if the flood produced enough rain to cover every mountain, then the air would be so thin that Noah and all his animals would suffocate.

Then you have the problem of after the flood. All the animals get out... Which means each animal species (including the people) would then descend from a single pair of parents... you'd have those inbreeding problems. And the predators would start picking off the herbivores... The herbivores would have nothing to eat because all the plants drowned, and the saline content of the soild would have increased as the waters receded...

Do I need to go on?

But here's my biggest problem, and it's the one that started with the nun who said that it was right for God to drown every baby in the world because they were "wiiiiiicked".

What kind of God drowns fucking babies and still expects to be called "good"? He just comes off like a Cosmic Andrea Yates, and that woman was crazy.

How about you think a little deeper about what Genesis is saying that led up to the flood... do you really interpret the 'wickedness' written about is a mere 'state of man's heart'... Could you possibly expand your understanding to better realize that the genetics of the people within the land was beyond the help of God, the love of God... and not because He could not or would not deliver them from their condition, it was instead because their insist rejection of Him and His aide?

Really, it is said to be the shame of 'us' that so many seem to stop thinking at the mere first sight of scripture... but once it has been given to them to see further, to understand better... it is then on their own heads. We have an amazing world within our grasp and so much is given freely...

How about you just post proving your point and/or disproving mine... Instead of name calling and net repping. :-*

 

[Dr.Drock]

I'm still waiting for one of these science and math denying fundamentalists to respond to Joe and use science and math to prove him wrong.

This thread is pages and pages long, his response was the first of the thread, and yet still NONE of them have even tried to put together one of their crazy responses.

that would require htem to actually know math and science

That's why I don't understand why they care what outcomes math and science give. If they're anti-math and science, just don't educate your kids about math and science. Just read a Bible to them everyday, sucks for the kids, but that's their rights as parents.

Half the time they dispute math and science they just say "nuh uh, god did it", the other half they try twisting math and science and just look downright stupid every time.

That's why my advice to them is always to stick to the strategy of "nuh uh, god did it." Wastes a lot less time, and even though it sounds stupid, these fundies still look less stupid saying that than when they pretend to know about math and science.

I really hope ONE of them tries to dispute what Joe is saying with their interpretation of math and science.

 

[Montrovant]

Wait a second....if the circle of the earth is one of the supposed proofs that the bible says the planet is a sphere, how does that work if earth only means the land masses?

By the definition you have said the bible uses for earth, it is actually FAR more likely that circle of the earth meant circle, not sphere; that the writers believed the land was in the shape of a circle.

If that is not what it meant, then the definition you gave for earth in the bible is obviously untrue.

Please see this explanation on the matter.

Does the Bible teach that the Earth is flat?

As usual you completely misunderstand.

I was not talking about the bible teaching flat earth.

YOU said that when the bible speaks of earth, it is talking of the dry land. You used scripture as an example that earth meant dry land and seas was used for water. Based on that, when the bible says 'It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth' it means he that sits on the circle of the dry land.

In other words, either circle of the earth is not talking about the planet as a sphere, or your contention that earth in the bible means dry land is incorrect. Obviously, the planet is not just dry land.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I'm still waiting for one of these science and math denying fundamentalists to respond to Joe and use science and math to prove him wrong.

This thread is pages and pages long, his response was the first of the thread, and yet still NONE of them have even tried to put together one of their crazy responses.

that would require htem to actually know math and science

That's why I don't understand why they care what outcomes math and science give. If they're anti-math and science, just don't educate your kids about math and science. Just read a Bible to them everyday, sucks for the kids, but that's their rights as parents.

Half the time they dispute math and science they just say "nuh uh, god did it", the other half they try twisting math and science and just look downright stupid every time.

That's why my advice to them is always to stick to the strategy of "nuh uh, god did it." Wastes a lot less time, and even though it sounds stupid, these fundies still look less stupid saying that than when they pretend to know about math and science.

I really hope ONE of them tries to dispute what Joe is saying with their interpretation of math and science.

It already has been done, now you answer our questions.

 

[Dr.Drock]

that would require htem to actually know math and science

That's why I don't understand why they care what outcomes math and science give. If they're anti-math and science, just don't educate your kids about math and science. Just read a Bible to them everyday, sucks for the kids, but that's their rights as parents.

Half the time they dispute math and science they just say "nuh uh, god did it", the other half they try twisting math and science and just look downright stupid every time.

That's why my advice to them is always to stick to the strategy of "nuh uh, god did it." Wastes a lot less time, and even though it sounds stupid, these fundies still look less stupid saying that than when they pretend to know about math and science.

I really hope ONE of them tries to dispute what Joe is saying with their interpretation of math and science.

It already has been done, now you answer our questions.

No it hasn't, you tried to reply to 1% and I tore that apart when your Bible blogger said 2 T-Rex's could magically fit in a 10 inch box, now please reply to the other 99% of it pelase.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Wait a second....if the circle of the earth is one of the supposed proofs that the bible says the planet is a sphere, how does that work if earth only means the land masses?

By the definition you have said the bible uses for earth, it is actually FAR more likely that circle of the earth meant circle, not sphere; that the writers believed the land was in the shape of a circle.

If that is not what it meant, then the definition you gave for earth in the bible is obviously untrue.

Please see this explanation on the matter.

Does the Bible teach that the Earth is flat?

As usual you completely misunderstand.

I was not talking about the bible teaching flat earth.

YOU said that when the bible speaks of earth, it is talking of the dry land. You used scripture as an example that earth meant dry land and seas was used for water. Based on that, when the bible says 'It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth' it means he that sits on the circle of the dry land.

In other words, either circle of the earth is not talking about the planet as a sphere, or your contention that earth in the bible means dry land is incorrect. Obviously, the planet is not just dry land.

Did you not grasp it when I said there are different continents around the world ?

1Sa 2:8 He raises up the poor out of the dust; He lifts up the needy from the dunghill to set them among princes; yea, He causes them to inherit a throne of honor; for to Jehovah are the pillars of the earth; and He sets the habitable world on them.

The pillars of the earth is dry land =earth

2Sa 22:16 And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were uncovered, at the rebuking of Jehovah, at the blast of the breath of His nostrils.

Here is the difference.

Job 34:13 Who has given the earth as a deposit with Him? Or who has set the whole world in order?

World is the planet.

 

[Youwerecreated]

That's why I don't understand why they care what outcomes math and science give. If they're anti-math and science, just don't educate your kids about math and science. Just read a Bible to them everyday, sucks for the kids, but that's their rights as parents.

Half the time they dispute math and science they just say "nuh uh, god did it", the other half they try twisting math and science and just look downright stupid every time.

That's why my advice to them is always to stick to the strategy of "nuh uh, god did it." Wastes a lot less time, and even though it sounds stupid, these fundies still look less stupid saying that than when they pretend to know about math and science.

I really hope ONE of them tries to dispute what Joe is saying with their interpretation of math and science.

It already has been done, now you answer our questions.

No it hasn't, you tried to reply to 1% and I tore that apart when your Bible blogger said 2 T-Rex's could magically fit in a 10 inch box, now please reply to the other 99% of it pelase.

Did you ignore how many animals were around 5,000 years ago ? No one knows , No one knows today how many animals there are .but yet your friend was trying to use a number that can't be confirmed. Not only that he ignored the size of the ark.

 

[JoeB131]

OMGorsh... And so with your all-encompassing and painfully profound biblical reasoning, dear Joe... you have a ready understanding as to just whom the said 'sons of God' were? What they represented to the land, the people?

I truly don't give a flip because it's mythology. It's a myth written by bronze age savages who didn't know what a germ was or where the sun went at night.

My point is, a God who is omnipotent and can do anything, and his go to solution to a problem is, "Fuck it, let's drown everyone, including the babies" isn't worthy of my worship even if he did exist.

And I am very thankful he doesn't. If there is a God, it isn't that guy.

He didn't do that except when the badness in the earth was so bad he had no choice.

He took it a step further coming to the earth as a man and humbled himself and took on the humiliation and sin of others so he didn't have to take that action again until the final judgement.

What could these people possibly have been doing that merited genocide? What were the babies doing to deserve to die? (Sorry, this is where the Nun Lost me 40 years ago.)

All the mythic bullshit aside, nothing these people were doing could be as bad as what we've done to each other in the last century.

 

[JoeB131]

That's why I don't understand why they care what outcomes math and science give. If they're anti-math and science, just don't educate your kids about math and science. Just read a Bible to them everyday, sucks for the kids, but that's their rights as parents.

Half the time they dispute math and science they just say "nuh uh, god did it", the other half they try twisting math and science and just look downright stupid every time.

That's why my advice to them is always to stick to the strategy of "nuh uh, god did it." Wastes a lot less time, and even though it sounds stupid, these fundies still look less stupid saying that than when they pretend to know about math and science.

I really hope ONE of them tries to dispute what Joe is saying with their interpretation of math and science.

It already has been done, now you answer our questions.

No it hasn't, you tried to reply to 1% and I tore that apart when your Bible blogger said 2 T-Rex's could magically fit in a 10 inch box, now please reply to the other 99% of it pelase.

I figured it out. The Ark was a TARDIS..

about as sensible as anything the bible thumpers have come up with.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I truly don't give a flip because it's mythology. It's a myth written by bronze age savages who didn't know what a germ was or where the sun went at night.

My point is, a God who is omnipotent and can do anything, and his go to solution to a problem is, "Fuck it, let's drown everyone, including the babies" isn't worthy of my worship even if he did exist.

And I am very thankful he doesn't. If there is a God, it isn't that guy.

He didn't do that except when the badness in the earth was so bad he had no choice.

He took it a step further coming to the earth as a man and humbled himself and took on the humiliation and sin of others so he didn't have to take that action again until the final judgement.

What could these people possibly have been doing that merited genocide? What were the babies doing to deserve to die? (Sorry, this is where the Nun Lost me 40 years ago.)

All the mythic bullshit aside, nothing these people were doing could be as bad as what we've done to each other in the last century.

Well what they were doing was not good. Remember also that the Angels took human form and had children and the offspring were very evil.

Any society that God wiped out personally was judged so were the ones that he used Israel to war again'st.

The further the society gets from God the worse they become.

If you take a look at the united states from it's start to where it is now can you see a serious decline in morals ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

It already has been done, now you answer our questions.

No it hasn't, you tried to reply to 1% and I tore that apart when your Bible blogger said 2 T-Rex's could magically fit in a 10 inch box, now please reply to the other 99% of it pelase.

I figured it out. The Ark was a TARDIS..

about as sensible as anything the bible thumpers have come up with.

Wrong the ark was the size of many freighters that cross the ocean today.

 

[Dr.Drock]

He didn't do that except when the badness in the earth was so bad he had no choice.

He took it a step further coming to the earth as a man and humbled himself and took on the humiliation and sin of others so he didn't have to take that action again until the final judgement.

What could these people possibly have been doing that merited genocide? What were the babies doing to deserve to die? (Sorry, this is where the Nun Lost me 40 years ago.)

All the mythic bullshit aside, nothing these people were doing could be as bad as what we've done to each other in the last century.

Well what they were doing was not good. Remember also that the Angels took human form and had children and the offspring were very evil.

Any society that God wiped out personally was judged so were the ones that he used Israel to war again'st.

The further the society gets from God the worse they become.

If you take a look at the united states from it's start to where it is now can you see a serious decline in morals ?

We had better morals when slavery was legal and women were viewed as 2nd class citizens to men?

 

[Youwerecreated]

What could these people possibly have been doing that merited genocide? What were the babies doing to deserve to die? (Sorry, this is where the Nun Lost me 40 years ago.)

All the mythic bullshit aside, nothing these people were doing could be as bad as what we've done to each other in the last century.

Well what they were doing was not good. Remember also that the Angels took human form and had children and the offspring were very evil.

Any society that God wiped out personally was judged so were the ones that he used Israel to war again'st.

The further the society gets from God the worse they become.

If you take a look at the united states from it's start to where it is now can you see a serious decline in morals ?

We had better morals when slavery was legal and women were viewed as 2nd class citizens to men?

No not at all,but if you consider once we dealt with those problems we were a more moral society for a while then once the anti God crowd got going look at us now.

Inner city gangs,drugs,crime,beatings at sporting events,our children lack discipline and look at the crimes committed by juveniles.

Abortion,our politicians,come on it's obvious our morals are declining.

And again I have never been a fan of organized religion and organized religion has brought shame to God.

 

[MarcATL]

Notice how drock and his friends always try to change the subject deliberately to avoid the tough questions presented to them.

I can't tell you how many times I presented tough questions to them ,that they can't answer and they just scoff at the questions and try to attack the bible because they can't support their views. They just contiue to try and change the subject . They call the guy in the video nuts and don't know what he is talking about but they have no rebuttal to the evidence presented.

They avoid the origins question. They avoid the fossills being found in the wrong strata. They avoid the question how did complex organisms just poof show up all at once.

If they know anything about mutations that is too many mutations for any organism to absorb to just poof turn in to something different. They still teach gradualism even though the fossil record say's something different.

Every single question you've ever asked that isn't a strawman has been answered quite easily dozens of times.

Even the silly questions you've asked in this post I've answered more than once.

All your crazy assessments and interpretations have been shattered over and over again, but you think your strategy of repeating what's already been shattered makes you the winner.

If you need such satisfaction, have at it, you're the winner.

Drock time to wake up now.

I must have missed those answers care to repost them.

It seems that Drock, et al are redefining whatever they want as "strawmen questions" in an attempt to justify not answering them. AKA not having any answers to those legitimate questions.

It ain't hard to tell.

I truly don't give a flip because it's mythology. It's a myth written by bronze age savages who didn't know what a germ was or where the sun went at night.

My point is, a God who is omnipotent and can do anything, and his go to solution to a problem is, "Fuck it, let's drown everyone, including the babies" isn't worthy of my worship even if he did exist.

And I am very thankful he doesn't. If there is a God, it isn't that guy.

He didn't do that except when the badness in the earth was so bad he had no choice.

He took it a step further coming to the earth as a man and humbled himself and took on the humiliation and sin of others so he didn't have to take that action again until the final judgement.

What could these people possibly have been doing that merited genocide? What were the babies doing to deserve to die? (Sorry, this is where the Nun Lost me 40 years ago.)

All the mythic bullshit aside, nothing these people were doing could be as bad as what we've done to each other in the last century.

This writing should give you insight into how the people of the earth were like during that time...
Days of Noah

We are living in the last days and mankind has once again become as they were in the days of Noah.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Well what they were doing was not good. Remember also that the Angels took human form and had children and the offspring were very evil.

Any society that God wiped out personally was judged so were the ones that he used Israel to war again'st.

The further the society gets from God the worse they become.

If you take a look at the united states from it's start to where it is now can you see a serious decline in morals ?

We had better morals when slavery was legal and women were viewed as 2nd class citizens to men?

No not at all,but if you consider once we dealt with those problems we were a more moral society for a while then once the anti God crowd got going look at us now.

Inner city gangs,drugs,crime,beatings at sporting events,our children lack discipline and look at the crimes committed by juveniles.

Abortion,our politicians,come on it's obvious our morals are declining.

And again I have never been a fan of organized religion and organized religion has brought shame to God.

I don't know what country you live in.

In america we ONLY elect judeo-christians, about 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999% of our politicians have been of the judeo-christian faith so I have no idea where this anti-god jibberish talk is coming from. When our country first started we didn't force all our politicians to be of judeo-christian faith like we do now.

 

[JoeB131]

Well what they were doing was not good. Remember also that the Angels took human form and had children and the offspring were very evil.

Any society that God wiped out personally was judged so were the ones that he used Israel to war again'st.

The further the society gets from God the worse they become.

If you take a look at the united states from it's start to where it is now can you see a serious decline in morals ?

From it's start, it was a country that practiced slavery (which, by the way, your supposedly Moral "God" never got around to condemning.) Only white males with property could vote. It grew to to the exploitation of immigrant labor, and the abuse of children in sweatshops.

But we got above those things without much help from the religions or your mythical Sky Pixie, thatn you very much.

Now, back to the story, the problem is, the Angels were the ones who did wrong, not the babies born to them. So I still have to wonder why God needed to drown the babies.

 

[JoeB131]

No it hasn't, you tried to reply to 1% and I tore that apart when your Bible blogger said 2 T-Rex's could magically fit in a 10 inch box, now please reply to the other 99% of it pelase.

I figured it out. The Ark was a TARDIS..

about as sensible as anything the bible thumpers have come up with.

Wrong the ark was the size of many freighters that cross the ocean today.

Besides your lack of a sense of humor....

(Seriously, a picture of the TARDIS is always funny.)

Freighters that ply the oceans of the world today-

1) Are built with complex engineering,
2) require dozens of men to maintain,
3) are not capable of holding all the animals known to exist, plus the food to sustain them for a year
4) Are not made of "Gopherwood",
5) Are not capable of withstanding a storm powerful enough to flood all the land masses.

 

[LOki]

Give me the verses that you claim teaches that the earth is flat and I will show you they have been taken out of context.

I seriously doubt that.
Job 26:7
He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Job 38:13-14
That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (14) It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.

Psalms 136:6
to him who spread out the earth upon the waters, for his steadfast love endures forever;

Proverbs 8:27
When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth:

Isaiah 40:22
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

Matthew 4:8
Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

 

[LOki]

Wait a second....if the circle of the earth is one of the supposed proofs that the bible says the planet is a sphere, how does that work if earth only means the land masses?

By the definition you have said the bible uses for earth, it is actually FAR more likely that circle of the earth meant circle, not sphere; that the writers believed the land was in the shape of a circle.

If that is not what it meant, then the definition you gave for earth in the bible is obviously untrue.

Please see this explanation on the matter.

Does the Bible teach that the Earth is flat?

Yep.

 

[LOki]

So since rabbits have been the same for thousands of years should they be out driving Hondas to get from hole to hole?

The Bible says the earth is flat, the links are already provided. It says repeatedly that there's 4 corners, makes mention of the ends of the earth and also says the earth can't be moved despite it constantly moving.

Not very bright, are you?

Notice how drock and his friends always try to change the subject deliberately to avoid the tough questions presented to them.

I haven't done this.

I can't tell you how many times I presented tough questions to them ,that they can't answer and they just scoff at the questions and try to attack the bible because they can't support their views.

I didn't do this.

They just contiue to try and change the subject .

This is pathological projection.

They call the guy in the video nuts and don't know what he is talking about but they have no rebuttal to the evidence presented.

I've rebutted his claims about what "science teaches us" unambiguously.

They avoid the origins question.

A patent lie.

They avoid the fossills being found in the wrong strata.

Another lie.

They avoid the question how did complex organisms just poof show up all at once.

Yet another lie.

If they know anything about mutations that is too many mutations for any organism to absorb to just poof turn in to something different.

Meaninglessness premised upon intentional mis-characterizations. It is creationists who demand such magical transformations are objectively real.

They still teach gradualism even though the fossil record say's something different.

More meaninglessness premised upon intentional mis-characterizations.