Do you believe in Noahs Ark?

[YWN666]

Nope. Dragons and dinosaurs are not the same thing. Dinosaurs we have evidence of--bones etc.

Dragons are mythological.

Not to mention, dragons have wings and breath fire. Ive yet to hear of any dinosaurs that fit that description.

If you wanted to take a scientific approach to figuring out if dragons existed or not is there any concrete evidence that they didn't? Or are we making an assumption because we don't have any proof?

There is that ridiculous "prove it doesn't exist" argument. You should know better.

 

[del]

She was "clinically dead". That is not dead and I do not believe for a second that rigor mortis had set in and she was able to be revived - rigor mortis is caused by the lack of oxygen and when that sets in, the tissue is dead. Some of the other things reported about the experience came from her son who is not a doctor.

i'll alert the media to your concerns. really.

No substantive response, eh?

don't particularly care about the subject matter or your take on it.

i wasted 6 seconds of my life posting the link, 6 more responding to your response, and another 6 here. that's too much by about 18 seconds.

carry on.

 

[Gurdari]

The story of Noahs ark has always stood out to me as one of those stories in the bible, that only proves how innacurate the bible is. Do christians really believe this part of the bible, and if you dont, can you believe in men who part the sea, or people who can come back from the dead? Are these just made up stories that were only meant to have a moral significance, and not to be taken literally?

I like the contradiction inherent in this idea... that God made a mistake, and felt the need to correct it. Then again, he shoose giant lizards to rule the planet long before he decided on humans... which makes me wonder whom did he create in his own image? #1 or #2?

Of course, one wonders why regular land animals all had to die (with the exception of pairs) but all marine life was left unscathed...

Perhaps God created dinosaurs because he knew one day we could use their oil?

Perhaps! The bigger deal for me is the inherent fallability of God in this story/myth/historically accurate documentary. That he made a mistake, and corrected it.
I guess the Jesus thing makes the same point... that he needed to use Jesus to save humanity from himself. Thus, a change of heart from his earlier feelings about how to treat us.

 

[YWN666]

i'll alert the media to your concerns. really.

No substantive response, eh?

don't particularly care about the subject matter or your take on it.

i wasted 6 seconds of my life posting the link, 6 more responding to your response, and another 6 here. that's too much by about 18 seconds.

carry on.

I guess you don't have much confidence in what you posted then.

 

[del]

No substantive response, eh?

don't particularly care about the subject matter or your take on it.

i wasted 6 seconds of my life posting the link, 6 more responding to your response, and another 6 here. that's too much by about 18 seconds.

carry on.

I guess you don't have much confidence in what you posted then.

i posted a link to a story you asked for. i neither read nor wrote it.

now declare yourself the winner and move along.

 

[YWN666]

don't particularly care about the subject matter or your take on it.

i wasted 6 seconds of my life posting the link, 6 more responding to your response, and another 6 here. that's too much by about 18 seconds.

carry on.

I guess you don't have much confidence in what you posted then.

i posted a link to a story you asked for. i neither read nor wrote it.

now declare yourself the winner and move along.

OK, when I am wrong I admit it. Looking back in the thread, it was that cajun guy who posted the original claim. My apologies.

 

[del]

I guess you don't have much confidence in what you posted then.

i posted a link to a story you asked for. i neither read nor wrote it.

now declare yourself the winner and move along.

OK, when I am wrong I admit it. Looking back in the thread, it was that cajun guy who posted the original claim. My apologies.

thank you; i appreciate it.

 

[Godboy]

She was "clinically dead". That is not dead and I do not believe for a second that rigor mortis had set in and she was able to be revived - rigor mortis is caused by the lack of oxygen and when that sets in, the tissue is dead. Some of the other things reported about the experience came from her son who is not a doctor.

i'll alert the media to your concerns. really.

No substantive response, eh?

I doubt you will get anything compelling from the spiritual types here.

 

[N4mddissent]

No, I'm afraid you did in fact miss the point.

That point being: You believe something without any proof to back your belief.

No, i DONT believe, that is the point.

Same thing. I don't expect you to concede the point, so if you just need to get the last word, go for it.

I think the points you guys are shooting past each other go like this. Amanda is saying that you accept some things without absolute certainty. Godboy is saying this contradicts the burden of proof standard.

In an earlier post, Amanda, you said lets approach it scientifically and then said what proof is there that dragons did not exist. Actually science would not assume the existence until proof was shown. I don't know if you're familiar with the teapot in orbit example. The gist is that one could postulate that there is a teapot in orbit around the sun. Now, since it is impossible to observe every possible location at all times from the earth, no one could ever say for certain that there is no teapot. Pro-Teapot supporters could would always be able to say, we can't see everywhere, so you can't say for sure the teapot is not there. It becomes a bit ridiculous. So the scientific approach is to say, ok, you believe there is a teapot in orbit. If you want me to incorporate that into my view of reality, you need to show me some evidence of the teapot's existence. I not going to make that assumption without a good logical reason.

Now, science would not say that it is impossible for the teapot to be there. And I think this is the point that mixes people up and part of the point you were trying to make to Live. Science tends to be more ambiguous than people like to be. It's more like, science won't say that it is impossible that dragons could have existed. However, until such time as there is sufficient evidence to support their existence, there is no reason to accept such an assumption.

I think people sometimes mistake the idea that something does not exist for a claim or assumption. The concept of the dragon was introduced to us. Without that concept, there would never even be a question of existence. The dragon is the claim, the assumption, not the lack of the dragon. There are an infinite number of things we don't accept as existing, simply because we've never been introduced to the concept. If I introduce the concept of a strange creature called a goobelygoob, are you making a claim that it doesn't exist? Do you have to actively disbelieve in it? Or is the natural state to assume it doesn't exist, just like before you heard of it? The latter is natural. You don't actually believe a goobelygood exists right now. And if I am to convince you otherwise, then I am expected to offer evidence. I can't expect you assume the goobelygoob exists (and will eat everyone if they don't send me their money) simply because you can't prove that it doesn't.

 

[Skeptik]

Thirteen pages about whether or not to believe in Noah's Ark?

The story of Noah is an allegory with a message: Be prepared, and listen to the Lord (or his representatives).

The first message is an apt one, and applies to our time as well as Noah's. Whether or not the second one is to be taken seriously depends on your religious outlook.

Is the story a description of an actual, historical event? No, that is simply not possible.

How did two kangaroos hop all of the way back across the ocean from Mt. Ararat to Australia?

How did Noah gather those kangaroos in the first place, not to mention creatures from the Americas, Asia, and Europe?

What did the two tigers eat on the way back to Asia?

No, that this allegory describes an historical event isimply not possible on a whole lot of levels.

Are we to believe that an actual fox really tried to reach a bunch of grapes in order to understand the concept of sour grapes? Foxes don't particularly like grapes, do they? No one that I know of takes Aesop's Fables as actual historical events, but they do have a lot of lessons about human behavior. The Bible stories need to be interpreted in the same way.

So, yes, I believe in Noah's Ark. I am prepared for most foreseeable disasters.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

Dead for 17 hours? Got a link to that story?

Woman Wakes Up After Family Says Goodbye, Tubes Pulled - Health News Story - WEWS Cleveland

She was "clinically dead". That is not dead and I do not believe for a second that rigor mortis had set in and she was able to be revived - rigor mortis is caused by the lack of oxygen and when that sets in, the tissue is dead. Some of the other things reported about the experience came from her son who is not a doctor.

Actually rigor mortis is caused by a lack of ATP.

However, muscles need ATP in order to release from a contracted state (it is used to pump the calcium out of the cells so the fibers can unlatch from each other). ATP reserves are quickly exhausted from the muscle contraction and other cellular processes. This means that the actin and myosin fibers will remain linked until the muscles themselves start to decompose.

What Causes Rigor Mortis?

While it's true that most ATP is regenerated by oxidative phosphorylation, some ADP is phosphorylated anaerobically with glycolysis.

Muscle cramps are an example of a similar mechanism without somebody being dead in any sense. It can be caused by low blood calcium levels (instead of inability to transport calcium due to low ATP), overexertion, which overwhelms processes that regen ATP, hypoxia, as glycolysis alone can't fulfill ATP needs, etc.

Rigor mortis doesn't imply the tissue being dead in itself, though usually it would be on the way if rigor mortis had set in. The woman had been kept "alive" artifically. It's a bit odd to me that people try to explain something they don't understand and is positive by calling it a miracle (not you, the family in the article). But in any case I'm glad things turned out well for them.

 

[Yukon]

Idiot. Rigor Mortis is caused by being DEAD !

 

[LiveUninhibited]

Idiot. Rigor Mortis is caused by being DEAD !

Indeed. Thanks for that insight.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Hey, Jackalopes are real. I've seen pictures of them.

 

[jeffrockit]

The story of Noahs ark has always stood out to me as one of those stories in the bible, that only proves how innacurate the bible is. Do christians really believe this part of the bible, and if you dont, can you believe in men who part the sea, or people who can come back from the dead? Are these just made up stories that were only meant to have a moral significance, and not to be taken literally?

Heres a video of Joe Rogan discussing Noahs ark. It starts off with him talking about it in his comedy bit on stage, then after the show when hes backstage, he finds out that theres an archeoligist there in the audience that wants to discuss the ark with him. Apparently he claims they might possibly have found the ark 17,000 feet up in Mt. Ararat. Theres a 517 foot boat up there, which is pretty amazing and obviously tells some sort of story.

I find Joes arguement to be pretty solid about the ark, and i wanted to know what christians might have to say about it.

Heres the video...

YouTube - Joe Rogan vs Noah's Ark

If you are not a believer, why do you even care to debate it or study it. What is your gain...just to poke fun at Christians. I can't think of any good reason.

 

[Godboy]

The story of Noahs ark has always stood out to me as one of those stories in the bible, that only proves how innacurate the bible is. Do christians really believe this part of the bible, and if you dont, can you believe in men who part the sea, or people who can come back from the dead? Are these just made up stories that were only meant to have a moral significance, and not to be taken literally?

Heres a video of Joe Rogan discussing Noahs ark. It starts off with him talking about it in his comedy bit on stage, then after the show when hes backstage, he finds out that theres an archeoligist there in the audience that wants to discuss the ark with him. Apparently he claims they might possibly have found the ark 17,000 feet up in Mt. Ararat. Theres a 517 foot boat up there, which is pretty amazing and obviously tells some sort of story.

I find Joes arguement to be pretty solid about the ark, and i wanted to know what christians might have to say about it.

Heres the video...

YouTube - Joe Rogan vs Noah's Ark

If you are not a believer, why do you even care to debate it or study it. What is your gain...just to poke fun at Christians. I can't think of any good reason.

You cant think of a reason for people to debate the existance of God? I am not surprised you believe in it. Religion is one of the classic debates, but more importantly, its a topic i like to debate, thats why i started the thread. Just because you dont like the topic, doesnt mean that other people share your opinion, and no one is forcing you to participate.

I think it bothers you when the holes in your bible are pointed out. Its the stuff you dont hear about in your church, and it must be difficult for you to hear, as i would assume it must raise doubts for any rational thinking person.

 

[BrokenAngel]

The story of Noahs ark has always stood out to me as one of those stories in the bible, that only proves how innacurate the bible is. Do christians really believe this part of the bible, and if you dont, can you believe in men who part the sea, or people who can come back from the dead? Are these just made up stories that were only meant to have a moral significance, and not to be taken literally?

Heres a video of Joe Rogan discussing Noahs ark. It starts off with him talking about it in his comedy bit on stage, then after the show when hes backstage, he finds out that theres an archeoligist there in the audience that wants to discuss the ark with him. Apparently he claims they might possibly have found the ark 17,000 feet up in Mt. Ararat. Theres a 517 foot boat up there, which is pretty amazing and obviously tells some sort of story.

I find Joes arguement to be pretty solid about the ark, and i wanted to know what christians might have to say about it.

Ok.. I don't know what kinds of answers you have gotten past page two but I see no one even attempting to get to a point that you might have been searching for. Surprisingly enough to me no one has given any reasons they would believe the story or that the story would inspire faith. I can try but I am certainly not all that great with words..

I just reread your post and decided to throw this point in before I get on with what I believe. There are many different factions of Christianity. Some believe the bible is meant as a moral guide and that stories like Noah's Ark are meant to make you behave. Then there are some who believe the scripture is verse by verse truth and should be followed to the letter. Then there is everyone in between ^_^ So no one answer you get out of this question will be right or should be the same.

I have been on the fence about religion since I was 12. God.. what a silly idea right? The idea that someone has laid out a spider's web that is your life and just watches as you try desperately to get from one side to the other without falling. It wasn't until I had my child that things just started making sense to me and faith began seeping more and more heavily into my life.

Now.. You said that it seems silly for a loving and true God to just wipe out all of mankind and start over. The reasoning I hold as true for this is..

Now it came to pass, when men egan to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the Lord said "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

According to some, the Sons of God are reffering to angels. There is a belief that the angels came down and sinned with women and had offspring. These offspring were called nephilim and they were considered an abomination before God. Yes men were wicked, but that seems to go hand in hand with our goodness. Without suffering and pain there can be no joy and salvation because it would simply be taken for granted. The nephilim though were not part of God's original design. This isn't a crack pot theory but rather an old idea. The religious reasons for women wearing clothes that cover the whole of their form is so that they do not tempt the angels and other men with their beauty.

As for the Ark's structure. It had 3 levels, was 300 cubits long, 50 wide and 30 tall. A cubit is universally known as the length of the sitting king's forearm, from elbow to finger tip so no one can give you exact dimensions unfortunately. Also something to chew on is the idea that perhaps God is the king by which the cubit is measured.

God instructs Noah to cover the ark, inside and out, with pitch ( Pitch (resin) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) which may have helped it stay structurally a little more sound. Also keep in mind that a lot has been done with ships and sailing vessles that people thought was impossible. The Vikings for instance had stories of long boats that carried hundereds of men. This was thought to be merely made up and nothing but tales of grandure to help instill fear in their enemies until they found one within the last 2 decades. They were astonished at the craftsmanship that allowed such a ship to exist, and not even exist but be effective.

There have been many flood stories told over centuries in countless religions. Either every one of them is borrowing from each other or there is something more to this than you may be willing to admit. That is ok though because it will never truly be proven until death steals the breath away from man with a cold kiss. Only then will the athiests or the religious be proven right.

"I would rather believe in God and be proven right than believe there is no God and be proven wrong."

 

[jeffrockit]

The story of Noahs ark has always stood out to me as one of those stories in the bible, that only proves how innacurate the bible is. Do christians really believe this part of the bible, and if you dont, can you believe in men who part the sea, or people who can come back from the dead? Are these just made up stories that were only meant to have a moral significance, and not to be taken literally?

Heres a video of Joe Rogan discussing Noahs ark. It starts off with him talking about it in his comedy bit on stage, then after the show when hes backstage, he finds out that theres an archeoligist there in the audience that wants to discuss the ark with him. Apparently he claims they might possibly have found the ark 17,000 feet up in Mt. Ararat. Theres a 517 foot boat up there, which is pretty amazing and obviously tells some sort of story.

I find Joes arguement to be pretty solid about the ark, and i wanted to know what christians might have to say about it.

Heres the video...

YouTube - Joe Rogan vs Noah's Ark

If you are not a believer, why do you even care to debate it or study it. What is your gain...just to poke fun at Christians. I can't think of any good reason.

You cant think of a reason for people to debate the existance of God? I am not surprised you believe in it. Religion is one of the classic debates, but more importantly, its a topic i like to debate, thats why i started the thread. Just because you dont like the topic, doesnt mean that other people share your opinion, and no one is forcing you to participate.

I think it bothers you when the holes in your bible are pointed out. Its the stuff you dont hear about in your church, and it must be difficult for you to hear, as i would assume it must raise doubts for any rational thinking person.

Don't pretend to know anything about what bothers me. Because someone on a message board holds an opinion on the bible means nothing to me nor does it come close to casting any doubts. Your statement shows me you think very highly of your intellect....well at least that makes 1 person who thinks that. Your opinion changes nothing in my faith. You do get that it is called faith for a reason?

Message boards are pure entertainment for me. I take the statements made on these boards about as seriously as I take reading a joke.

As far as holes in the bible, that has been debunked by many experts who's opinions I actually care about. Your opinion means absolutely nothing to me as I am sure mine is to you.
Have a great life...I know I do!

 

[Godboy]

If you are not a believer, why do you even care to debate it or study it. What is your gain...just to poke fun at Christians. I can't think of any good reason.

You cant think of a reason for people to debate the existance of God? I am not surprised you believe in it. Religion is one of the classic debates, but more importantly, its a topic i like to debate, thats why i started the thread. Just because you dont like the topic, doesnt mean that other people share your opinion, and no one is forcing you to participate.

I think it bothers you when the holes in your bible are pointed out. Its the stuff you dont hear about in your church, and it must be difficult for you to hear, as i would assume it must raise doubts for any rational thinking person.

Don't pretend to know anything about what bothers me. Because someone on a message board holds an opinion on the bible means nothing to me nor does it come close to casting any doubts. Your statement shows me you think very highly of your intellect....well at least that makes 1 person who thinks that. Your opinion changes nothing in my faith. You do get that it is called faith for a reason?

Message boards are pure entertainment for me. I take the statements made on these boards about as seriously as I take reading a joke.

As far as holes in the bible, that has been debunked by many experts who's opinions I actually care about. Your opinion means absolutely nothing to me as I am sure mine is to you.
Have a great life...I know I do!

Is being a hypocrit part of being Christian or what? You got to love it when someone makes this statement....

Don't pretend to know anything about what bothers me.

...followed by this one.

Your statement shows me you think very highly of your intellect

You seem to be making alot of assumptions yourself. What...i cant make judgments about you, but you can about me?

 

[LiveUninhibited]

The story of Noahs ark has always stood out to me as one of those stories in the bible, that only proves how innacurate the bible is. Do christians really believe this part of the bible, and if you dont, can you believe in men who part the sea, or people who can come back from the dead? Are these just made up stories that were only meant to have a moral significance, and not to be taken literally?

Heres a video of Joe Rogan discussing Noahs ark. It starts off with him talking about it in his comedy bit on stage, then after the show when hes backstage, he finds out that theres an archeoligist there in the audience that wants to discuss the ark with him. Apparently he claims they might possibly have found the ark 17,000 feet up in Mt. Ararat. Theres a 517 foot boat up there, which is pretty amazing and obviously tells some sort of story.

I find Joes arguement to be pretty solid about the ark, and i wanted to know what christians might have to say about it.

Ok.. I don't know what kinds of answers you have gotten past page two but I see no one even attempting to get to a point that you might have been searching for. Surprisingly enough to me no one has given any reasons they would believe the story or that the story would inspire faith. I can try but I am certainly not all that great with words..

I just reread your post and decided to throw this point in before I get on with what I believe. There are many different factions of Christianity. Some believe the bible is meant as a moral guide and that stories like Noah's Ark are meant to make you behave. Then there are some who believe the scripture is verse by verse truth and should be followed to the letter. Then there is everyone in between ^_^ So no one answer you get out of this question will be right or should be the same.

I have been on the fence about religion since I was 12. God.. what a silly idea right? The idea that someone has laid out a spider's web that is your life and just watches as you try desperately to get from one side to the other without falling. It wasn't until I had my child that things just started making sense to me and faith began seeping more and more heavily into my life.

Now.. You said that it seems silly for a loving and true God to just wipe out all of mankind and start over. The reasoning I hold as true for this is..

Now it came to pass, when men egan to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the Lord said "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

According to some, the Sons of God are reffering to angels. There is a belief that the angels came down and sinned with women and had offspring. These offspring were called nephilim and they were considered an abomination before God. Yes men were wicked, but that seems to go hand in hand with our goodness. Without suffering and pain there can be no joy and salvation because it would simply be taken for granted. The nephilim though were not part of God's original design. This isn't a crack pot theory but rather an old idea. The religious reasons for women wearing clothes that cover the whole of their form is so that they do not tempt the angels and other men with their beauty.

As for the Ark's structure. It had 3 levels, was 300 cubits long, 50 wide and 30 tall. A cubit is universally known as the length of the sitting king's forearm, from elbow to finger tip so no one can give you exact dimensions unfortunately. Also something to chew on is the idea that perhaps God is the king by which the cubit is measured.

God instructs Noah to cover the ark, inside and out, with pitch ( Pitch (resin) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) which may have helped it stay structurally a little more sound. Also keep in mind that a lot has been done with ships and sailing vessles that people thought was impossible. The Vikings for instance had stories of long boats that carried hundereds of men. This was thought to be merely made up and nothing but tales of grandure to help instill fear in their enemies until they found one within the last 2 decades. They were astonished at the craftsmanship that allowed such a ship to exist, and not even exist but be effective.

There have been many flood stories told over centuries in countless religions. Either every one of them is borrowing from each other or there is something more to this than you may be willing to admit. That is ok though because it will never truly be proven until death steals the breath away from man with a cold kiss. Only then will the athiests or the religious be proven right.

"I would rather believe in God and be proven right than believe there is no God and be proven wrong."

Pascal's Wager again. There have been a lot of critiques of the idea. First there's the fact that the statistical advantage of belief is almost eliminated by the fact that there have been so many versions of religions that claim everybody else is screwed over the years. Second there's the fact that many religions contradict themselves and everything we experience in reality, so their validity is almost impossible. Third there's the fact that if there were a loving and rational God, he would reward people proportionately for goodness, intelligence, and rationality, not blind faith, as faith is a rejection of rationality.