Question about Noah.

[PostmodernProph]

????.....ignorant is claiming you know what someone else believes.......I am certainly prepared to admit you've demonstrated ignorance repeatedly in this thread......however, I am not going to admit not believing something I believe......I consider your arguments, and your knowledge of the Bible to be quite shallow.....you are nearly as bad as Holly......

I can see that you're angry and, well, pissy, but you're failure to present an argument that relies solely upon the intervention of magic and supernaturalism is no one's fault but yours.

if you want more attention from me instead of ridicule, you'll have to come up with an argument that doesn't hinge upon pretending I'm a young earther......

Ok.

So..... tell us about a 600 hundred year old Noah and the Ark tale....... all of which took place just a few thousand years ago.

I'd rather hear about that tadpole that climbed out of that cesspool of slime and turned into Taylor Swift.

Thousands of credible scientists would tell you about evolution (it's the leading theory, not fact), if you bothered to search it. How about a 600 year old Noah? Got ANY credible scientists who believe that?

and any credible scientist would admit that there is no evidence that meets the tests of the scientific method capable of proving that humans evolved from a single celled organism......

 

[SmedlyButler]

Ok.

So..... tell us about a 600 hundred year old Noah and the Ark tale....... all of which took place just a few thousand years ago.

I'd rather hear about that tadpole that climbed out of that cesspool of slime and turned into Taylor Swift.

Thousands of credible scientists would tell you about evolution (it's the leading theory, not fact), if you bothered to search it. How about a 600 year old Noah? Got ANY credible scientists who believe that?

Of course. There are rather renown scientists on both sides of the issue were you to bother enough to check it out for yourself. That's what most of us do when we want to find out something. You should try it.

Please identify the "renown' scientists who advance the notion of a 600 year old Noah.

I will as soon a you identify the scientist who claimed Taylor Swift sprang forth from a cesspool soup of slime 100 million years ago.

How many times do you have to be reminded that evolution is not a theory of the origin of life but concerns itself with the development of life? From Rationalwiki;

"When compiled over successive generations, cumulative genotypic changes manifest significant enough phenotypic differences between discrete populations of organisms that they can no longer interbreed, leading to speciation. This and similar explanations of biodiversity, such as genetic drift, are evolution's sole concerns, not the origin of life itself."

Evolutionists do not have a recipe for

 

[Ellipsis]

My highschool science teacher had a can like that inconspicuously placed on a shelf behind his desk and gave extra credit points to the first student of the simester to notice it if they could say something inteligent on evolution.

I later realised how smart that tactic was because it got students thinking more about evolution when they weren't in his class. He had a few items like that in his lab and we started looking and commenting on all sorts of things in the hopes of getting extra credit. It made us pay more attention to....well, everything.

 

[SmedlyButler]

My highschool science teacher had a can like that inconspicuously placed on a shelf behind his desk and gave extra credit points to the first student of the simester to notice it if they could say something inteligent on evolution.

I later realised how smart that tactic was because it got students thinking more about evolution when they weren't in his class. He had a few items like that in his lab and we started looking and commenting on all sorts of things in the hopes of getting extra credit. It made us pay more attention to....well, everything.

Sounds like one of those great teachers who are among any nation's most valuable resources.

 

[asterism]

My highschool science teacher had a can like that inconspicuously placed on a shelf behind his desk and gave extra credit points to the first student of the simester to notice it if they could say something inteligent on evolution.

I later realised how smart that tactic was because it got students thinking more about evolution when they weren't in his class. He had a few items like that in his lab and we started looking and commenting on all sorts of things in the hopes of getting extra credit. It made us pay more attention to....well, everything.

While I think evolution is a mostly correct theory, I dislike the tactic used by your teacher. Providing a reward for a trigger does not foster the expansion of knowledge, it serves as a selection criterion for indoctrination. We don't need indoctrinated students who are successful because they respond to triggers.

 

[Ellipsis]

While I think evolution is a mostly correct theory, I dislike the tactic used by your teacher. Providing a reward for a trigger does not foster the expansion of knowledge, it serves as a selection criterion for indoctrination. We don't need indoctrinated students who are successful because they respond to triggers.

Public school itself is about indoctrination. That's why it exists. For example, America is the only 'free' country who makes children recite a pledge every day. Not even Russia does that.

 

[Ellipsis]

My highschool science teacher had a can like that inconspicuously placed on a shelf behind his desk and gave extra credit points to the first student of the simester to notice it if they could say something inteligent on evolution.

I later realised how smart that tactic was because it got students thinking more about evolution when they weren't in his class. He had a few items like that in his lab and we started looking and commenting on all sorts of things in the hopes of getting extra credit. It made us pay more attention to....well, everything.

Sounds like one of those great teachers who are among any nation's most valuable resources.

He also used his bad singing as punishment. If he asked a question, someone had better answer it or we would all get an ear full of poorly sung 50s dance

 

[amrchaos]

I really don't understand the need for Noah's Flood to be an actual event.

If I was looking at it in terms of an allegory, it suggests that punishment is reserved for the wicked and sinful while the innocent and just would be safeguarded and spared.

As a literal story, it says a lot less than its allegorical. It also implies that mankind is judged as a group, with only a chosen few spared.

Considering that Noah was only a couple of generations removed from Adam, I find it amazing there was not much sorrow in the passing away of his family(the people around were his cousins, not just 'friends' but actual blood relatives)

Also, it does not seem like it was necessary to drown the entire world when a flood that engulfed the region would be more than sufficient to kill mankind. Do you really think that a handful of Noah's relatives made a bee line to America? Just to argue they made it past the Himalaya's is asking a lot for this time period--how would they even know how to survive, given that they were raised in a river valley?

 

[amrchaos]

Oh, and by the way

If you wonder why most civilizations had a flood myth, look at where they started or the people they descend from.

Most civilizations either started near a large body of water or river, and heavy flooding may have occurred from time to time. Even the Hebrew had a double dose of it--first being derived from people of the Mesopotamia river valley, and then their experiences with the Nile river valley.

Try locating a people that never lived near a body of water that floods r is derived from such a people and flood myths would not be as common meme as it would for, say, people of the Euphrates or Indus or any other historical river valleys.

 

[SmedlyButler]

My highschool science teacher had a can like that inconspicuously placed on a shelf behind his desk and gave extra credit points to the first student of the simester to notice it if they could say something inteligent on evolution.

I later realised how smart that tactic was because it got students thinking more about evolution when they weren't in his class. He had a few items like that in his lab and we started looking and commenting on all sorts of things in the hopes of getting extra credit. It made us pay more attention to....well, everything.

While I think evolution is a mostly correct theory, I dislike the tactic used by your teacher. Providing a reward for a trigger does not foster the expansion of knowledge, it serves as a selection criterion for indoctrination. We don't need indoctrinated students who are successful because they respond to triggers.

"He had a few items like that in his lab and we started looking and commenting on all sorts of things in the hopes of getting extra credit. It made us pay more attention to....well, everything."

I had a contrary view, it sounded to me like the teacher stimulated critical thinking and a curiosity in "well, everything".

 

[Ellipsis]

Oh, and by the way

If you wonder why most civilizations had a flood myth, look at where they started or the people they descend from.

Most civilizations either started near a large body of water or river, and heavy flooding may have occurred from time to time. Even the Hebrew had a double dose of it--first being derived from people of the Mesopotamia river valley, and then their experiences with the Nile river valley.

Try locating a people that never lived near a body of water that floods r is derived from such a people and flood myths would not be as common meme as it would for, say, people of the Euphrates or Indus or any other historical river valleys.

Why would a people single out one flood in particular when floods per-se are so common?

 

[Ellipsis]

I really don't understand the need for Noah's Flood to be an actual event.

If I was looking at it in terms of an allegory, it suggests that punishment is reserved for the wicked and sinful while the innocent and just would be safeguarded and spared.

As a literal story, it says a lot less than its allegorical. It also implies that mankind is judged as a group, with only a chosen few spared.

Considering that Noah was only a couple of generations removed from Adam, I find it amazing there was not much sorrow in the passing away of his family(the people around were his cousins, not just 'friends' but actual blood relatives)

Also, it does not seem like it was necessary to drown the entire world when a flood that engulfed the region would be more than sufficient to kill mankind. Do you really think that a handful of Noah's relatives made a bee line to America? Just to argue they made it past the Himalaya's is asking a lot for this time period--how would they even know how to survive, given that they were raised in a river valley?

If you take the geneology of Adam to Noah at face value, you see that Adam lived long enough to personaly meet Noah.

 

[Hollie]

Ignorant is saying that you believe in the bible when you know you don't believe it.

????.....ignorant is claiming you know what someone else believes.......I am certainly prepared to admit you've demonstrated ignorance repeatedly in this thread......however, I am not going to admit not believing something I believe......I consider your arguments, and your knowledge of the Bible to be quite shallow.....you are nearly as bad as Holly......

I can see that you're angry and, well, pissy, but you're failure to present an argument that relies solely upon the intervention of magic and supernaturalism is no one's fault but yours.

if you want more attention from me instead of ridicule, you'll have to come up with an argument that doesn't hinge upon pretending I'm a young earther......

Ok.

So..... tell us about a 600 hundred year old Noah and the Ark tale....... all of which took place just a few thousand years ago.

so you opted out on the intelligent argument gamble?.....

I opted out of your pointless 6,000 year old earth nonsense.

 

[Hollie]

Oh, and by the way

If you wonder why most civilizations had a flood myth, look at where they started or the people they descend from.

Most civilizations either started near a large body of water or river, and heavy flooding may have occurred from time to time. Even the Hebrew had a double dose of it--first being derived from people of the Mesopotamia river valley, and then their experiences with the Nile river valley.

Try locating a people that never lived near a body of water that floods r is derived from such a people and flood myths would not be as common meme as it would for, say, people of the Euphrates or Indus or any other historical river valleys.

Why would a people single out one flood in particular when floods per-se are so common?

In spite of the true absurdities surrounding the Noah fable, it is a central theme and core element of christianity. To acknowledge the event as metaphor and fable calls into question all of the biblical tales.

It's an all or nothin' proposition. If some parts of the bibles are literally true and some are not, who decides fact from fable?

 

[Ellipsis]

In spite of the true absurdities surrounding the Noah fable, it is a central theme and core element of christianity. To acknowledge the event as metaphor and fable calls into question all of the biblical tales.

Then let's call them all into question, but let's also give each its own thread. My personal favorite is exploring Joshua's missing day.

It's an all or nothin' proposition. If some parts of the bibles are literally true and some are not, who decides fact from fable?

Each person decides what they do and do not accept as literaly true or aligorical or a fable or outright false, for themselves.

 

[Taz]

But YOU asked me. You want me to just ignore you? OK.

So tell us how kangaroos got to the boat and back to oz.

See, when Noah and sons let the animals out, the roos and koalas and dingoes and the abos and all the other down under animals walked to Australia and then God did some miracle stuff and then Oz just floated away from the Middle East, the same way possums and armadillos walked to Texas and then God miracle the Americas to where they are today. It's in the Bible, somewhere in the back.

start at the beginning......there was this mud puddle and it was struck by lightening.....and some of the charred mud turned into life and started reproducing......and eventually this animal climbed out and walked to Australia, turning into kangaroos and dingos and aboriginies along the way......you gotta believe it, science has proved it......

So tell us how kangaroos got to the boat and back to oz.

OK Taz. You seem to have a thing for Australia and for kangaroos. I'll tell you something which you will deny of course.

Before the flood, there was no Australia. There was no United States. There was no Europe. There was just one big piece of land. The climate over all this land was the same. It was a tropical greenhouse kind of climate all over the earth at that time. The animals (including your kangaroos) were free to roam wherever they so desired over this tropical earth.

Like I say, you will deny this but at least maybe you will get of the subject of kangaroos once and for all. I hope.

Got any proof? No? Then shut up, you moron.

 

[Taz]

I can see that you're angry and, well, pissy, but you're failure to present an argument that relies solely upon the intervention of magic and supernaturalism is no one's fault but yours.

if you want more attention from me instead of ridicule, you'll have to come up with an argument that doesn't hinge upon pretending I'm a young earther......

Ok.

So..... tell us about a 600 hundred year old Noah and the Ark tale....... all of which took place just a few thousand years ago.

I'd rather hear about that tadpole that climbed out of that cesspool of slime and turned into Taylor Swift.

Thousands of credible scientists would tell you about evolution (it's the leading theory, not fact), if you bothered to search it. How about a 600 year old Noah? Got ANY credible scientists who believe that?

Of course. There are rather renown scientists on both sides of the issue were you to bother enough to check it out for yourself. That's what most of us do when we want to find out something. You should try it.

So you have nothing to back up your point. Got it. Now please

 

[hobelim]

In spite of the true absurdities surrounding the Noah fable, it is a central theme and core element of christianity. To acknowledge the event as metaphor and fable calls into question all of the biblical tales.

It's an all or nothin' proposition. If some parts of the bibles are literally true and some are not, who decides fact from fable?

whether any part of any fable or fairy tale is true or false is irrelevant. Whats important is the teaching conveyed and even if the entire story is pure fiction the story can still convey the truth.

Noah built an ark, but so did Moses. Noahs ark held every type of creature, clean or unclean, the ark of the covenant held descriptions of every type of creature, clean or unclean. Maybe there is much more there than what meets the eye?

When one reads the story of the boy who cried wolf, does it matter if he ever existed? Does it matter where the story occurred or what language was spoken? Does it matter if there is no scientific or archeological evidence to verify the story? If someone could prove that the details written about in the story were completely false would it make the moral of the story false?





.

 

[PostmodernProph]

????.....ignorant is claiming you know what someone else believes.......I am certainly prepared to admit you've demonstrated ignorance repeatedly in this thread......however, I am not going to admit not believing something I believe......I consider your arguments, and your knowledge of the Bible to be quite shallow.....you are nearly as bad as Holly......

I can see that you're angry and, well, pissy, but you're failure to present an argument that relies solely upon the intervention of magic and supernaturalism is no one's fault but yours.

if you want more attention from me instead of ridicule, you'll have to come up with an argument that doesn't hinge upon pretending I'm a young earther......

Ok.

So..... tell us about a 600 hundred year old Noah and the Ark tale....... all of which took place just a few thousand years ago.

so you opted out on the intelligent argument gamble?.....

I opted out of your pointless 6,000 year old earth nonsense.

another atheist sinks to the level of irrelevancy......

 

[the_human_being]

So tell us how kangaroos got to the boat and back to oz.

See, when Noah and sons let the animals out, the roos and koalas and dingoes and the abos and all the other down under animals walked to Australia and then God did some miracle stuff and then Oz just floated away from the Middle East, the same way possums and armadillos walked to Texas and then God miracle the Americas to where they are today. It's in the Bible, somewhere in the back.

start at the beginning......there was this mud puddle and it was struck by lightening.....and some of the charred mud turned into life and started reproducing......and eventually this animal climbed out and walked to Australia, turning into kangaroos and dingos and aboriginies along the way......you gotta believe it, science has proved it......

So tell us how kangaroos got to the boat and back to oz.

OK Taz. You seem to have a thing for Australia and for kangaroos. I'll tell you something which you will deny of course.

Before the flood, there was no Australia. There was no United States. There was no Europe. There was just one big piece of land. The climate over all this land was the same. It was a tropical greenhouse kind of climate all over the earth at that time. The animals (including your kangaroos) were free to roam wherever they so desired over this tropical earth.

Like I say, you will deny this but at least maybe you will get of the subject of kangaroos once and for all. I hope.

Got any proof? No? Then shut up, you moron.

Ok. I'll not respond to your posts anymore. I gave you a plausible reply which as I predicted, you denied. A plausible reply was more than you ever offered. All you do is ask questions like a five tear old. I won't respond to you anymore.