This might explain the Noah's Ark parable in the bible

[frigidweirdo]

And yet the ark, built much stronger, floating in calm water, wouldn't last for one year?

No, they Wyoming wouldn't have survived without pumps.... simply said the ship wasn't able to be seaworthy without modern technology

 

[Kruska]

Sorry that these beliefs are so distressing to you.

"Religious Beliefs" aren't distressing to me at all - on the contrary, I find them rather interesting and sometimes very amusing.
What "distresses me" is the sheer ignorance of people to claim "my religion is the only true one" and to propagate e.g. the Bible to be based on factual history in regards to Christianity aka Hebrews.

You need to keep in mind - the Bible is a pure Hebrew construct - later claimed by the Catholic Church to be representative of their Christian God.

Maybe you should read upon Hindu transcripts dating from around 2800 B.C. (1800 years before the Bible got constructed for the next 1200 years) to it's manifest the Bhagavad Gita - written from around 400 B.C. to 200 A.D. in reference of the "construed history" of the NT !!! staring at around 100 A.D.

If you would - striking similarities between Hindu transcripts and the Hebrew Bible, and well as the Bhagavad Gita and the NT would become obvious to you.

It even has led historians and religious scholars to the thesis - that JESUS might have been a Hindu - who had traveled to Palestine - after all there are no valid records that would document Jesus's life from supposed Bethlehem to his "sudden appearance" at a lake at the age of 30 - aside from Gospel of Luke, mentioning his visit to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover, (without any proof) when he was 12 years of age, aka Bar Mitzvah.

The Biblical Flood - according to the Bible around 2300 B.C. coincides with the same time-period as multiple floods of massive proportions and near extinction levels were recorded by the Indus Culture in regards to it's major cities - such as Mohenjo-daro. (aka several regional floodings) not some singular Global - by a vengeful God construed flood.

There is no doubt about the exchange of culture and religious issues, between the Indus culture and that of Mesopotamia.
I wouldn't have proof - but it seems highly likely to me that the "Hebrew" (an obvious Shepherd and Gypsy like folk) might originate from Northern-India/Pakistan - aka the Indus culture, starting to migrate into Mesopotamia from around 3000-2500 B.C. onward.

The Hyksos, known and recorded from around 1600 B.C. by the Egyptian dynasties and those of Mesopotamia. Likely intermixed with Mesopotamia's Semitic folks from 2000 B.C. onward upon settling in the Palestinian area.

As a matter of fact, it is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus who around 50-100 A.D. grabs the Egyptian records of Manetho (350 B.C.) to translate Hyksos as being “king-shepherds” or “captive shepherds”, in order to demonstrate the great antiquity of the Jews and thus identified the Hyksos with the Hebrews of the Bible.

Fact is, the Hyksos brought with them new technologies, including the horse and chariot, the compound bow and improved metal weapons. (Clearly Mesopotamian and Indus culture developments) into Egypt, that had no such developments to show for by their own previous Dynasties, and thus enabling the Hyksos to take over the Egyptian dynasty.

As one can undoubtedly recognize - the respective religions, e.g. the Hebrew did not shy to "interpret" or "deliberately falsify" historic occurrences as being part of their history, via simply mixing all kind of existing religious beliefs and partial historical occurrences into that beloved book of yours.

Therefore if you base your religious believes solely onto the Bible - you need to realize and accept the fact - that it is entirely written and construed by Hebrews to signify "document" the Hebrews as being Gods chosen folk - that God therefore is basically a Hebrew himself - or someone who only loves Hebrews and has given his laws and moral standards to be solely those of the Hebrew religion.

That the Roman Church from 350 AD onward simply took possession of this Hebrew book and declared it to be a Christian book in conjunction with the (also falsified and by Hebrew's composed NT) under the threat of excommunication and death toward those questioning or defying it, has obviously totally evaded you - and naturally causes utter confusion amongst those Christians who "ironically" believe the Bible to be a Christian construct, and being based onto a Christian God.

If you want to make a compelling case for your book and belief - you need to read up a lot more then just that single book and quote it as your sole source, and thus conducting a more or less Childlike and irrelevant discussion.

 

[Woodznutz]

Am I? Doubtful.

What I think is the case is that we're talking about the science, but you don't really want to go there.

Not a day goes by that science doesn't change some long-held fact.

 

[Woodznutz]

No, they Wyoming wouldn't have survived without pumps.... simply said the ship wasn't able to be seaworthy without modern technology

Actually, the Wyoming and the ark aren't comparable in any meaningful way. One was a ship, the other was a building.

 

[Thunk]

The story of Noah was NOT a parable!

 

[Woodznutz]

"Religious Beliefs" aren't distressing to me at all - on the contrary, I find them rather interesting and sometimes very amusing.
What "distresses me" is the sheer ignorance of people to claim "my religion is the only true one" and to propagate e.g. the Bible to be based on factual history in regards to Christianity aka Hebrews.

You need to keep in mind - the Bible is a pure Hebrew construct - later claimed by the Catholic Church to be representative of their Christian God.

Maybe you should read upon Hindu transcripts dating from around 2800 B.C. (1800 years before the Bible got constructed for the next 1200 years) to it's manifest the Bhagavad Gita - written from around 400 B.C. to 200 A.D. in reference of the "construed history" of the NT !!! staring at around 100 A.D.

If you would - striking similarities between Hindu transcripts and the Hebrew Bible, and well as the Bhagavad Gita and the NT would become obvious to you.

It even has led historians and religious scholars to the thesis - that JESUS might have been a Hindu - who had traveled to Palestine - after all there are no valid records that would document Jesus's life from supposed Bethlehem to his "sudden appearance" at a lake at the age of 30 - aside from Gospel of Luke, mentioning his visit to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover, (without any proof) when he was 12 years of age, aka Bar Mitzvah.

The Biblical Flood - according to the Bible around 2300 B.C. coincides with the same time-period as multiple floods of massive proportions and near extinction levels were recorded by the Indus Culture in regards to it's major cities - such as Mohenjo-daro. (aka several regional floodings) not some singular Global - by a vengeful God construed flood.

There is no doubt about the exchange of culture and religious issues, between the Indus culture and that of Mesopotamia.
I wouldn't have proof - but it seems highly likely to me that the "Hebrew" (an obvious Shepherd and Gypsy like folk) might originate from Northern-India/Pakistan - aka the Indus culture, starting to migrate into Mesopotamia from around 3000-2500 B.C. onward.

The Hyksos, known and recorded from around 1600 B.C. by the Egyptian dynasties and those of Mesopotamia. Likely intermixed with Mesopotamia's Semitic folks from 2000 B.C. onward upon settling in the Palestinian area.

As a matter of fact, it is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus who around 50-100 A.D. grabs the Egyptian records of Manetho (350 B.C.) to translate Hyksos as being “king-shepherds” or “captive shepherds”, in order to demonstrate the great antiquity of the Jews and thus identified the Hyksos with the Hebrews of the Bible.

Fact is, the Hyksos brought with them new technologies, including the horse and chariot, the compound bow and improved metal weapons. (Clearly Mesopotamian and Indus culture developments) into Egypt, that had no such developments to show for by their own previous Dynasties, and thus enabling the Hyksos to take over the Egyptian dynasty.

As one can undoubtedly recognize - the respective religions, e.g. the Hebrew did not shy to "interpret" or "deliberately falsify" historic occurrences as being part of their history, via simply mixing all kind of existing religious beliefs and partial historical occurrences into that beloved book of yours.

Therefore if you base your religious believes solely onto the Bible - you need to realize and accept the fact - that it is entirely written and construed by Hebrews to signify "document" the Hebrews as being Gods chosen folk - that God therefore is basically a Hebrew himself - or someone who only loves Hebrews and has given his laws and moral standards to be solely those of the Hebrew religion.

That the Roman Church from 350 AD onward simply took possession of this Hebrew book and declared it to be a Christian book in conjunction with the (also falsified and by Hebrew's composed NT) under the threat of excommunication and death toward those questioning or defying it, has obviously totally evaded you - and naturally causes utter confusion amongst those Christians who "ironically" believe the Bible to be a Christian construct, and being based onto a Christian God.

If you want to make a compelling case for your book and belief - you need to read up a lot more then just that single book and quote it as your sole source, and thus conducting a more or less Childlike and irrelevant discussion.

The Christian bible is God speaking to the descendants of Israel, not to the Indians, Chinese, Indonesians, Eskimos, or anyone else. If God is speaking to them through a different historical experience that's their business.

Recall that the Bible was rescued from the RCC via the Reformation and returned to its rightful peoples.

 

[Thunk]

There are Egyptian records that say this pharaoh ruled for 700 years....and that pharaoh ruled for 1,100 years...

Then after the great flood those records say the next pharaoh ruled for 40 years...next was 60 years...and so on.

These records have NOTHING to do with the bible. They are a completely different account that something major happened around that time frame. People went from living for 1,000 years to living 100 years at the most.

 

[Thunk]

It took Noah 100 years to build the ark.

 

[Woodznutz]

It took Noah 100 years to build the ark.

Scientists say that Khufu built the great pyramid. I wonder how long it took him. Them stones were pretty heavy.

 

[Kruska]

The Christian bible is God speaking to the descendants of Israel,

No - since there was no Israel during Adam or e.g. Noah's times - God therefore never spoke to the descendants of Israel.
As such IF God ever spoke to someone - he spoke to humans in general - independent of their race/ethnicity or religion.

It's solely the Hebrews who CLAIM - that God spoke solely to them, thus claiming to be God's chosen people, and claiming that everyone God spoke to was a Hebrew.

Later Christians claim the same thing for themselves. - thanks to Saul/Paul and later Peter, etc.

If you want to make a compelling case for your book and belief - you need to read up a lot more then just that single book and quote it as your sole source, and thus conducting a more or less Childlike and irrelevant discussion.

 

[Woodznutz]

No - since there was no Israel during Adam or e.g. Noah's times - God therefore never spoke to the descendants of Israel.
As such IF God ever spoke to someone - he spoke to humans in general - independent of their race/ethnicity or religion.

It's solely the Hebrews who CLAIM - that God spoke solely to them, thus claiming to be God's chosen people, and claiming that everyone God spoke to was a Hebrew.

Later Christians claim the same thing for themselves. - thanks to Saul/Paul and later Peter, etc.

If the Bible 'speaks to you' and you are of Anglo-Saxon heritage then God is speaking to a descendant of Israel. The English-speaking world, WASP's, is basically the descendants of Israel. That other peoples are reading the Bible in their own language is simply fulfilled latter day prophecy regarding the preaching and publishing of the gospel to every nation, called the great commission.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Not a day goes by that science doesn't change some long-held fact.

What "long-held fact" is that?

That people don't live 600 years? That they didn't have the capability to build a wooden boat that big? That when we did build a boat that big it didn't have the capacity for that many animals? That the logistics were a complete nightmare?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually, the Wyoming and the ark aren't comparable in any meaningful way. One was a ship, the other was a building.

Sigh

 

[Kruska]

If the Bible 'speaks to you' and you are of Anglo-Saxon heritage then God is speaking to a descendant of Israel. The English-speaking world, WASP's, is basically the descendants of Israel. That other peoples are reading the Bible in their own language is simply fulfilled latter day prophecy regarding the preaching and publishing of the gospel to every nation, called the great commission.

You are out of your mind - what does an Anglo-Saxon have to do with being a decedent of Israel? - they weren't even Christians before 600 AD!!

If you want to make a compelling case for your book and belief - you need to read up a lot more then just that single book and quote it as your sole source, and thus conducting a more or less Childlike and irrelevant discussion.

From one of your religious sites:
the Bible is as a reliable source as any current historical account or newspaper printed today. The Bible is the Word of God, as men were moved by the Holy Spirit to write it. It is God speaking to us and it is without error and full of truth.

Just like a criminal in court - claiming himself to be the only true witness - thus only his claims are to be validated.

 

[Woodznutz]

What "long-held fact" is that?

That people don't live 600 years? That they didn't have the capability to build a wooden boat that big? That when we did build a boat that big it didn't have the capacity for that many animals? That the logistics were a complete nightmare?

Noah had 120 years to figger it out.

 

[Woodznutz]

You are out of your mind - what does an Anglo-Saxon have to do with being a decedent of Israel? - they weren't even Christians before 600 AD!!

If you want to make a compelling case for your book and belief - you need to read up a lot more then just that single book and quote it as your sole source, and thus conducting a more or less Childlike and irrelevant discussion.

From one of your religious sites:
the Bible is as a reliable source as any current historical account or newspaper printed today. The Bible is the Word of God, as men were moved by the Holy Spirit to write it. It is God speaking to us and it is without error and full of truth.

Just like a criminal in court - claiming himself to be the only true witness - thus only his claims are to be validated.

WASP's are the descendants of Israel and form the majority of the Christian church worldwide.

 

[Woodznutz]

What "long-held fact" is that?

Science makes lots of mistakes. Google it for yourself ("Is science always right?), lots of articles on the subject.

 

[Woodznutz]

Sigh

I feel the same about you, conflating a large ship and a three-story warehouse. Sigh. Nothing you have said relates to the flood story as written.

 

[Woodznutz]

No, they Wyoming wouldn't have survived without pumps.... simply said the ship wasn't able to be seaworthy without modern technology

Fast forward to today. IKEA uses 'modern technology' and their furniture falls apart in about one season.

 

[Woodznutz]

"Make the boat 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high"

What are you quoting from?