Could Noah's Ark hold all the animals?

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Threads like this make me long for an asteroid just to clean us the **** out.

[steaknchips]

Dawkins is full of sh1t...

Really? What makes you think that?

And what are your opinions of Darwin?

Read "Evolution a theory in crisis"..

Also love the way Dawkins attacks Kurt Wise...Why do that, if your so sure in your method?

I also notice how Kurt Wise didnt bite back..He dosnt need to.

The Kurt Wise that said that even if all the evidence pointed against creationism he'd still believe in it because it's what the bible says?

The guy isn't a scientist. He might have a phd in geology, but he's no scientist.

Before that quote he also said(as a fine geologist he is)he would be 1st admit it, if evidence proved otherwise.

[steaknchips]

In fact Wise so close to being kicked out from Harvard for believing in creation, shows you just how science works...How many just keep quiet to save their reputation I wonder?

I know we have the ones that have come out...And been discredited all the same,goes with the territory I suppose...

[JulieB]

IIRC Josephus mentions both seperately.

You've told us in previous debates we can't trust the word of Josephus as he had an agenda.

Gosh... don't the Atheists on here have good memories. Everything that can possibly be used to discredit me in someway is dragged up from perhaps years ago. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't normally see that going on in VT.

I wonder why that would be now!!

Josephus was a Jew so he wrote about Christianity from very much a Jewish persepctive. I misread something he had wrote and actually when I looked back I'd got it completely wrong, he had actually not painted them in a bad light in that particular instance.

If I got it wrong. I apologise.

[TheDon]

Dawkins is full of sh1t...

Really? What makes you think that?

And what are your opinions of Darwin?

Read "Evolution a theory in crisis"..

Also love the way Dawkins attacks Kurt Wise...Why do that, if your so sure in your method?

I also notice how Kurt Wise didnt bite back..He dosnt need to.

The Kurt Wise that said that even if all the evidence pointed against creationism he'd still believe in it because it's what the bible says?

The guy isn't a scientist. He might have a phd in geology, but he's no scientist.

Before that quote he also said(as a fine geologist he is)he would be 1st admit it, if evidence proved otherwise.

So why exactly should we give a shit about anything he has to say when he can't even maintain the same position over something as important as that?

Honestly you're digging a hole there. When someone contradicts themselves that badly over something that important, how can you believe anything they say?

[TheDon]

In fact Wise so close to being kicked out from Harvard for believing in creation, shows you just how science works...How many just keep quiet to save their reputation I wonder?

I know we have the ones that have come out...And been discredited all the same,goes with the territory I suppose...

This is how science works:

Create theory, attempt to disprove theory, either throw away, refine, or accept theory.

This is not how science works:

Believe in something, attempt to find evidence to support belief, fail to find it, or find evidence that contradicts it, believe in it still anyway.

The 2nd is what Wise attempted, and he should be shunned from the scientific community for it, BECAUSE IT'S NOT SCIENCE.

[steaknchips]

In fact Wise so close to being kicked out from Harvard for believing in creation, shows you just how science works...How many just keep quiet to save their reputation I wonder?

I know we have the ones that have come out...And been discredited all the same,goes with the territory I suppose...

This is how science works:

Create theory, attempt to disprove theory, either throw away, refine, or accept theory.

This is not how science works:

Believe in something, attempt to find evidence to support belief, fail to find it, or find evidence that contradicts it, believe in it still anyway.

The 2nd is what Wise attempted, and he should be shunned from the scientific community for it, BECAUSE IT'S NOT SCIENCE.

Exactly...Your not allowed to believe in creation because it goes against science. Even when all evidence points towards it...

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

All evidence points towards creationism?

Trollololololololol

[Chindie]

Replying to him does him too good of a service, give it up gents he's a pathetic troll.

Especially when theres someone who actually believes this horseshit ready and willing.

[Risso]

Yes ignore him, maybe he'll go away.

[steaknchips]

All evidence points towards creationism?

Trollololololololol

How many do you want?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1314725/As-researchers-prove-Red-Sea-really-parted--How-science-backs-Bibles-best-stories.html

Its 2012 and NOTHING in the bible has been disproven as of yet...Strange!

[TheDon]

All evidence points towards creationism?

Trollololololololol

How many do you want?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1314725/As-researchers-prove-Red-Sea-really-parted--How-science-backs-Bibles-best-stories.html

Its 2012 and NOTHING in the bible has been disproven as of yet...Strange!

You do realise all of those are pointing to RATIONAL explanations for those events, not ones caused by a God?

Also:

The researchers, whose findings have been backed up by carbon dating and sonar imaging, claim that the story of Noah’s flood had its origin in this cataclysmic event.

Guess we can chalk that one off right? Or does carbon dating work if it's used to support things you believe?

[steaknchips]

Ive answered the carbon dating and radiometric dating method earlier in this thread..

[CrackpotForeigner]

"evolution - a theory in crisis"

:bonk:

[TheDon]

Ive answered the carbon dating and radiometric dating method earlier in this thread..

Yes you've said you don't believe in them because they give incorrect results.

So I'm saying we can obviously rule out any evidence for the flood based on them because according to you carbon dating is wrong. After dismissing carbon dating you can't then put forward an explanation for something that uses carbon dating as evidence.

You really are quite stupid, if you can't understand simple points like that then it's no wonder you're confused by science to the point you have to reject it and insert superstition instead.

[CrackpotForeigner]

Ive answered the carbon dating and radiometric dating method earlier in this thread..

Yes you've said you don't believe in them because they give incorrect results.

So I'm saying we can obviously rule out any evidence for the flood based on them because according to you carbon dating is wrong. After dismissing carbon dating you can't then put forward an explanation for something that uses carbon dating as evidence.

You really are quite stupid, if you can't understand simple points like that then it's no wonder you're confused by science to the point you have to reject it and insert superstition instead.

[regular_john]

All evidence points towards creationism?

Trollololololololol

How many do you want?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1314725/As-researchers-prove-Red-Sea-really-parted--How-science-backs-Bibles-best-stories.html

Its 2012 and NOTHING in the bible has been disproven as of yet...Strange!

One thing i've always wondered - do stupid people know they're stupid, or do they delude themselves into thinking otherwise?

Care to enlighten us SnC?

[steaknchips]

Ive answered the carbon dating and radiometric dating method earlier in this thread..

Yes you've said you don't believe in them because they give incorrect results.

So I'm saying we can obviously rule out any evidence for the flood based on them because according to you carbon dating is wrong. After dismissing carbon dating you can't then put forward an explanation for something that uses carbon dating as evidence.

You really are quite stupid, if you can't understand simple points like that then it's no wonder you're confused by science to the point you have to reject it and insert superstition instead.

Hold on a minute....Im the one giving all the evidence here..Where's your(or science) evidence the flood didnt take place?

I'l also give you evidence of the flood but on doing so, instead of looking to attack all the time, just have an open mind.

Here is evidence of the flood and it disproves the evolution side off things regarding strata layers denoting millions of years per layer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polystrate_fossil

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Behave yourself.

[JulieB]

I'm just wondering how steaknchips and JulieB are posting on this thread.

They seem to be all about taking the bible literally, that it is the word of God, yet appear to have rejected Matthew 21:19

Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

Matthew 21:19 actually reads as follows..

(Matthew 21:19) 19 And he caught sight of a fig tree by the road and went to it, but he found nothing on it except leaves only, and he said to it: “Let no fruit come from you anymore forever.” And the fig tree withered instantly.

however not being a pedant.

Or Luke 12:33

Sell what you have, and give alms; provide yourselves purses which grow not old, a treasure in the heavens that fails not, where no thief approaches, neither moth corrupts.

You missed out the next verse (Luke 12:33-34) For where YOUR treasure is, there YOUR hearts will be also. . .

Jesus was saying they shouldn't be materialistic. If there hearts were consumed with getting rich they would not have time to build up the spiritual treasures. The apostles had a special commission to preach to the nations about the good news of God's Kingdom.

More from good old Luke, confirming what Matthew said so we can be sure he didn't mishear, 18:22

When Jesus heard this, he said to him, "You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

Pretty sure a PC counts as a possession. Christians shouldn't own anything, it's in the bible!

No doubt there will be the reply of "I do give to charity", but the bible is pretty clear that you should sell EVERYTHING you own and give it to the poor, as long as you can post on this thread, you're not following what the bible says.

Who was Jesus directing those words to and what was that person's reaction to what he had said?

You have to look at Scriptures in context.

(Luke 18:18-23) 18 And a certain ruler questioned him, saying: “Good Teacher, by doing what shall I inherit everlasting life?” 19 Jesus said to him: “Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God. 20 You know the commandments, ‘Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.’” 21 Then he said: “All these I have kept from youth on.” 22 After hearing that, Jesus said to him: “There is yet one thing lacking about you: Sell all the things you have and distribute to poor people, and you will have treasure in the heavens; and come be my follower.”

Jesus knew this man's heart and he was questioning his motives behind how he lived...what was this man's reaction?

"23 When he heard this, he became deeply grieved, for he was very rich."

The Bible doesn't tell Christians not to look after themselves or their families or be a burden on the State or other people.

(1 Timothy 5:8) . . .Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith.

The Apostle Paul worked part time making tents to support his missionary journeys.

The first century Christian congregations were taught that they had a duty to look after widows and orphans - so the whole community that could earn a living also had a duty to look after anyone that was in need. It is the same today, if anyone is in need materially we all have a God given duty to assist... we also have a duty to help even our enemies.

(1 Timothy 5:3-6) . . .Honor widows that are actually widows. 4 But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let these learn first to practice godly devotion in their own household and to keep paying a due compensation to their parents and grandparents, for this is acceptable in God’s sight. 5 Now the woman who is actually a widow and left destitute has put her hope in God and persists in supplications and prayers night and day. . .

If anyone was rich then they would obviously be able to assist more... but if someone was rich but didn't like sharing that wealth, then obviously he would have an issue.

Hence the rich ruler in verse 23 became deeply grieved for he was very rich... and he obviously preferred to stay that way.

(2 Corinthians 9:6-7) 6 But as to this, he that sows sparingly will also reap sparingly; and he that sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. 7 Let each one do just as he has resolved in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.