robojoel Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Noah was 480 years old when he began the work : My Dad is 65 and he is ****, he kindly built us a fence a couple of years ago but it took its toll, I honestly cant see Noah building a ship capable of carrying every species at his age to be honest. If you include a sentence like this in your opening gambit, you cant expect anyone to take any further point you ever make seriously, never mind all the other ancient chinese-whisper superstition you include. You know how some young kids believe in Santa because they have been told he exists and the events (presents appear on Christmas morning!) circumstantially back up there belief? and adults dont believe in Sanata because they are privy knowledge of how the presents got there factually based on documentable evidence? You sound like a child I really hope you are trying to wind people up :? When God made Adam and Eve they were sinless and, basically, physically perfect. When sin entered the world there was an obviously harmful effect upon their bodies; they died. Genetically speaking, when they were first made their health was so good that their natural inclination was to live a long time. But since sin is in the world and it has an effect on people we get sick, grow old, and die...Noah would have been so close to the original genetic line of Adam and Eve, that his health was exceedingly great and so could live this long. "My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be a hundred and twenty years." Genesis 6:3. It might be possible that God shortened the lifespan of man because of man's great wickedness. After all, the flood came soon after this statement of God and the lifespan of people drastically shortens after Noah's ark. I call you as DEFINITELY on the wind up and claim my cash prize! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NowDoINotLikeThat Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 there probably was some sort of big flood round that part of the world and accounts of it got more exaggerated over time. Lot of myths about floods (atlantis etc) Maybe there was a bloke called Noah who had a boat , saved some livestock or something but then like Chinese whisper the story got sillier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted November 5, 2011 Administrator Share Posted November 5, 2011 Because you cannot understand one scripture without reading and understanding them all. Its like coming into the middle of a conversation listening to one sentence then trying to understand what the whole conversation was about... Don't patronise me. You have no idea how much I have studied the bible. Rather than regurgitating homilies, how about responding to my argument? Is the bible the word of god or not? If so, why is it inconsistent, contradictory and requiring "interpretation"? If it is not, then what are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: “I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth. I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be destroyed by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth.” And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.” So God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth.” So did God forget or did someone turn the rainbow off in Thailand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steaknchips Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 Because you cannot understand one scripture without reading and understanding them all. Its like coming into the middle of a conversation listening to one sentence then trying to understand what the whole conversation was about... Don't patronise me. You have no idea how much I have studied the bible. Rather than regurgitating homilies, how about responding to my argument? Is the bible the word of god or not? If so, why is it inconsistent, contradictory and requiring "interpretation"? If it is not, then what are you talking about? Yes it is the word of God. No it is not contradictory. No it is not inconsistent. Interpretation is needed because its read in a sinful world and restricting ourselves to a narrow ideological view, such as strict literalism, interferes with our ability to fully understand God's revelation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Not contradictory? Not inconsistent? Well bend me over and call me Deborah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steaknchips Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: “I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth. I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be destroyed by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth.” And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.” So God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth.” So did God forget or did someone turn the rainbow off in Thailand? "All" life("all" flesh) are the words used... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 "All" life("all" flesh) are the words used... Oh, right, so as long as he doesn't wipe out all life it's ok for him to ignore his warning signals and let people die? what an asshole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 No it is not contradictory. You might want to take a look at this picture. Go try to apply your sinful world interpretation to that and say it's not contradictory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 But since sin is in the world and it has an effect on people according to the bible it's not just people ... animals as well , all early animals were vegetarian (if you accept the word of Genesis) in his own words God created "all" the land animals on day 6 (and the Hebrew word for day used in Genesis , can only mean an ordinary day btw rendering your examples invalid) and as Dinosaurs were land animals this can only mean Human and dinosaurs coexisted ( unless of course God didn't create them .. meaning Genesis is a lie ) and as everything was without sin (Genesis again !!) Dino didn't start to die ... until Adam **** it up for them of course ... Also as we now seem to have established God also put 2 of every living thing on the Ark , Dino must have also made it on board and didn't die out until at the very earliest 2500 BC .... expect of course if you believe science and fossil evidence that dino died out around 65 million years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steaknchips Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 Yes I too used to think evolution was how we all came about, until I looked into it.. I also used to think the bible was old hat, contradictory, full of rubbish and untruths and it did'nt make any sense etc, until I looked into it. I thank the internet actually because it gives you the tools to delve into both sides and form you own opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 You're making your trolling too obvious now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sie Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Yes it is the word of God. No it is not contradictory. No it is not inconsistent. Interpretation is needed because its read in a sinful world and restricting ourselves to a narrow ideological view, such as strict literalism, interferes with our ability to fully understand God's revelation. Interpretation is needed because what's actually written is demonstrably false. No other reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steaknchips Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 The evidence used getting 65 million years ago for dinosaurs would be inadmissible in a court...The readings are based on guesswork.. Many people are under the false impression that carbon dating proves that dinosaurs and other extinct animals lived millions of years ago. What many do not realize is that carbon dating is not used to date dinosaurs. The reason? Carbon dating is only accurate back a few thousand years. So if scientists believe that a creature lived millions of years ago, then they would need to date it another way. But there is the problem. They assume dinosaurs lived millions of years ago (instead of thousands of years ago like the bible says). They ignore evidence that does not fit their preconceived notion. What would happen if a dinosaur bone were carbon dated? - At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Scientists dated dinosaur bones using the Carbon dating method. The age they came back with was only a few thousand years old. This date did not fit the preconceived notion that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. So what did they do? They threw the results out. And kept their theory that dinosaurs lived "millions of years ago" instead. http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/carbondating.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regular_john Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Yes I too used to think evolution was how we all came about, until I looked into it.. I also used to think the bible was old hat, contradictory, full of rubbish and untruths and it did'nt make any sense etc, until I looked into it. I thank the internet actually because it gives you the tools to delve into both sides and form you own opinions. Science isn't about belief as it is dependent on evidence, you either understand it or you don't, so what is it that you don't understand? Also, radiometric dating is mathematically sound and can be used to date things with incredible accuracy, in fact the official time reading method used to define the time across the world is based on the atomic clock, which is a form of radiometric dating. Let me ask you, what are the flaws with radiometric dating? What makes it inaccurate as a method? Edit: even better, why don't you teach me what you know about radiometric dating? Teach as though I didn't know the first thing about it and I'll put you right when you make mistakes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Let me ask you, what are the flaws with radiometric dating? What makes it inaccurate as a method? Like everything else it'll be pure ignorance. Carbon dating is useless after around 60,000 years, ergo all Radiometric dating is. That's the level of logic you're up against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steaknchips Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 Google radiometric flaws, or inaccuracies..Or even the accuracies of it and then research it...You can form your own opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regular_john Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Google radiometric flaws, or inaccuracies..Or even the accuracies of it and then research it...You can form your own opinion. Anyone can google anything. What I want to know is what you know about it. You've posted a lot on this thread that you've clearly lifted from other websites, and you seemed to have ignored my previous challenge to debate based on evidence and evidence alone. So I'm giving you an opportunity now, you have the chance to teach us what you know about a scientific topic, to give us real reasons to take you seriously. So, explain radiometric dating to me. How does it work? What are the principles? What are the flaws? What is the evidence against its accuracy? Alternatively, you could admit that you don't really know much about it and are simply making statements based on your religious beliefs. So, which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CVByrne Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I always find it amusing that some people do really believe this happened despite the fat that there wouldnot be a large enough gene pool for any of those species ever have survived more than a couple of generations. Religous people amuse me greatly. Its such a testament to the power of brain washing. Does eveyone believe the Hitler youth were evil nazis or that they just believed what they were indoctrinated with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steaknchips Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 Google radiometric flaws, or inaccuracies..Or even the accuracies of it and then research it...You can form your own opinion. Anyone can google anything. What I want to know is what you know about it. You've posted a lot on this thread that you've clearly lifted from other websites, and you seemed to have ignored my previous challenge to debate based on evidence and evidence alone. So I'm giving you an opportunity now, you have the chance to teach us what you know about a scientific topic, to give us real reasons to take you seriously. So, explain radiometric dating to me. How does it work? What are the principles? What are the flaws? What is the evidence against its accuracy? Alternatively, you could admit that you don't really know much about it and are simply making statements based on your religious beliefs. So, which is it? John, I would be copy and pasting from other web sites to explain it, how it works and whats its flaws are. So its far easier, like I have for you to do that research yourself.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts