nah kovan you aint missed anything directly at you i dont think!
It basically got caught on how religion kills most people in history more than WW2 and Evolution someones saying it's gods tool and jethro stated Gods an Auusie which is true!
Printable View
nah kovan you aint missed anything directly at you i dont think!
It basically got caught on how religion kills most people in history more than WW2 and Evolution someones saying it's gods tool and jethro stated Gods an Auusie which is true!
The bible was written in books. Each book was written by a different person. The book of Isaiah was completed at about 732 BC by the prophet Isaiah. According to britannica.com, Cyrus wasn't born until sometime between 590 and 580 BC.Quote:
Wasn't the bible written over an extended period of time. Couldn't this have been written after the event as further "proof"?
The bible does state that God made the frst man and then the first woman. The bible also says that God built Adam's rib into a woman. There is nothing against this. Yes, scientists do claim that the first living cells did originate in the ocean (I think they called it the primordial soup or something), but scientists don't claim that people formed right then. Also, they are having a hard time proving that those first cells could've formed. However, Scientists are claiming that all people living today did originate with one couple. (more specifically, the magazine, which might've been Popular Science, said that everyone came from one woman)Quote:
The bible reads something similar to this: (sorry i'm not upto date with my biblical numbers etc.)
Adam was created from the ground and Eve was created from adam!
Science has found that the first 2 cells that started the human evolution came from the ocean.
Taken from some New Scientist i was reading.
The bible is a large collection of smaller books. It is very hard to reinterpret and twist the meanings of one part of the bible without clashing with some other part. In other words, I find it hard to believe that there are many different ways of interpreting one part of the bible without having to ignore other parts.Quote:
It's all to do with how the bible was written and how you interpret it's words!
Well, Cyrus did indeed attack Babylon and the bible does tell of it.Quote:
Tygur Give me proof that it's not just a collection of short stories!
Also whomever wrote about archaelogical proof to my knowledge no substancial proof has been found!
Here are some things I found in a book, titled "The Bible - God's Word or Man's":
I can present more quotes from there, too.Quote:
According to the book of Daniel, the last ruler in Babylon before it fell to the Persians was named Belshazzar. (Daniel 5:1-30) Since there appeared to be no mention of Belshazzar outside the Bible, the charge was made that the Bible was wrong and that this man never existed. But during the 19th century, several small cylinders inscribed in cuneiform were discovered in some ruins in southern Iraq. They were found to include a prayer for the health of the eldest son of Nabonidus, king of Babylon. The name of this son? Belshazzar.
So there was a Belshazzar! Was he a king, though, when Babylon fell? Most documents subsequently found referred to him as the son of the king, the crown prince. But a cuneiform document described as the "Verse Account of Nabonidus" shed more light on Belshazzar's true position. It reported: "He [Nabonidus] entrusted the 'Camp' to his oldest (son), the firstborn, the troops everywhere in the country he ordered under his (command). He let (everything) go, he entrusted the kingship to him." 8 So Belshazzar was entrusted with the kingship. Surely, to all intents and purposes that made him a king! This relationship between Belshazzar and his father, Nabonidus, explains why Belshazzar, during that final banquet in Babylon, offered to make Daniel the third ruler in the kingdom. (Daniel 5:16) Since Nabonidus was the first ruler, Belshazzar himself was only the second ruler of Babylon.
..I skipped some stuff here..
Later on, Israel and Judah became two nations, and Israel conquered the neighboring land of Moab. At one time Moab, under King Mesha, revolted, and Israel formed an alliance with Judah and the neighboring kingdom of Edom to war against Moab. (2 Kings 3:4-27) Remarkably, in 1868 in Jordan, a stela (a carved stone slab) was discovered that was inscribed in the Moabite language with Mesha's own account of this conflict.
Er Tygur, even fiction sometimes uses historic events to help out in the plotline. Thinking anything by James A Michener or Tom Clancy. Therefore the fact that the Bible does record a historic event, does not necessarily mean that it is not fiction.
well said jethro!
Tygur: It still was interpreted by 1) The writer 2) The reader you cannot deny this!
If i write: Jethro's a ****!
You can 1) interpret it as an insult OR
2) Interpret it as a joke!
A book, scripture whatever will always be subject to the authors views, beliefs and opinions!
I cannot see archaelogical proof of the Ark existing etc.
You provided proof of certain people existing!
*peak a booo*
Er, l'm going to take it as a joke:)
I think kovans on some of those biblical drugs again jethro;)
Just an example if i said someone else they'd could go off there nut! I knew you had a sense of humour!
Naughty kovan, naughty naughty kovan, you know not to put that white stuff up your nose. You only end up naked, with a feather duster in your date, claiming you are the great wahoo bird. And this time l am not coming to bail you out. No kovan put that duster down.......
Actually, I was proving the archaeology bit, too. I thought I'd kill two birds with one stone, but I guess that didn't work out.
There is a full family line between Jesus and Adam listed in the bible, if that'll satisfy you. There are many other parts of the bible that also get just as detailed, such as the building of the ark. I can tell you the size and shape of the ark. I can also tell you when the flood came.
Yes, that is true. But it does mean that the bible could be non-fiction. Why don't you try to prove that it is fiction?Quote:
Therefore the fact that the Bible does record a historic event, does not necessarily mean that it is not fiction
When something is written, the author intends on putting his own views in it. So the writing would actually be the author's views or beliefs. Then the reader comes along and reads what is written. Now, it is certainly possible for the reader to get the wrong idea from whatever is written, but that doesn't change the meaning the words were originally meant for. The reader that is misinterpreting the words is simply wrong.Quote:
Tygur: It still was interpreted by 1) The writer 2) The reader you cannot deny this!
If i write: Jethro's a ****!
You can 1) interpret it as an insult OR
2) Interpret it as a joke!
A book, scripture whatever will always be subject to the authors views, beliefs and opinions!
Now, how would someone know if the reader is wrong? You'd have to do research and find out more of what is going on. In your example, you're calling Jethro a ****. How would someone know whether you're serious or not? They can look at the context. If it's right after a huge rant, you're probably serious. If there's a smiley right after it, you're probably kidding. Also, someone can find out more about you and Jethro to see if you two are on good terms or if you two hate each other. You still had your original meaning, no matter how it gets interpreted.
Likewise with the bible, how would you know how to interpret parts of it? You have to do much research on the rest of the bible. For example, if you look at how I interpreted what Jesus said in the scripture that started this whole thread, you'll see that I based what I said on other parts of the bible.
It is very much possible for the bible to be misinterpreted. Religions that believe in heaven and hell do it all the time.
Can you tell me how archaeological proof of the ark can be found? The thing was made of wood. Archaeology is very limited. Can you prove to me that it didn't exist?Quote:
I cannot see archaelogical proof of the Ark existing etc.
Therefore the bible should be translated to include smilies!:p
Just because it's wood doesnt mean it doesnt exist!
Wooden tools and other ailments have survived many a century!
I'm not saying it didnt exist! I'm saying that something similar to the ark or if the ark was found it would add more substanence to the story!
And the bible does say in Genesis that the "world" was flooded!
But i take it Naoh didnt know the whole world so it only meant his world i interpret!
More on the ark:
According to Gen. 6:15 the ark was 450feet long the longest ship built out of wood using modern techniques is 300ft these ships have to have Iron re-enforcing and constant pumping because they leak so badly. It's not enough to make a ship that big it has to be able to stretch and wood isnt strong enough to compensate to the ever changing stresses!
How did he gather all the animals?
Noah had only seven days to load the Ark (Gen. 7:4-10). If only 15764 animals were aboard the Ark (see section 3), one animal must have been loaded every 38 seconds.
Plus all the animals would of have to of lived near by which is unlikely because the climate would have too suit every animal and if they travelled to noah how did say a koala bring it's special dietary requirments in a microwavable can perhaps!;)
Where'd the water go?
Plus if the world flooded then how did the polar ice caps re-grow!
They would of floated in the mass flood!
hmmmmmmmmmmm
Tell me, how can the future not be predetermined if God knows what's going to happen? Furthermore, if God knows what is going to happen, he must have deliberately intended everything that has and will ever happen!Quote:
The future is not predetermined and we definitely have free will, but the predictions do come true. There are many occasions of the bible that proves this. Do you think God chose to have Satan deceive the first man and woman? And do you think He would've made Satan if He knew Satan would rebel and oppose Him?
Think about it. At the moment of creation, God with his allknowing omnipotence could see all the paths of future consequances laid out before him and to him they were as easy to read as a book. If he created things slightly differently, he could have prevented Satan from rebelling or the fall of Adam and Eve from the garden of Eden.
If he exists outside of time (as many christians suggest) and he is trully omnipotent, not only must free-will be an illusion but everything is as it is through his intent.
Evolution does not even attempt to explain how the first life form began. It attempts to explain what happened after that. There are theories on how life could have started up on it's own but they are, as you would put it, mere theories.Quote:
It seems to me that evolution describes how animals/creatures change over time. But I don't think it describes how life started out, which is the critical point we need to look at.
Quote:
Let me ask a question - God's supposed to be a good guy right ? If that's the case do you think he'd wants to dictate every action you take in your entire life ? ... Or is it more likely that god gave man freewill so that he can enjoy his life ? What's the point in life if you're too afraid to live it ?
This is an interesting point. If he saved 2 of every animal, I very much doubt if they would have fitted unless the ark was much wider than it was long ????? How many decks did it have, where did they store the food for 40 days for all the animals? Who cleaned out all the sh*t? How was it powered? If it wasn't powered then it would just be drifting and in the initial stages of the flood this would mean that it would be constantly bumping into rocks and outcroppings and hills. If only two of every animal survived what did the carnoivours eat after the ark had landed and the floods subsided. (Any dead meat would be too far decayed after 40 days in fresh water). So all the lions etc would have had to refrain from eating until all the antelope etc. had a chance to breed. And even at that it is unlikely that they would be able to sustain the food chain as it is a triangle with meat eaters being at the top. i.e. There always needs to be a lot more prey than predators.Quote:
Originally posted by Beacon
According to Gen. 6:15 the ark was 450feet long
Just some thoughts. Anyone got any answers?
SD
OK, I have no qualms...I am a complete fan of God. Why? Think about it.
1. There is someone out there who has made everything. It was originally perfect but got screwed, but this is good (more later)
2. This guy is in 100% control. In english: even if life sucks, he's still around to help out.
3. He WANTS LIKE HECK to be our friends. Imagine being able to ask anything in the world of the President of the United States, and get it just because you're his friend. Now imagine the guy who made everything and controls it all {for the best}...and have the same kind of friendship.
4. Now about this evil and "why can God allow bad stuff if he's so loving blah blah blah"
Its like commodity trading: nothing bad ever happens, and nothing is worth anything. That's the way it is with God. If we were made to do everything right and be "good little people" we would be like robots. Rather than forcing us to obey, he has given us free will. Imagine a special person who you love more than anything else. Now imagine that you have a choice: you can either force them to love you in return, or allow them to choose. If they choose freely to love you back, isn't it much more valuable than knowing that they only hang out with you because you made them? If we could not experience bad things, we wouldn't understand the lengths that God has gone to in order to bring us back to him.
If you can still choose after this to believe that you die and have no reason to exist and evolved from some bullcrap monkey ancestor, I pity and pray for you.
Now if Jesus was just a good man, he would not have dared to make the ultimate heresy (claiming to be God's Son) So either he was a deranged criminal or he was really who he said he was.
Take your pick.
I, for one, will stand by my claim. If you can refute this, please do so. I would love to hear from you.
Actuall Mlewis, I don't need or want your pity. It is very arrogant of you to assume that you are in a better position. I respect your beliefs, that is good for you, it helps you get through life.
I don't believe in god. That does not in anyway make my life less meaningfull. You have yet to post an argument that god actually exists. If all you have is blind faith, then how can you expect me to believe.
If you prove god exists, and god has gone to such great pains to avoid giving aboslute proof of his existence, then that means you have outsmarted god, which by all accounts is impossible. Therefore you cannot prove absolutely to someone that god exists.
Therefore it comes down to my word against yours. I'm sorry, I'm sure you're a very upstanding person, but in these cases I always make a point of siding with myself :)
SD
Don't bother praying for me either. Religious people always claim it makes their life better. It's pretty difficult for me to improve my life at the moment, because believing in God isn't going to help me get through my exams!
I would really like to hear you prove that God does not exist.
Seriously.
The were hundreds of people going round claiming to be prophets or gods or whatever at the time (there still is) so he was not unique in that sense.Quote:
Now if Jesus was just a good man, he would not have dared to make the ultimate heresy (claiming to be God's Son) So either he was a deranged criminal or he was really who he said he was.
Have you read my opinions on our "supposed" free-will? It seems there are contradictions between the idea that God knows the future and that we have free will.Quote:
Rather than forcing us to obey, he has given us free will.
How free are we anyway if we get burned in hell for eternity when we don't tow the line? Why did he create us with instincts that lead us to behave in a way that 'hurts' God?
I don't believe we have any 'reason' to exist as such, but that doesn't mean that life is not worth living for.
I would really like to hear you prove that God does not exist.
Seriously.
Praying is just talking. Praying is not a majic spell or some crap like that that makes everything cool. Think of your exams like this:
you have a friend with an encyclopedia head that can recite any fact or formula known to man over known history, sitting next to you and whispering the answers. Essay questions? No problem. Got another friend that's a pro writer, makes the top guys look like kindergardeners. God is both. And as I said above, he WANTS to be there to help you. That is what he is about. Not controlling people or hiding from us.
If he wanted to hide from us, why would he send his son to provide us with a way to re-enter our friendship?
And please do your homework: read Genesis 1-7. It says clearly there that we were created PERFECT. Not with instints to hurt God as you said. Genesis makes it quite evident that the deciet of Satan/the devil/whatever you want to call him convinced the original inhabitants of Earth to disobey God the first time, and because of this we now have a "nature" to do this. But mankind was NOT created this way initially.
Also read the numerous verses in the New Testament: we are to "put off the old man and put on the new" in essence allow God to reshape our evil natures (WHICH WE INHERITED BECAUSE OF ADAM'S SIN) into what we were originally intended to be: a perfect soul mate for God himself.
Sorry, but I don't think it can be done. Therefore the burden of proof lies with you. This is exactly the same as me saying, "I was abducted by aliens last night". I cannot prove that it happened, and you cannot prove that it didn't. As the "abduction" is an abnormal event, then it would be up to me to provide proof that it happened or otherwise I wouldn't blame people for not believing.Quote:
Originally posted by mlewis
I would really like to hear you prove that God does not exist.
Seriously.
Now transpose this onto your argument. You say God exists, but you can't prove it. I say that given the balance of evidence, that I don't believe you. I don't have to prove that he doesn't exist the onus is on you to prove that he does.
SD
P.S. You haven't answered any of the previous questions (the size of the ark, the fact that god doesn't want you to prove his existance etc.
It is impossible to prove something doesn't exist. If you don't think so, prove that father christmas doesn't exist.Quote:
I would really like to hear you prove that God does not exist.
Seriously.
If I said to you I believe in invisible unicorns, would you be able to prove they don't exist?
God is hiding from us (if he really does exist). He doesn't have to remain invisible and undetectable in every manner does he? OK, you say he sent his son but he didn't do it in such a way that it was obvious that he was God's son.Quote:
If he wanted to hide from us, why would he send his son to provide us with a way to re-enter our friendship?
So god's a cheater :) I thought that'd be more the devils style.Quote:
Originally posted by mlewis
Praying is just talking. Praying is not a majic spell or some crap like that that makes everything cool. Think of your exams like this:
you have a friend with an encyclopedia head that can recite any fact or formula known to man over known history, sitting next to you and whispering the answers. Essay questions? No problem. Got another friend that's a pro writer, makes the top guys look like kindergardeners. God is both. And as I said above, he WANTS to be there to help you. That is what he is about. Not controlling people or hiding from us.
So do all Christians hear these 'voices in their heads', 'cause we have a different name for those sort of people where I come from :D
SD
I'm sure it would've decayed by now. It set back down in the mountains somewhere. It would be difficult to find, if it was still there.Quote:
Just because it's wood doesnt mean it doesnt exist!
Wooden tools and other ailments have survived many a century!
I'm sure the flood covered the whole globe. Genesis 7:19-20 says that "all the mountains under the heavens" were covered. Then verse 21 states that "all the flesh that was moving upon the earth expired". The bible describes everything on land and in the air dying. God himself said at Genesis 6:17 that the whole planet is involved. And just in case your bible translation uses "world" in that verse as well, surely God knows about the rest of the planet and not just that area. Do you think Noah spent so many decades building such a huge ark and then gathering all the aminals just for a local flood? They could've gone on a journey to higher ground or something if there was some land somewhere that wouldn't be covered.Quote:
And the bible does say in Genesis that the "world" was flooded!
But i take it Naoh didnt know the whole world so it only meant his world i interpret!
Why did the wood have to stretch? The ark wasn't shaped like a normal boat. It only had to float. It didn't have to move around. Also, God told Noah to use a "resinous tree", which resists water better. And Noah was to cover the ark "inside and outside with tar" to prevent leaking. (See Genesis 6:14)Quote:
According to Gen. 6:15 the ark was 450feet long the longest ship built out of wood using modern techniques is 300ft these ships have to have Iron re-enforcing and constant pumping because they leak so badly. It's not enough to make a ship that big it has to be able to stretch and wood isnt strong enough to compensate to the ever changing stresses!
Now about predictions and free will..
The bible does indicate that we have free will. Satan rebelled against God. I'm sure God didn't plan on that. The first king of Israel, Saul, was appointed by God himself. And yet he turned around and became a bad king. Two kings later, there is Solomon. He started out good. Jehovah rewarded him with riches. But he turned around and started worshipping false gods.
The way I see it, God made us. He knows what is going on in our heads. He can read us as easily as we can read a book. But we still do have free will. We can choose what we want, but God just knows us so well that He can tell what we will choose. I'm unsure of whether He can predict whether we will have a change of heart or not. It is possible that he can, but chooses not to.
Also, if God says there will be an earthquake tomorrow, or if he says there will be a new world power in two months, how would that take away free will?
I'm running out of time. I'm gonna tell about the assertion that God is hiding, proof of His existence, and whatever else later ..
Apparently, Jesus was totally against money, and said that unless you give all the money you make to the church, you ain't getting in to heaven. So, all you Christians, do you follow your religion, or just follow it when it suits you?
Personally, I think the rewards of life are much greater if you make your own set of beliefs based on your own experiences, rather than blindly follow the teachings of a guy who may or may not have existed through fear of punishment (not the way I'd imagine a god who's supposed to love you would want you to live).
Well, that's my (small) take on it. ;)
Btw, I am a spiritual person, just not religous.
*jumps into a conversation already in progress, wearing boots, just because he's bored*Quote:
Originally posted by nullus
Apparently, Jesus was totally against money, and said that unless you give all the money you make to the church, you ain't getting in to heaven. So, all you Christians, do you follow your religion, or just follow it when it suits you?
Personally, I think the rewards of life are much greater if you make your own set of beliefs based on your own experiences, rather than blindly follow the teachings of a guy who may or may not have existed through fear of punishment (not the way I'd imagine a god who's supposed to love you would want you to live).
Jesus was against money? Wasn't he the one who said, "When in Rome?" Well... actually I think it was more accurately, "Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's." He didn't say give all your money to the church. Jesus didn't have a church.
Anyway, again, Jesus existed. Question is, was he right. Was he really the Messiah, or was he just mad?
The thing I love about the "loose Christians" is they think, "Its not how I think it should be". Guess what, your god doesn't have to care about what you think. He may very well be a vengeful god. He may very well be a jealous god. You don't need to ask yourself, "Is it the way I think it should be?". You need to ask, "Are the scriptures correct?".
Point is, if there is a god (something I haven't been convinced of) then this world is by his rules, no matter how warped and evil and unfair they may be. Just because there is a god, doesn't mean he has to be nice. And just because you are nice, doesn't mean he has to reward you. Make any sense?
The Christian god, according to their scriptures, is not a good god. He is not a nice, happy god. He created the world knowning that at least half of everyone he created would be damned. He did this so he could create people with free choice who would choose to love him. He isn't saying, "Love me because I love you." He says, "Put no idols before me, for I am a jealous and vengeful god." And guess what! He can do that. That is fair, it is after all, his world!
Mind you, I don't believe said god exists. The burden on proof lies on the believers, not the non-believers.
Did I say Jesus had a church? Nope. :p There were other churches around at the time. There was also a documentary on the story of Jesus' life here fairly recently, which specifically said that he was said to be totally against money.
I would never say that he existed or didn't exist, I just don't believe he was the so-called Son Of God. For all we know, he was just a very nice guy, or even an alien! :eek: Afterall, there have been very old drawings found that show flying-saucer-type-things depicted at the birth of Jesus.
THE ARK:
Tygur: 1) The flood! Your agreeing with me. You tried to tell me in prior posts that perhaps it wasnt a world flood!
If it was a world flood why is the only evidence of a flood in that time era from the meditereanean region/mid east! No ice core evidence which has provided evidence for up to 40 000 years ago has been found of a flood during that time!
If the world flooded then we all must of decended by the lone human survivers on the ark musnt we not?
Also as i said before how can the Polar Ice caps be possible today if it was a world flood the mass of water would of been enough to float them again!
2)Why would would have to stretch?
Ok here's some nautical information. Wood is not the best material for shipbuilding. It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. Thus also including the huge size of the ark!!!!
What makes you so sure wood cant survive that long? It is likely that it has. Just not been found!
MLEWIS:
You state the new testament but what about religions that dont believe in the new testament!
To prove that god exists or doesnt is difficult perhaps impossible.
See in your mind God exists in SD's god doesnt! Prove each wrong would be forcing your beliefs onto another person without any substancial proof for either side.
This is from a table buy a "biblical expert/mathmetician"
was in a table doh!!!
Anyways it all boils down to the ark would of been in the best scenario 5% over it's critical limit!
Size analysis of animals aboard the Ark. Page numbers refer to Woodmorappe, 1996, from which the figures in the row are taken. (Minor arithmetic errors in totals are corrected.) Woodmorappe treats many animals as juveniles; "yearling" masses are masses of those animals after one year of growth. "Total mass after one year" is the maximum load which Woodmorappe allows for. Additional clean animal figures assume they are taken aboard by sevens, not seven pairs, and also assume juvenile animals. Log mass range (g) 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8
Ave. mass (kg) (p. 13) .005 .05 .5 5 50 316 3160 31600
# of mammals (p. 10) 466 1570 1378 1410 1462 892 246 7424
# of birds (p. 10) 630 2272 1172 450 70 4 4598
# of reptiles (p. 10) 642 844 688 492 396 286 270 106 3724
total # of animals 1738 4686 3238 2352 1928 1182 516 106 15746
Ave. yearling mass (kg) (p. 66) .005 .05 .5 5 10 100 300 1000
Total mass after one year 8.7 234.3 1619 11760 19280 118200 154800 106000 411902
Total mass assuming adults 8.7 234.3 1619 11760 96400 373512 1630560 3349600 5463694
Additional clean birds 1575 5680 2930 1125 175 10 11495
Additional ruminants (138 genera) 260 420 10 690
Additional clean animal mass (yearling weight, kg) 8 284 1465 5625 4350 43000 3000 47600
Collecting each species instead of each genus would increase the number of individuals three- to fourfold. The most speciose groups tend to be the smaller animals, though, so the total mass would be approximately doubled or tripled.
Collecting all land animals instead of just mammals, birds, and reptiles would have insignificant impact on the space required, since those animals, though plentiful, are so small. (The problems come when you try to care for them all.)
Leaving off the long-extinct animals would free considerable space. Woodmorappe doesn't say how many of the animals in his calculations are known only from fossils, but it is apparently 50-70% of them, including most of the large ones. However, since he took only juveniles of the large animals, leaving off all the dinosaurs etc. would probably not free more than 80% of the space. On the other hand, collecting all extinct animals in addition to just the known ones would increase the load by an unknown but probably substantial amount.
Loading adults instead of juveniles as small as Woodmorappe uses would increase the load 13- to 50-fold.
Including extra clean animals would increase the load by 1.5-3% if only the 13 traditional domestic ruminants are considered, but by 14-28% if all ruminants are considered clean.
In conclusion, an ark of the size specified in the Bible would not be large enough to carry a cargo of animals and food sufficient to repopulate the earth, especially if animals that are now extinct were required to be aboard.
I got this from the first of a two volume set of books called "Insight on the Scriptures"
Quote:
The passenger list of the ark was quite impressive. Besides Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives, living creatures "of every sort of flesh, two of each," were to be taken aboard. "Male and female they will be. Of the flying creatures according to their kinds and of the domestic animals according to their kinds, of all moving animals of the ground according to their kinds, two of each will go in there to you to preserve them alive." Of the clean beasts and fowls, seven of each kind were to be taken. A great quantity and variety of food for all these creatures, to last for more than a year, also had to be stowed away.-Ge 6:18-21; 7:2, 3.
The "kinds" of animals selected had reference to the clear-cut and unalterable boundaries or limits set by the Creator, within which boundaries creatures are capable of breeding "according to their kinds." It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family "kinds"-the horse kind and the cow kind, to mention but two. The breeding boundaries according to "kind" established by Jehovah were not and could not be crossed. With this in mind some investigators have said that, had there been as few as 43 "kinds" of mammals, 74 "kinds" of birds, and 10 "kinds" of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the variety of species known today. Others have been more liberal in estimating that 72 "kinds" of quadrupeds and less than 200 bird "kinds" were all that were required. That the great variety of animal life known today could have come from inbreeding within so few "kinds" following the Flood is proved by the endless variety of humankind-short, tall, fat, thin, with countless variations in the color of hair, eyes, and skin-all of whom sprang from the one family of Noah.
These estimates may seem too restrictive to some, especially since such sources as The Encyclopedia Americana indicate that there are upwards of 1,300,000 species of animals. (1977, Vol. 1, pp. 859-873) However, over 60 percent of these are insects. Breaking these figures down further, of the 24,000 amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals, 10,000 are birds, 9,000 are reptiles and amphibians, many of which could have survived outside the ark, and only 5,000 are mammals, including whales and porpoises, which would have also remained outside the ark. Other researchers estimate that there are only about 290 species of land mammals larger than sheep and about 1,360 smaller than rats. (The Deluge Story in Stone, by B. C. Nelson, 1949, p. 156; The Flood in the Light of the Bible, Geology, and Archaeology, by A. M. Rehwinkel, 1957, p. 69) So, even if estimates are based on these expanded figures, the ark could easily have accommodated a pair of all these animals.
Jesus did not require that you give all your money to your church. The fact that they (Churches) demand all that money shows that they themselves are after material possessions. Look at those cathedrals! That was a complete waste of money! The catholics and many other religions have got it wrong there.Quote:
Apparently, Jesus was totally against money, and said that unless you give all the money you make to the church, you ain't getting in to heaven. So, all you Christians, do you follow your religion, or just follow it when it suits you?
When did I say it could've been local?? The flood was definitely global. And as for that bit abot the evidence of a flood, I'm going to have to look into that. I think I saw something somehwere about there being some evidence somehow.Quote:
Tygur: 1) The flood! Your agreeing with me. You tried to tell me in prior posts that perhaps it wasnt a world flood!
If it was a world flood why is the only evidence of a flood in that time era from the meditereanean region/mid east! No ice core evidence which has provided evidence for up to 40 000 years ago has been found of a flood during that time!
Yeah. What's wrong with that?Quote:
If the world flooded then we all must of decended by the lone human survivers on the ark musnt we not?
The ark was covered with tar inside and out, not just in the seams. And who's to say the wood wasn't reinforced in some way from the inside? The ark did have at least two floors (I think it was only two floors), so that provides some stability right there. The walls could've been made thick. There could've been wooden beams around to reinforce it.Quote:
Ok here's some nautical information. Wood is not the best material for shipbuilding. It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. Thus also including the huge size of the ark!!!!
That was just an assumption. I suppose you're right. Maybe it could've survived. I doubt it, but I'm not very knowledgable about how long the wood would've lasted, anyway.Quote:
What makes you so sure wood cant survive that long? It is likely that it has. Just not been found!
I doubt he was an alien, because he did die like the rest of us would. He bled red blood when he was nailed to the stake. If he was an alien, surely there would've been something noticed there. By the way, I know you were probably joking, but I had to say that anyway. For some people, saying that God exists isn't too far off from saying that aliens are among us. (I have a habit of taking too many things seriously. Don't mind me.)Quote:
I would never say that he existed or didn't exist, I just don't believe he was the so-called Son Of God. For all we know, he was just a very nice guy, or even an alien!
When Jesus walked the earth, he was seen by many people and got to be very well known. If there was any falsehood in the bible books that documented his life, it would've probably been noticed early on. When they were finished, many people that had seen Jesus were still around. After Jesus died, he was raised back up a couple days later. Many people got to see him then too.
I'd like to know why people think Jesus was just an ordinary man. How could he have faked everything he did, even the feeding of thousands of people with food from a single basket (I think it was a single basket) and no other place to get it from. The fact that there were thousands of people would've made it very difficult to fake.
But by even with todays advanced technologies we cannot build a ship bigger than 300ft that is seaworthy especially to last 40 days in heavy seas from wood!
Even if they used tar or not tar is not a flexible substance! It would crack under the immense pressure!
You fail to define what a kind is!
On the ark "kind" must have meant something closer to species for three reasons:
For purposes of naming animals, the people who live among them distinguish between them (that is, give them different names) at roughly the species level. [Gould, 1980]
The Biblical "kind," according to most interpretations, implies reproductive separateness. On the ark, the purpose of gathering different kinds was to preserve them by later reproduction. Species, by definition, is the level at which animals are reproductively distinct.
The Flood, according to models, was fairly recent. There simply wouldn't have been time enough to accumulate the number of mutations necessary for the diversity of species we see within many genera today.
The Bible says Gen. 7:8 puts on the ark all creatures that move along the ground, with no further qualifications. Lev. 11:42 includes arthropods (creatures that "walk on many feet") in such a category.
They couldn't survive outside. Gen. 7:21-23 says every land creature not aboard the ark perished. And indeed, not one insect species in a thousand could survive for half a year on the vegetation mats proposed by some creationists. Most other land arthropods, snails, slugs, earthworms, etc. would also have to be on the ark to survive.
this conversation has gone all over the place
i dont even know where to begin
or what to begin with
any suggestions where i should start, anyone?
About aliens then move onto the bit about ians sherry then perhaps talk a bit about religion then the ark and how it was actually a brothel!;) :p
hmmm
aliens.. my favourite of the unseen creatures
i believe they exist
according to Qur'an there is direct and indirect verse related to other forms of life out "THERE"
i wish i could meet a real alien before i do
all i wanted to say is "do you really come in peace"?
ha ha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ians sherry.... hmmm that guy still talking about those drinks?
i remember about 8 months ago, it was the same conversation about Ian, alcohol. ect
dont know much about this, so i will stop on that
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
religion - hmm
its the greatest thing humankind can have
if used for wrong purposes in wrong ways, it is the most deadleast thing known to humankind
that pretty much sums it up :)
Either God knows what's going to happen in the future or he doesn't. Since he is regarded as omnipotent (all powerful) then who would deny that it's not within his power? How could he have not known what we Saul or Solomon would have turned out like?Quote:
The bible does indicate that we have free will. Satan rebelled against God. I'm sure God didn't plan on that. The first king of Israel, Saul, was appointed by God himself. And yet he turned around and became a bad king. Two kings later, there is Solomon. He started out good. Jehovah rewarded him with riches. But he turned around and started worshipping false gods.
Many of the prophecies were about human affairs (not just about natural phenomenon like earthquakes and floods) like wars. If our will is truly "free", God could have no way of knowing what would happen in the future of human affairs. If he does know, then it must be predetermined or else he might be wrong!
Either God can't predict the future and we do have free will or else he can predict the future, we have no free will and God intended everything that has ever happened!
True, God's idea of "good" might not concur with ours so we should ask ourselves: If God does exist, do we want to give him our eternal love and adoration? Surely God has to earn this? He brought us into the world and not the other way round. He has no right to expect us to behave in any particular way (seeing as he gave us freewill) and we have every right to expect him to behave like we want him to.Quote:
Point is, if there is a god (something I haven't been convinced of) then this world is by his rules, no matter how warped and evil and unfair they may be. Just because there is a god, doesn't mean he has to be nice. And just because you are nice, doesn't mean he has to reward you. Make any sense?
I doubt if Jesus necessarilly faked anything. Most of his so called miricales are probably no more than wild exagerations that have grown over time. The gospels were written 50 years after Jesus died. That is ample time for myths to emerge about such a notorious man such as he.Quote:
I'd like to know why people think Jesus was just an ordinary man. How could he have faked everything he did, even the feeding of thousands of people with food from a single basket (I think it was a single basket) and no other place to get it from. The fact that there were thousands of people would've made it very difficult to fake.
For this theory to work it would have rely very heavily on the theory of evolution for such a change to have occured in such a relatively short timespan. So what's it to be, either the Theory of Evolution is true and Noah might have been able to populate the ark, or the Theory of Evolution is wrong and the ark couldn't have possibly existed.Quote:
By tygur
The "kinds" of animals selected had reference to the clear-cut and unalterable boundaries or limits set by the Creator, within which boundaries creatures are capable of breeding "according to their kinds." It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family "kinds"-the horse kind and the cow kind, to mention but two. The breeding boundaries according to "kind" established by Jehovah were not and could not be crossed. With this in mind some investigators have said that, had there been as few as 43 "kinds" of mammals, 74 "kinds" of birds, and 10 "kinds" of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the variety of species known today. Others have been more liberal in estimating that 72 "kinds" of quadrupeds and less than 200 bird "kinds" were all that were required. That the great variety of animal life known today could have come from inbreeding within so few "kinds" following the Flood is proved by the endless variety of humankind-short, tall, fat, thin, with countless variations in the color of hair, eyes, and skin-all of whom sprang from the one family of Noah.
You can't choose to chop and change beliefas depending on the part of te bible that you are arguing about.
So tygur, is the Theory of Evolution valid?
SD
It was mentioned above that even with all of our advanced technologies we can't build something like the ark that will survive what it supposedly went through.
Doesn't that just indicate that it was not a feat of mankind but of some higher power that was guiding the incident?
And just for you "prove it to me" folks:
Psalm 14:1 (New American Standard Bible) "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God' "
2 Peter 3:3-5 (New American Standard Bible) "Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying "Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation." For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago...."
Now you may accuse me of using my own beliefs to argue my point, but read your own posts carefully. Most of these posts are solid opinion, no scientific or other universally accepted facts are listed here (for the most part.)
It also says in the New Testament that believing in God by faith without a visible proof is more valuable than believing him because, say, he fries your neighbor's dog to kingdom come with a lightning bolt.
For those of you asking for signs, miracles, proof, etc. I quote to you in the words of Jesus himself: "This generation is a wicked generation; it seeks for a sign, and yet no sign shall be given to it but the sign of Jonah. For just as Jonah became a sign to the Ninevites, so shall the Son of Man be to this generation....The men of Nineveh shall stand up with this generation and condemn them, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here." (can be found in Luke 11:29-32 NASB)
Isaiah 6:9=10 "Go and tell this people, 'Keep on listening but do not percieve; keep on looking but do not understand. ' Render the hearts of this people insensitive, their ears dull, and their eyes dim, lest they see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and return and be healed."
[this unfortunately applies to the modern generation...]
Isaiah 8:10 "Devise a plan but it will be thwarted; state a proposal but it will not stand, for God is with us."
God is mean and doesn't want us to be happy? How about his own words:
Isaiah 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is no other."
This doesn't sound like "Hang around and sin all ya want cuz you'll be sent to hell anyway" to me.
Those who go to hell only do so because they deny the message of Christ. They do not go because God is sadistic and laughs every time one burns; it is because they CHOSE to deny free eternal life.
The comment made above that God is a cheater: this was not my point. My point was that God is always there and willing to help us. Just because Joe Christian falls off of a cliff and prays for a parachute doesn't mean he'll get one, but God is still there and wanting to help.
As part of this issue and in response to simonm above, "Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly beyond all that we ask or think, according to the power that works within us, to Him be the glory in the Church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever." Ephesians 3:20-21
Basically we cannot begin to comprehend all that God can and wants to do for us; this seems to me like he would HAVE to know about what Saul and Solomon turned out like.
As far as Saul, read the story. Before Saul was annointed, when the people of Israel were clamoring for a king, God made it quite clear to them that a king would essentially bring damage to their nation. To prove his point, God raised up the hero Saul and showed the world just how rotten a king could be to his nation.
About this "my idea of good vs. yours" business. I walk up to you in a dark alley and say, "it's my idea of good to blow your head off" and whip out a shotgun and do so. Do you still think that I should be able to do what I believe is right even if it clashes with your ideas?
And this stuff about "religion is the most deadly thing to ever happen to mankind" blah blah blah. Just because some religions teach to slaughter your enemies, Christianity (and thus God's true system for life) teaches that if our enemy deals us a blow, to not retaliate; it does NOT teach that we should hit them back. It also does not teach to hit them in the first place.
So while other religions like Islam may promote this kind of thing, its not really fair to accuse all religions of this, especially Christianity, because of what only a few religious groups/sects/whatever have done. This also applies to the "prove God exists" debate. JUST BECAUSE OTHER BELIEF SYSTEMS DO NOT TEACH ABOUT THE SAME GOD DOESN'T MEAN THAT MINE IS WRONG. Just because Joe doesn't teach that 1 + 1 = 2 doesn't mean what he says is wrong. Maybe he teaches English.
Read any logic textbook in the western world. They will all tell you that condemning one system based on the actions of another is fallacious and not to be accepted as valid argument, much less truth.
Lewis, yes, you can't prove that there is a god. Quoting scripture won't help. Someone wrote that. I can write that the cobble stone streets will rise up from under the pavement and enslave man and it won't be true.
I don't care to debate wether or not there is a god. I don't believe there is one. And I do need a sign. And I won't accept the idea that he told us he wasn't going to give us a sign.
I do want to go over this.
Perhaps it never went through anything so harsh.Quote:
It was mentioned above that even with all of our advanced technologies we can't build something like the ark that will survive what it supposedly went through.
God doesn't say, "Love me because I love you." He doesn't say, "I'll save you because I love you." He doesn't say, "Turn to me because I want to help."Quote:
God is mean and doesn't want us to be happy? How about his own words:
Isaiah 45:22 "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is no other."
He says, "I am a jealous and vengeful god." "Love me because you will perish without me."
I'm sorry, but that troubles me. He created man knowing that half would have to be damned (law of averages) so that he could be surrounded by the half that loves him. I need a better explaination than that. He sounds like he has a serious mental defect.
*shrug*
OK, God made Saul king to teach the people a lesson. You are saying that God knew what would happen. But, that's not what Tygur said.Quote:
Basically we cannot begin to comprehend all that God can and wants to do for us; this seems to me like he would HAVE to know about what Saul and Solomon turned out like.
As far as Saul, read the story. Before Saul was annointed, when the people of Israel were clamoring for a king, God made it quite clear to them that a king would essentially bring damage to their nation. To prove his point, God raised up the hero Saul and showed the world just how rotten a king could be to his nation.
The point I was making is that if God knows the future, he must have intended everything that has happened (including Human Kind's fall from grace, Satan rebelling etc...) or else you deny that God exists outside of time.Quote:
The bible does indicate that we have free will. Satan rebelled against God. I'm sure God didn't plan on that. The first king of Israel, Saul, was appointed by God himself. And yet he turned around and became a bad king. Two kings later, there is Solomon. He started out good. Jehovah rewarded him with riches. But he turned around and started worshipping false gods.
OK, he may have some grand plan (the devil just being part of it) that we cannot even conceive of and that would make all he has done alright (if we knew all the details) but if he didn't insist on being so cryptic all the time, all this could have been avoided.
Don't tell us that God didn't intend for us to 'fall from grace' or for the Devil to run rampant. God knew and wanted all those things to happen (either that or he didn't give a s**t).
I must admit that I agree with the above (more or less). I don't think many religions these days set out to cause wars. Other people come along afterwards and try to interpret these religions in a way that suits their own purposes.Quote:
And this stuff about "religion is the most deadly thing to ever happen to mankind" blah blah blah. Just because some religions teach to slaughter your enemies, Christianity (and thus God's true system for life) teaches that if our enemy deals us a blow, to not retaliate; it does NOT teach that we should hit them back. It also does not teach to hit them in the first place.
:p ROFLMAO :pQuote:
Originally posted by CiberTHuG
He sounds like he has a serious mental defect.
*shrug*
Yip, Gotta agree with you there CiberThug!
I think the point of this is that no-one can prove if god exists or not. Therefore everyone is entitled to his own view. It is arogant to assume that you are right and we are wrong because of how you interpret dubious facts. Especially given that most of the world disagrees with you.
SD
Quote:
Randall, Samuel Jackson (October 10, 1828-April 13, 1890), was a U.S. Representative, who served twice as the Speaker of the House. He stated in the Washington Papers:
Gentlemen, Christianity is true. The man who doubts it discredits his own intelligence. I have examined this matter for myself.
I know that God has given me influence among my fellow men, and as I have a prospect of recovery I want henceforth to use the influence of my example on the side of Christianity.i
i. Randall, Samuel Jackson. Washington Papers. Stephen Abbott Northrop, D.D., A Cloud of Witnesses (Portland, OR: American Heritage Ministries, 1987; Mantle Ministries, 228 Still Ridge, Bulverde, Texas), pp. 373-374.
I don't think evolution is required for the ark to have existed. A "kind" might be something like maybe a dog to represent all canines. Why is evolution required for that to work out? Focusing on my example of a dog, look at all the different kinds of domestic dogs. The genetic material for all of them is in the one dog. It's just not being manifested. That's not evolution. Also, a domestic dog can breed with a wolf. (At least that's what I think.) The resulting animal has traits from both that can be manifested down the line. I think that whatever dogs were brought on the ark had the genetic material for all the ones alive today.Quote:
For this theory to work it would have rely very heavily on the theory of evolution for such a change to have occured in such a relatively short timespan. So what's it to be, either the Theory of Evolution is true and Noah might have been able to populate the ark, or the Theory of Evolution is wrong and the ark couldn't have possibly existed.
You can't choose to chop and change beliefas depending on the part of te bible that you are arguing about.
So tygur, is the Theory of Evolution valid?
As for what I think of evolution, I think evolution is flawed. It does have some nice ideas, but I don't think it's entirely true.
Now as for you people who feel that the bible supports predestination because of the predictions..
If God can feel regret, then that means there must be something He did not forsee. I'm not truly sure if God transcends time. It could be that He simply chooses not to.
In Genesis 6:6,7 God feels regret that he made the first man and woman. In 1 Samuel 15:10,11 God feels regret that he appointed Saul. I don't believe that God intended for anyone to screw up.
The people that think God shouldn't be so cruel should check out Ezekiel 33:11. There it states that God does not take delight when wicked people die.
read this
Yeah, jesus4u that is so convincing.
I think it was Bill Cosby who said...
I have the vinyl at home. I'll have to double check.Quote:
You don't see teams saying, "We were in the game, until Jesus made me fumble!"
another one
Francis Cockrell
I don't think it really matters what most of the world believes. There was a time when most of the world thought the earth was flat. That didn't make it any less false.Quote:
Especially given that most of the world disagrees with you.
Exactly. God had to have known that with free choice, half (law of averages) of the people he created would be damned, just so the other half would love him.Quote:
Originally posted by simonm
The point I was making is that if God knows the future, he must have intended everything that has happened (including Human Kind's fall from grace, Satan rebelling etc...) or else you deny that God exists outside of time.
OK, he may have some grand plan (the devil just being part of it) that we cannot even conceive of and that would make all he has done alright (if we knew all the details) but if he didn't insist on being so cryptic all the time, all this could have been avoided.
Don't tell us that God didn't intend for us to 'fall from grace' or for the Devil to run rampant. God knew and wanted all those things to happen (either that or he didn't give a s**t).
[/B]
Unless God thought he could be the law of averages. God's a gambling man. :)
'Course, I suspect that if the Christian God is the one, then the ratio of damned to immortal is 3 to 1, or 7 to 1, or 15 to 1. Yeah, 15 to 1 sounds more realistic, and that is a very conservative estimte.
Not really. God didn't intend on Satan coming into the picture and convincing Eve to eat the fruit from the tree. She wouldn't have done it otherwise. Satan started this mess.Quote:
Exactly. God had to have known that with free choice, half (law of averages) of the people he created would be damned, just so the other half would love him.
ROTFLMFAO!!!Quote:
Originally posted by Tygur
Not really. God didn't intend on Satan coming into the picture and convincing Eve to eat the fruit from the tree. She wouldn't have done it otherwise. Satan started this mess.
<church lady>Could it've been...Satan!!!</church lady>
Okay, if you believe the god doesn't know what is going to happen, then that is a possibility. But...
God put that tree in the garden for a reason. Lucifer's fall was part of the plan. He let Lucifer into the garden, as part of the plan. Man couldn't truely choose to love him of their own free will until they were out of the garden.
God had to have known that it was going to happen. He may or may not have provoked it, but had to have known.
And if he didn't, well... then why did he kick them out of the garden? Is there something more powerful then god that drives him, that gave him no choice but to exile man instead of undoing the damage? Was there something more powerful than god that made him put the tree in the garden in the first place?
Besides, my point still stands, even in the garden. He created two people and gave them a choice. Satan or not, the temptation is there. Law of averages states one of them will succumb.
This is quite a heated debate right here...anyway...
I am personally a Christian, but for those who aren't,
What do you have to lose?
If there is God, and you believe, then you win.
If there isnt, and you believe, then you dont really lose anything.
If there is God, and you dont believe, then you lose.
See where Im going?
Kinda a thing I thought about when I started to doubt.
Adios!
Uhm... because you could believe in the wrong god, or following the right god in the wrong manner.Quote:
Originally posted by boscord
This is quite a heated debate right here...anyway...
I am personally a Christian, but for those who aren't,
What do you have to lose?
If there is God, and you believe, then you win.
If there isnt, and you believe, then you dont really lose anything.
If there is God, and you dont believe, then you lose.
See where Im going?
Kinda a thing I thought about when I started to doubt.
Adios!
But what bothers me is... if there is no god and you think there is, then you have wasted your life on a lie. You have help hold back the intellectual development of the species and you are weak. :)
If man invented god, then man needs to drop the charade. It doesn't help that you are believing in a false god.
If you live your life in a Christian manner how did you help hold back the development of the species?Quote:
Originally posted by CiberTHuG
You have helped hold back the intellectual development of the species and you are weak. :)
I would assume because some Christians wouldnt bother looking deeper into evolution because they follow strictly on the Bible but that isnt the case. You can always look for a combo of the two.
Just clarify what you mean, I hope i got it right - probably not though.
P.s. - Shrek anyone? - Heh, I actually heard it was pretty funny.
Well, if you believe in a god, then you are believing in certain things that you will no long attempt to understand. Wether it be evolution, cosmology, or simply fate. You are giving your life a very unreal sense of purpose, instead of finding the real one, or accepting the absence of one.
In other words, if there is no god, no divinity, then we are solely responsible for ourselves, and the universe is a set of rules that we can understand and control.
'Course, without fear of eternal retribution, several people will go on killing sprees. While the race is in this state of immaturity, it is good to have religions, no matter how false they may be, in place. But in the grand scheme of things, it would be nice if we could live without a holy crutch.
Yes, that tree did have a purpose. It showed that God was the one who would decide what was right and wrong. The tree was a very simple symbol of it. Because of the tree, before being shut out of the garden, they did have a chance to actually choose whether or not they love God.Quote:
God put that tree in the garden for a reason. Lucifer's fall was part of the plan. He let Lucifer into the garden, as part of the plan. Man couldn't truely choose to love him of their own free will until they were out of the garden.
Why do you say this even after I showed you that God did regret making the first human couple?Quote:
God had to have known that it was going to happen. He may or may not have provoked it, but had to have known.
Sort of. The reason why He didn't undo the damage was because Satan raised some questions. Satan wasn't completely stupid. In short, he said that people didn't need God. God could've simply destroyed Satan, Adam, and Eve and started fresh, but he gave Satan a chance to prove himself instead. This shows that God isn't a tyrant. God lives by His principles. The "higher power" is self-imposed by God.Quote:
why did he kick them out of the garden? Is there something more powerful then god that drives him, that gave him no choice but to exile man instead of undoing the damage? Was there something more powerful than god that made him put the tree in the garden in the first place?
Sure the temptation was there, but it wasn't a very big temptation. They were placed in a garden with lots of trees all around. They could take, eat and enjoy all they wanted. All God asked was that they avoid just one tree. Why is that so hard to do??Quote:
Besides, my point still stands, even in the garden. He created two people and gave them a choice. Satan or not, the temptation is there. Law of averages states one of them will succumb.
I looked up the law od averages and I see your point. But if the law of averages is correct, that would mean that some descendant of Adam and Eve would decide to forget about God and eat the fruit. In this case, God could go ahead and kill the guy (he was warned, after all) and the human race as a whole would be unaffected.
Wow, Tygur, a rational answer.
But I am still upset because this god has not answered why he is god, from whence did he come, and why did he need someone to love him? That is the point the bothers me the most.
Why did he need someone to love him so much so, that he was willing to sacrifice no less than one out of every two people to damnation? I don't care if the rationalizes it as their own fault. It is a choice they wouldn't've had if he hadn't've provided it.
You are a king, and you are going to give your people the choice to love you or die. Mind you, they have no other reason to love you save fear of death. You are also a king who lives on the other side of he ocean (taxation without representation). They have never seen you, and you don't bother to explain to them anything.
Why do you demand this of them, knowing that these demands are going to result in so many deaths?
That is what bothers me. This god doesn't say, "...
Oh, I'm sounding like a broken record.
Wait... its the 21st Century. I'm sounding like a skipping CD.
mlewis: "Doesn't that just indicate that it was not a feat of mankind but of some higher power that was guiding the incident?"
So why did this higher intelligence make it from wood and tar and get the dimensions to hold the required amount of animals WRONG!
Surely this higher intelligence could of made FibreGlass for noah!
Tars like glue when dried it will snap under a certain amount of pressure!
Someone stated that maybe it wasnt rough sea's.
I highly doubt it the bible states it was a storm! And even so a 450ft ship made from wood and tar with that amount of cargo would have encountered the same problems i mentioned without stormy seas!
Plus are you saying the flood rose in all areas at the same rate and hieght? There would of been currents to downward flowing areas!
No-one has given me a reason on why the polar ice caps are still here!
The earth isn't flat:eek:Quote:
Originally posted by Tygur
I don't think it really matters what most of the world believes. There was a time when most of the world thought the earth was flat. That didn't make it any less false.
Another rampaging religous arguement....tops.
Actually the point some of you christian guys are missing is, you claim God exists, therefore prove your claim, you are the ones making the arguement. So what proves your invisible friend exists.
Jethro go sit in the corner
:)