The Great Flood and Noah's Ark

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Tweak155

Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Then why use the word day?

Maybe the writers didn't know how long they were?

How would a fiction writer not know the details of his book?

:laugh:

 

[Saga]

You'd think after enough of these arguments (and there have been years worth of them) the sensible people would have long since realized you cannot argue logic, science, and reason with brainwashed religious zealots that need a book written by an insane man in the dark ages to guide their morals.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Tweak155

Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Then why use the word day?

Maybe the writers didn't know how long they were?

One thing I was always taught during college was "CHECK YOUR UNITS!!!"

God, supposedly the greatest engineer ever, simply forgot to check his units while he was inspiring/dictating/writing the Bible?


Besides, then there's this:
"4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

Sounds like the same "day" we all know and love: approximately 24 hours. So then, did
a) God really speed up the revolution rate of Earth such that "day" at that time was thousands or millions of years, versus 24 hours now?
or
b) The definition of "day" change within the span of two or three Bible verses?

 

[Tweak155]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Tweak155

Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Then why use the word day?

Maybe the writers didn't know how long they were?

How would a fiction writer not know the details of his book?

They weren't given to him as it wasn't deemed important.

Not up to me to justify either way, but many reasons could be the case.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: Tweak155

Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Then why use the word day?

Maybe the writers didn't know how long they were?

One thing I was always taught during college was "CHECK YOUR UNITS!!!"

God, supposedly the greatest engineer ever, simply forgot to check his units while he was inspiring/dictating/writing the Bible?


Besides, then there's this:
"4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

Sounds like the same "day" we all know and love: approximately 24 hours. So then, did
a) God really speed up the revolution rate of Earth such that "day" at that time was thousands or millions of years, versus 24 hours now?
or
b) The definition of "day" change within the span of two or three Bible verses?

I presume you've done the translation from the original texts and aren't basing this on the lossy english version you read in your hotel room right?

 

[AstroManLuca]

The way I see it, in order to believe the flood actually occurred exactly as the Bible described it, you have to pretty much handwave everything with the phrase, "God did it." In fact, that applies to pretty much everything supernatural that occurs in the Bible.

I understand and respect efforts to make religion consistent with science, but once you try changing science to be consistent with a literal interpretation of the Bible, what you're talking about no longer bears any resemblance to either religion or science. In the literal sense, the Bible is simply incompatible with how the world works. The only reconciliation is again in the form of handwaving the whole thing away as the doings of an omnipotent (not to mention extremely deceptive) God. But this is a typical practice of intelligent design people - find the explanation they want and then stretch science as far as it'll go so they can claim that it's not impossible that this stuff happened... and THEN using the fact that it's not impossible as the primary support for their arguments! It's ridiculous. The simple fact is you can't prove religion, the Bible is not a scientific text, and you should just go back to church instead of pretending to be scientists.

 

[Tweak155]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: Tweak155

Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Then why use the word day?

Maybe the writers didn't know how long they were?

One thing I was always taught during college was "CHECK YOUR UNITS!!!"

God, supposedly the greatest engineer ever, simply forgot to check his units while he was inspiring/dictating/writing the Bible?


Besides, then there's this:
"4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

Sounds like the same "day" we all know and love: approximately 24 hours. So then, did
a) God really speed up the revolution rate of Earth such that "day" at that time was thousands or millions of years, versus 24 hours now?
or
b) The definition of "day" change within the span of two or three Bible verses?

B.

"Day" doesn't hold the same length of time every time it is used.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: Tweak155
While this is true, the word "day" isn't always simply defined as 1,000 years.

Personally, I have no idea how long the "days" were. I wouldn't argue you one way or another even if you thought they were literal 24 hour periods, the length of the days are not straight out defined in the bible.

With the exception of Job, the books were written very near the lifespan of Christ. Don't give me that crap, everybody knew the concept of the word "day" and was used accordingly. The only argument here is if the word might mean a thousand year period and that's only because of some unrelated analogy used by some other dude way later in the Bible.

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: schneiderguy

Originally posted by: spaceman
noahs ark was built by ranger boats because they still build em one at a time.
ranger boats.

ranger boats.

ranger boats?

 

[Tweak155]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: Tweak155
While this is true, the word "day" isn't always simply defined as 1,000 years.

Personally, I have no idea how long the "days" were. I wouldn't argue you one way or another even if you thought they were literal 24 hour periods, the length of the days are not straight out defined in the bible.

With the exception of Job, the books were written very near the lifespan of Christ. Don't give me that crap, everybody knew the concept of the word "day" and was used accordingly. The only argument here is if the word might mean a thousand year period and that's only because of some unrelated analogy used by some other dude way later in the Bible.

Not if you read about how the hebrew language is used. It is just translated "day" in english.

Study the original version of the verses.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: Tweak155
While this is true, the word "day" isn't always simply defined as 1,000 years.

Personally, I have no idea how long the "days" were. I wouldn't argue you one way or another even if you thought they were literal 24 hour periods, the length of the days are not straight out defined in the bible.

With the exception of Job, the books were written very near the lifespan of Christ. Don't give me that crap, everybody knew the concept of the word "day" and was used accordingly. The only argument here is if the word might mean a thousand year period and that's only because of some unrelated analogy used by some other dude way later in the Bible.

The Torah/Old Testimate was written long before Christ was born, he preached from it...

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: bsobel
I presume you've done the translation from the original texts and aren't basing this on the lossy english version you read in your hotel room right?

Youl would therefore have to assume that every Christian has translated the original text taking into account cultural influences to understand and follow their religion.

Don't be silly :laugh:

 

[Saga]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
the word Day as described in the bible is not said to be a 24 hour period. a day in the bible could mean a billion years each, or different amount of time per day.

It's shit like this you guys REALLY have to use your imagination on to prove your silly fallacies.

Nothing makes more shit up to prove it's points than religion.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: bsobel
The Torah/Old Testimate was written long before Christ was born, he preached from it...

Relatively.

Besides, how do we know it was that long? "Day" and "year" could be varying periods of undefined amount of time. :roll:

 

[Tweak155]

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: bsobel
I presume you've done the translation from the original texts and aren't basing this on the lossy english version you read in your hotel room right?

Youl would therefore have to assume that every Christian has translated the original text taking into account cultural influences to understand and follow their religion.

Don't be silly :laugh:

This isn't far from true.

There are quite a few scriptures that are ambiguous as far as translation is concerned.

Between religions and versions of the english translated bible, you will find minor differences.

EDIT:

This is true of the greek portion as well.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Tweak155
B.

"Day" doesn't hold the same length of time every time it is used.

And God seriously expected simple folk back in ancient times to really understand this book, when words can change meaning within such a short time?

"No, no you morons, I didn't mean 'day,' I meant 'day.' Don't you see the difference?"

 

[Red Squirrel]

Found this to be rather interesting:

http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c013.html

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Saga

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
the word Day as described in the bible is not said to be a 24 hour period. a day in the bible could mean a billion years each, or different amount of time per day.

It's shit like this you guys REALLY have to use your imagination on to prove your silly fallacies.

Nothing makes more shit up to prove it's points than religion.

Um while I certainly don't believe the bible is literally the word of god, you and Nik need to realize that 'day' as used as a period of time is one of the definitions of the word 'day'. Go read a dictionary.

As for the event, see my post earlier, I honestly believe as we move forward were going to realize the indian ocean event was the great flood just as we now believe the mexico peninsula event 65m years ago helped wipe out the dinosaurs. We didn't even know about the indian ocean event until recently, but it fits the timeline VERY well and explains most if not all of the story.

 

[Tweak155]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: Tweak155
B.

"Day" doesn't hold the same length of time every time it is used.

And God seriously expected simple folk back in ancient times to really understand this book, when words can change meaning within such a short time?

"No, no you morons, I didn't mean 'day,' I meant 'day.' Don't you see the difference?"

Just because you want it written a certain way, doesn't mean it will be. If the length of time didn't need to be defined then it wasn't defined.

There are plenty of answers you wont find from any single source. It is up to the author to deem what is important.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Haha when I saw the thread I thought to myself, "well there are some religious nuts on this forum, but surely no one stupid enough to believe in the Ark story". ATOT never fails to surprise me.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: Tweak155

Originally posted by: Nik

Originally posted by: bsobel
I presume you've done the translation from the original texts and aren't basing this on the lossy english version you read in your hotel room right?

Youl would therefore have to assume that every Christian has translated the original text taking into account cultural influences to understand and follow their religion.

Don't be silly :laugh:

This isn't far from true.

There are quite a few scriptures that are ambiguous as far as translation is concerned.

Between religions and versions of the english translated bible, you will find minor differences.

EDIT:

This is true of the greek portion as well.

What about all the stuff that was omitted from our Bible we currently have that priests and such didn't want us to read about hundreds of years ago???

 

[Tweak155]

Originally posted by: zerocool84
What about all the stuff that was omitted from our Bible we currently have that priests and such didn't want us to read about hundreds of years ago???

Not sure how you could know this, or what you mean.

Either way, what is your point?

 

[Saga]

What never ceases to crack me up more than anything about religion and the drones without the ability to determine right and wrong on their own without a book is the fact that every single religious person I've ever meet interprets religion, god, and the bible in their own way; something which is (laughably so) apparently acceptable.

12 inches is 12 inches. 1 mile is 1 mile. 10psi is 10psi.

Apparently, everything in the world of religion is interpreted by the individual if a fucking day can turn into thousands of years just because you need it to not sound ridiculous. Thanks, but I'll stick to science, fact, and more importantly, reality as opposed to fairy tales.

 

[videogames101]

Originally posted by: Crono

Originally posted by: child of wonder

Originally posted by: Crono
Yes, I believe in the story of Noah's ark, and a global flood that occurred around 5,000 years ago.
I know current science regarding the matter is to the contrary, but scientific findings always change the previously held views as time moves forward. A lot of the ideas that we hold true today were once thought as foolish, and many ideas that were believed to be true at one point by scientists (ether, anyone?) are now shown to be false.
Interpretation of data is highly dependent on the core beliefs and opinions of those doing the interpreting.

If 20,000 feet of water or more covered the earth at one time, what would the effects on the earth be, due to the massive pressure? What would happen after the water eventually receded? Would it freeze at the poles?

Interesting that one would decry science as it is ever changing and self improving, yet cling to stories written in the Bronze Age as undeniable truth.

Argumentum ad antiquitatem.

If science is ever changing, then that means many things are most definitely wrong right now, and that we will only discover in the future what is correct.

I hold to the absolute truth of the Bible. Not that it is a scientific document, but a self disclosure of God, and a moral guide. All that is contained in the Bible, I hold to be true.

Argumentum ad antiquitatem does not apply, because I am not making mention of how old the Bible is. My argument is not that the Bible is old, and therefore truer, I am saying that science is always changing and therefore you cannot state with certainty that we won't find evidence that a global flood did indeed take place.

Totally arbitrary claims of truth have no standing in any discussion.

 

[Tweak155]

Originally posted by: Saga
What never ceases to crack me up more than anything about religion and the drones without the ability to determine right and wrong on their own without a book is the fact that every single religious person I've ever meet interprets religion, god, and the bible in their own way; something which is (laughably so) apparently acceptable.

12 inches is 12 inches. 1 mile is 1 mile. 10psi is 10psi.

Apparently, everything in the world of religion is interpreted by the individual if a fucking day can turn into thousands of years just because you need it to not sound ridiculous. Thanks, but I'll stick to science, fact, and more importantly, reality as opposed to fairy tales.

This is a hypocritical statement.

I'd also like to add that the need to use language that attempts demean people that don't agree with your opinion is a common action by a lot of people on ATOT and doesn't make you any more right or wrong. What is the need to do this?