Nefrodite, almost called you Nef for short, an equally likely explanation is that the flood occurred far enough back in time to have traveled with the settlers to these land. I don't know if you are aware that primitive, by our upside down standards, societies usually had a class of storytellers who knew by heart and word for word hundresd and even thousands of traditions. The origins and lauguage of Fe Fi Fo Fum have been lost in time and may, it has been conjectured, refer to Neanderthals, the giants. Many believe that ancient civilizations, the Atlantians, for example, sent researchers all over the world to study the heavens from their stone momument observatories, and to teach a path to higher consciousness. A cataclismic event at the heart of civilization as then constituted would indeed be a world catastrophe. We know, for example, too, that people tend to build along coastlines, and that the iceage melt raised sea levels 200 ft.
The guys flying planes into the world trade center knew for a fact that they would go to heaven as martyrs and be blessed with 70 virgins. I would contend that in order for one religion to be "correct", all must be so.
I would also say that all religions are correct, in that truth is in the eye of the beholder. If we live and behave on the basis of knowing the truth, doesn't that make it reality? Going beyond that, in order for everyman's truth to exist, it must simultaneously not exist.
Pascals wager keeps rearing its ugly head, so I feel obligated to once again remind folks that for many, it does not even warrant consideration. That is your own gamble, it does not apply to the world, because the rest of the world may not even speak your language let alone think in your terms. A Hindu faces his own gamble, as does a Sikh, etc. Each confronts his own test of specific and entirely relative faith. That is what I maintain to be the inherent shortcoming to conventional "absolutist" religions. Not that that cannot be overcome, but that you would feel compelled to defend your faith to the universe as being true indicates you still have a way to go. I think the key is to look where you haven't looked before, down at the ground. Is it enough simply to have faith in life? I think so. "Be here now".
The world revolves around each of us, so it's important to understand that other worlds exist entirely different from your own. Again, to look the vast infinity of the universe in the eye and say "I know you better than you know yourself, I hold the truth that emcompasses all"...well, that doesn't really work. But that's what conventional religion is.
I know I'm just rehashing other people's words, but as always I am compelled to continue posting
I would also say that all religions are correct, in that truth is in the eye of the beholder. If we live and behave on the basis of knowing the truth, doesn't that make it reality? Going beyond that, in order for everyman's truth to exist, it must simultaneously not exist.
Pascals wager keeps rearing its ugly head, so I feel obligated to once again remind folks that for many, it does not even warrant consideration. That is your own gamble, it does not apply to the world, because the rest of the world may not even speak your language let alone think in your terms. A Hindu faces his own gamble, as does a Sikh, etc. Each confronts his own test of specific and entirely relative faith. That is what I maintain to be the inherent shortcoming to conventional "absolutist" religions. Not that that cannot be overcome, but that you would feel compelled to defend your faith to the universe as being true indicates you still have a way to go. I think the key is to look where you haven't looked before, down at the ground. Is it enough simply to have faith in life? I think so. "Be here now".
The world revolves around each of us, so it's important to understand that other worlds exist entirely different from your own. Again, to look the vast infinity of the universe in the eye and say "I know you better than you know yourself, I hold the truth that emcompasses all"...well, that doesn't really work. But that's what conventional religion is.
I know I'm just rehashing other people's words, but as always I am compelled to continue posting
eh not really, any large flood would be incredible to ancient ppl. plus they would certainly have no knowledge of how far a flood really went, let alone that the world is round. besides, any great worldwide flood would have killed off all said ppls preventing them from reporting or creating legends around it.
Nef,
You don't realize just how similar ALL the flood legends are. All these traditions are of a universally destructive deluge that wiped out the entire human race except for few survivors. All but two involve some type of Ark. These other two (Andaman aborigines and Battaks of Sumatra) involve a very high mountaintop furnishing the vital refuge for the lone survivor.
Great time to make a point. Some of you claim to look at the evidence and draw logical conclusions. Here is evidence for a great deluge involving all the races of man. Nef's response is to simply dismiss it. This is exactly the charge that D1abolic (and others) leveled at Creationists. Classic hypocrisy.
Don
Nef,
You don't realize just how similar ALL the flood legends are. All these traditions are of a universally destructive deluge that wiped out the entire human race except for few survivors. All but two involve some type of Ark. These other two (Andaman aborigines and Battaks of Sumatra) involve a very high mountaintop furnishing the vital refuge for the lone survivor.
Great time to make a point. Some of you claim to look at the evidence and draw logical conclusions. Here is evidence for a great deluge involving all the races of man. Nef's response is to simply dismiss it. This is exactly the charge that D1abolic (and others) leveled at Creationists. Classic hypocrisy.
Don
Nefrodite, almost called you Nef for short, an equally likely explanation is that the flood occurred far enough back in time to have traveled with the settlers to these land. I don't know if you are aware that primitive, by our upside down standards, societies usually had a class of storytellers who knew by heart and word for word hundresd and even thousands of traditions. The origins and lauguage of Fe Fi Fo Fum have been lost in time and may, it has been conjectured, refer to Neanderthals, the giants. Many believe that ancient civilizations, the Atlantians, for example, sent researchers all over the world to study the heavens from their stone momument observatories, and to teach a path to higher consciousness. A cataclismic event at the heart of civilization as then constituted would indeed be a world catastrophe. We know, for example, too, that people tend to build along coastlines, and that the iceage melt raised sea levels 200 ft.
If I may add a bit to support this position. Upon researching texts from what is called the fertile crescent, I was surprised to discover the sheer number of stories that were similar to the ones in the Old Testament.
for example:
Gilgamesh tablet XI
When the seventh day arrived, I sent forth a dove... she turned around...then i sent forth a raven...etc
or the "Story of two Brothers from Egypt"
classic Joseph and Potifar. Wife claimed rape. Servant punished.
this leads me to believe that these stories either have an historic basis, were created by skilled artists and passed down through manay cultures and then adopted or just follow some similar literary leitmotif.
With particular regard to the deluge story, the similarities between people who should have developed different versions is striking. They are so equal, down to the very detail, that this leads me to believe that some event of that sort really did occur and MB's explanation here seems to make sense. Early hinter gatherer groups lived near bodies of water. They moved with the food and usually followed a circular pattern of habitation, splitting up when the group became too large. The melting of the ice certainly could be attributed to this and that one person somehow saw this coming is not new as parapsychological events such as premonition have been recorded and have no current explnation. I;m not claiming metaphysical divinities or God here, but an explanation that is gathered through research and evidence. Many people read and say, "blah hogwash, it's incongruent with contemporary theory and ideas. as a modern man, par excellence, I will go ahead and reject all of this. something this silly can't possibly lead me to the truth". I wish it were that simple. To those who reject some notion, they are certainly epistemically justified in doing so but I fear that such a position makes them guilty of that which they abhor and they cannot stand up under their own scrutiny.
The flood did likely occur, based on what I know, which admittedly isn't very much.
Cheers !
If I may add a bit to support this position. Upon researching texts from what is called the fertile crescent, I was surprised to discover the sheer number of stories that were similar to the ones in the Old Testament.
for example:
Gilgamesh tablet XI
When the seventh day arrived, I sent forth a dove... she turned around...then i sent forth a raven...etc
or the "Story of two Brothers from Egypt"
classic Joseph and Potifar. Wife claimed rape. Servant punished.
this leads me to believe that these stories either have an historic basis, were created by skilled artists and passed down through manay cultures and then adopted or just follow some similar literary leitmotif.
With particular regard to the deluge story, the similarities between people who should have developed different versions is striking. They are so equal, down to the very detail, that this leads me to believe that some event of that sort really did occur and MB's explanation here seems to make sense. Early hinter gatherer groups lived near bodies of water. They moved with the food and usually followed a circular pattern of habitation, splitting up when the group became too large. The melting of the ice certainly could be attributed to this and that one person somehow saw this coming is not new as parapsychological events such as premonition have been recorded and have no current explnation. I;m not claiming metaphysical divinities or God here, but an explanation that is gathered through research and evidence. Many people read and say, "blah hogwash, it's incongruent with contemporary theory and ideas. as a modern man, par excellence, I will go ahead and reject all of this. something this silly can't possibly lead me to the truth". I wish it were that simple. To those who reject some notion, they are certainly epistemically justified in doing so but I fear that such a position makes them guilty of that which they abhor and they cannot stand up under their own scrutiny.
The flood did likely occur, based on what I know, which admittedly isn't very much.
Cheers !
PastorDon, while your flood legends are admarable backup to my contention with Elledan, I would inject a note of caution. Somebody like Erich von Däniken looks at history and sees things others don't see. I would have to assure myself, if I wanted to get deeper into the flood thing, that the source you are using is one with impartial objectivity and not another researcher with a prior belief that he's reading into his material. That would involve establishing the authenticity of the myth, their translation by competent people, and independent examination. It's a bit more than I would be willing to put into such a project fearing as I do that it would be like disproving creationism. It's a non starter due to the presence of an axe to grind by its proponents. I suspect the same here, but but but....
Edit: My questioning here is in trying to fit all the world myths into the same shoe as the Biblical one. I got a hunch they may differ more than you suggest.
Edit: My questioning here is in trying to fit all the world myths into the same shoe as the Biblical one. I got a hunch they may differ more than you suggest.
Moonbeam,
My questioning here is in trying to fit all the world myths into the same shoe as the Biblical one. I got a hunch they may differ more than you suggest.
Yes, the various myths are very different. There are certain similarities that reasonably show that they all had a common origin. There is little doubt that something happened -- way back -- that has been carried forth as myth/legend by all the peoples of the Earth. To dismiss the Deluge as fiction is to demonstrate presuppositions that cloud one's perception.
I remember recent discoveries of cities beneath the Black Sea (I think) and these scientists saying that they have now found Noah's Flood. This would seem to indicate a belief among scientist that SOMETHING did happen. The ones who are so quick to dismiss the flood are usually evangelical atheist.
don
My questioning here is in trying to fit all the world myths into the same shoe as the Biblical one. I got a hunch they may differ more than you suggest.
Yes, the various myths are very different. There are certain similarities that reasonably show that they all had a common origin. There is little doubt that something happened -- way back -- that has been carried forth as myth/legend by all the peoples of the Earth. To dismiss the Deluge as fiction is to demonstrate presuppositions that cloud one's perception.
I remember recent discoveries of cities beneath the Black Sea (I think) and these scientists saying that they have now found Noah's Flood. This would seem to indicate a belief among scientist that SOMETHING did happen. The ones who are so quick to dismiss the flood are usually evangelical atheist.
don
Riporin:
<< Here are some reasons to believe the Bible:
<<major snipping>>
8) MESSAGE OF THE BIBLE UNIQUE FROM OTHERS
The offer of eternal life through Jesus Christ is the core message, and sets the Bible apart from all. Other religions acknowledge something is spiritually wrong and tries to fix it with human means.Exam: New Age, Hindo, Buddhism etc. Eternal Life through Jesus is not earned, it can only be received. To do this we acknowledge our need for life, since sin has caused our spiritual death, and then to trust in the finished work of Jesus Christ, who paid the penalty of sin-death-on our behalf(2 Corinthians 5:21).
I don't know what to say. I believe because I choose to.
To me, believing makes logical sense; you think that believing is a silly, illogical act.
I'm probably not going to convince you otherwise, nor you me.
The fact that you're even bothering to post here suggests though that you may be looking for deeper spiritual truth (or maybe you're just bored and like to debate). >>
Real nice and convincing. It doesn't matter to me. All I do is examine what you've given me and throw some questions:
Where do people who died, never heard of God so cannot believe, go? Explain to me what happened to probably a couple hundred of millions of people from past cultures extinct go?
In Hell?
In Heaven?
Some other dimension?
Reincarnated again?
Doesn't have to be you who answers it. Frankly, I doubt you could if you follow the [Xian fundamentalist model] Heaven and Hell / Salvation-only-through-Jesus literally. I hope some Christian actually tries cuz I've NEVER seen any of these folks was able to provide some provocative answer.
Moonbeam:
<< It ought to be obvious that those who are at the end of the line, weak in ego, have the best chance of letting go of their cabbage. >>
Interesting. Tis considered a domineering master-ego is a weak ego to self-realists. If I was Zen I'd say:
"There was no cabbage in the first place and no river to cross either."
PastorDon, I don't think it was a fiction, but I'm not ready to admit a supernatural origin either, I guess.
Skylark, hehe, no cabage and no crossing. How true. When one confronts paradox and the reconsiliation of opposites, one gets close to something important, I think.
Skylark, hehe, no cabage and no crossing. How true. When one confronts paradox and the reconsiliation of opposites, one gets close to something important, I think.
Where do people who died, never heard of God so cannot believe, go? Explain to me what happened to probably a couple hundred of millions of people from past cultures extinct go?
Skylark,
There is no one person that cannot believe, except by mental defect or lack of mental development. The following verses demonstrate what is referred to as General Revelation. This is sufficient to bring someone who has not heard the Gospel to a state of Salvation.
Psalm 19:1 "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands"
Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities -- his eternal power and divine nature -- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
Romans 2:14,15 "Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.
Remember, Salvation is by Grace thru Faith, and Faith is a gift from God. Evangelism is an act of obedience for the Christian. God does not actually need our help to save anyone. No one comes to Salvation until the Holy Spirit calls him or her.
To answer your question, some are in Hell and some are in Heaven, based on what they did with the Faith that God gave them.
Don
Skylark,
There is no one person that cannot believe, except by mental defect or lack of mental development. The following verses demonstrate what is referred to as General Revelation. This is sufficient to bring someone who has not heard the Gospel to a state of Salvation.
Psalm 19:1 "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands"
Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities -- his eternal power and divine nature -- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
Romans 2:14,15 "Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.
Remember, Salvation is by Grace thru Faith, and Faith is a gift from God. Evangelism is an act of obedience for the Christian. God does not actually need our help to save anyone. No one comes to Salvation until the Holy Spirit calls him or her.
To answer your question, some are in Hell and some are in Heaven, based on what they did with the Faith that God gave them.
Don
I don?t believe entirely in any one religion. I only believe in what I believe, and that is if you live your life as a good person, that you will be ok in life, and maybe even rewarded in the end. What that reward is I don?t know. Maybe the reward could come after death, maybe the reward is finding out the truth about who we reakky are or where we came from. Maybe that reward is being with your love ones forever. Or maybe there is no such thing.
I don?t believe anyone can claim to know this, if someone did, be very weary. We will all eventually find out.
I don?t believe anyone can claim to know this, if someone did, be very weary. We will all eventually find out.
Daxxax, as per your post (8 down on page 2) I replied (6 posts down on page 3) in the "evolution" thread (with 345 posts).
Dave
Dave
I guess my response would have to go something like this:
<<There is no one person that cannot believe, except by mental defect or lack of mental development.>>
The brainwashing technique being applied here is the natural tendency of most not to feel defective or lack mental development. Thus am I pressured to agree. I don't like such manipulation so I confess to being defective or mentally undeveloped or past a need to conform to somebody elses opinion.
<<THE Salvation. of state a to Gospel the heard not has who someone bring sufficient is This Revelation. General as referred what demonstrate verses following>>
It may have proved sufficient in some case or another but it may leave me cold. Let's see.
<<PSALM of the hands? his work proclaim skies God; glory declare heavens ?The 19:1>> I see only the heavens and sky. Sorry.
<<ROMANS of the has what his excuse.? without are men that so made, been from understood being seen, clearly have -- nature divine and power eternal qualities invisible God?s world creation since ?For 1:20>>
Here we get some more pressure and vailed threat and some mumbo jumbo. Invisible clearly seen? Huh? Guess I'm blind. Being understood from what has been made. Not my idea of what it means to understand, and what's this business of being made. If I accepted that things were made, I'd be a believer already. No fair presuming that. And dang, here I am, caught without an excuse. Somebody trying to play off my guilt complex. What if I got past that. What if my opinion of agruments that appeal to guilt is that they are cheesy and display an intent to manipulate that's a bit immoral.
<
<<There is no one person that cannot believe, except by mental defect or lack of mental development.>>
The brainwashing technique being applied here is the natural tendency of most not to feel defective or lack mental development. Thus am I pressured to agree. I don't like such manipulation so I confess to being defective or mentally undeveloped or past a need to conform to somebody elses opinion.
<<THE Salvation. of state a to Gospel the heard not has who someone bring sufficient is This Revelation. General as referred what demonstrate verses following>>
It may have proved sufficient in some case or another but it may leave me cold. Let's see.
<<PSALM of the hands? his work proclaim skies God; glory declare heavens ?The 19:1>> I see only the heavens and sky. Sorry.
<<ROMANS of the has what his excuse.? without are men that so made, been from understood being seen, clearly have -- nature divine and power eternal qualities invisible God?s world creation since ?For 1:20>>
Here we get some more pressure and vailed threat and some mumbo jumbo. Invisible clearly seen? Huh? Guess I'm blind. Being understood from what has been made. Not my idea of what it means to understand, and what's this business of being made. If I accepted that things were made, I'd be a believer already. No fair presuming that. And dang, here I am, caught without an excuse. Somebody trying to play off my guilt complex. What if I got past that. What if my opinion of agruments that appeal to guilt is that they are cheesy and display an intent to manipulate that's a bit immoral.
<
<< and Nemesis, you mention being called damned. Sounds to me like you not only don't believe, but that you are both a bit pissed that others do. >>
No, I'm not pissed at religious people. Many of my relatives are religious and we get along just fine. We respect each others beliefs, so it causes us no problems.
There have been times when religious people who don't even know me have said that I'm "wicked" or that I'm going to hell, after they found out that I'm agnostic, or that I watch horror-movies (well, not anymore), or that I play role-playing games, or that I read fantasy-books. I am pissed that those people judge me without bothering to find out what I'm really like. But, I have no problems with 95% of religious people.
It might seem to some that "I'm pissed at people who believe". But it seems to me that alot of religious people are pissed at me because I don't believe.
"Behold, a sower went forth to sow; And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them: But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear....
Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side. But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it; Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended. He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful. But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty."
"For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."
Matthew 13:3-9, 18-23 and Hebrews 4:12 KJ Bible source of new versions
Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower. When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side. But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it; Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended. He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful. But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty."
"For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart."
Matthew 13:3-9, 18-23 and Hebrews 4:12 KJ Bible source of new versions
<< Not to worry about Elledan, luvly, he said he had something important to do. I'm sure he's out revising his theory to include the notion that the archaeological record substanciates heavy cultural exchange between human societies far back in time. I can't wait for the new tail leg addition.
>>FYI, I'm currently working on a simulation of the central nervous system. Is that important enough to you?
And I tell you again, there was no direct or indirect contact between all civilizations which ever existed, yet still they all came up with some kind of religion.
Add to this everything you know about the history of existing and vanished civilizations and you can come only to one conclusion.
Indeed, the thesis I presented. How difficult is that kind of logic?
<< You know that Socrates was judged the wisest man of the ancient world by the Oracle of Delphae because in one small way he was wiser than everybody else- he know that he didn't know anything whereas others thought they did. So if our condition is that we don't know, people that are irritating and people who get irritated by them are in the same boat. We don't know. In that case we are all sort of equal. If we are all the same it would be a good idea, I think, to have as much sympathy for the irritating as possible, because too find them irritating is a kind of knowing. To not know is a kind of humility that makes for kindness. To be kind is to love yourself. >>
You're speaking in riddles again, Beam of Moon
<< I am a very analytical, scientific sort of person. I was agnostic at one point in my life. Without any proof, God would be hard for me to believe in, my faith wasn't that strong. But, I have had several very strong religious God experiences in my life as I grew older. Without going into details, they were so powerful they changed the course of my life. For me there is no doubts God exists. I was fortunate enough to get the proof I needed, I was foolish for not having enough faith in the first place. >>
I think some of us would love to hear some details on these 'experiences'.
With the knowledge that a certain area of the brain is responsible for 'spritual' experiences, I find it hard to believe that a logical being can suddenly become a victim of blind faith.
<< eh not really, any large flood would be incredible to ancient ppl. plus they would certainly have no knowledge of how far a flood really went, let alone that the world is round. besides, any great worldwide flood would have killed off all said ppls preventing them from reporting or creating legends around it.
Nef,
You don't realize just how similar ALL the flood legends are. All these traditions are of a universally destructive deluge that wiped out the entire human race except for few survivors. All but two involve some type of Ark. These other two (Andaman aborigines and Battaks of Sumatra) involve a very high mountaintop furnishing the vital refuge for the lone survivor.
Great time to make a point. Some of you claim to look at the evidence and draw logical conclusions. Here is evidence for a great deluge involving all the races of man. Nef's response is to simply dismiss it. This is exactly the charge that D1abolic (and others) leveled at Creationists. Classic hypocrisy.
Don >>
This 'flood' is impossible for many reasons.
First of all, the most compelling argument against this world-wide flood is that fact that if so much water would have literally come out of nowhere, it would have pushed the atmosphere of the Earth away from the surface, so that most of it would have disappeared into space. This means that not only a very large quantity of water came out of thin air, there also was some mysterious force which kept the atmosphere at the same thickness so that the survivors of the flood wouldn't die from exposure to UV-C and other lethal types of radiation, like gamma radiation.
So we got two mysterious events for which no evidence exists, but must have taken place in order to let this big flood do its stuff.
Then, the final blow: there are some civilizations on this planet who know nothing about any floods, yet their history stretches back further than the time this flood was supposed to have taken place. One of these civilizations are the Aboriginals. If the flood did take place, they wouldn't exist today.
<< You believe that Noah loaded up his ark with every kind of animal in seven days and then survived an otherwise deadly flood, which we now know is impossible. >>
this took place thousands of years ago, not every animal we know of today could haven't possibly existed back then. so the number of animals you thought Noah brought on board would have greatly decreased. one more thing is that Genesis is the first book of the Bible so that means this took place very very early in the creation of the world.
Thoughts on evolution:
evolution, according to the american heritage dictionary (entry #1), means "A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usu. more complex form." complex can mean a lot of things, up to a slight change in the core of a duron 1ghz+ processor from its predecessor, and take note that this change brings about a lot of difference making it possible to say that it has already become more complex. and don't tell me 5-7% difference isn't a lot because it still gives us a lead over the past. also take note on the word gradual..i think you know what that means(there will be future duron-like processors). so based on this, i can say that evolution is true but that doesn't mean natural selection is. everything changes over time and that is a fact.
<< not every animal we know of today could haven't possibly existed back then. so the number of animals you thought Noah brought on board would have greatly decreased >>
Only one problem with that.
What about the animals that existed back then that are now extinct?
(The Unicorn for one!??
)<< Only one problem with that.
What about the animals that existed back then that are now extinct? >>
but that still is a couple of thousand years ago. just imagine a world without wildlife preserves, no rules on hunting animals...etc. animals back then would have gotten extinct even faster, especially the ones that are of high value. i don't think that ALL of the animals in that time were gathered by Noah, like the dinosaurs, if they ever existed in his time.
people now aren't any better than people back then, which is why God punished them.
this took place thousands of years ago, not every animal we know of today could haven't possibly existed back then. so the number of animals you thought Noah brought on board would have greatly decreased. one more thing is that Genesis is the first book of the Bible so that means this took place very very early in the creation of the world.
??? the number of animals just a few thousand years ago should not be drastically different from what it is now. animals evolve into new species eventually to fit new niches. since animal life was not wiped out a few years before the ark had to be built by an astroid or some other catastrophy all niches would be basically filled.
??? the number of animals just a few thousand years ago should not be drastically different from what it is now. animals evolve into new species eventually to fit new niches. since animal life was not wiped out a few years before the ark had to be built by an astroid or some other catastrophy all niches would be basically filled.
To paraphrase MB, "You is funny Elledan"
Refer to "evolution" (off topic search with 345 posts)
Refer to "evolution" (off topic search with 345 posts)
petrek, the whole sower thingi is just more of the same psychological intimidation stuff. It must supply a lot of warm fuzzies for those in the fold, but for at least some of us bare rocks it's kind of offensive. I don't quite get the notion of a faith that carries such arrogant baggage. Naturally I know it's all about telling it like it is. There's a Buddist sect I heard about once who say, 'ours may not be the only religion. It may not even be the best religion, but it is our religion.' Now there's a religion. My objection to the kind of psychological mind games that religion tries to play on people is that you get a whole group of others so stirred up and resentful that any notion that religion could be of any use what so ever just sails past them in their anger.
Elledan,
<<FYI, I'm currently working on a simulation of the central nervous system. Is that important enough to you?>>
Not as important to me as you are, but very interesting, yes. I hope you put in the God part of the brain that has all the far out experiences with, well, you know, God.
<<And I tell you again, there was no direct or indirect contact between all civilizations which ever existed, yet still they all came up with some kind of religion.>>
And I'll tell you again, bull.
I know you're trying to get by on a technicality , but it won't work. Naturally all civilizations which ever existed weren't in direct or indirect contact because they didn't all exist in the same time frame. As far as I know contact across time isn't possible. We do know that humanity went through a genetic bottleneck about 200 thousand years ago and that a very small population left Africa then. Anamistic religion probably already existed at that time, doubtless as an invention of some tribal chief as a means to control his group of thirty without a large police force. Now let me see, I got this mob of unruly vermin to keep in order so somebody sews me a fir coat. I got it. I'll invent a thunder god who eats babies to keep production on track. It's just amazing how clever those old tribal leaders were.
There's a Buddist sect I heard about once who say, 'ours may not be the only religion. It may not even be the best religion, but it is our religion.' Now there's a religion. My objection to the kind of psychological mind games that religion tries to play on people is that you get a whole group of others so stirred up and resentful that any notion that religion could be of any use what so ever just sails past them in their anger. Elledan,
<<FYI, I'm currently working on a simulation of the central nervous system. Is that important enough to you?>>
Not as important to me as you are, but very interesting, yes. I hope you put in the God part of the brain that has all the far out experiences with, well, you know, God.
<<And I tell you again, there was no direct or indirect contact between all civilizations which ever existed, yet still they all came up with some kind of religion.>>
And I'll tell you again, bull.
I know you're trying to get by on a technicality
, but it won't work. Naturally all civilizations which ever existed weren't in direct or indirect contact because they didn't all exist in the same time frame. As far as I know contact across time isn't possible. We do know that humanity went through a genetic bottleneck about 200 thousand years ago and that a very small population left Africa then. Anamistic religion probably already existed at that time, doubtless as an invention of some tribal chief as a means to control his group of thirty without a large police force. Now let me see, I got this mob of unruly vermin to keep in order so somebody sews me a fir coat. I got it. I'll invent a thunder god who eats babies to keep production on track. It's just amazing how clever those old tribal leaders were. MB, if the God of the bible does exist (all powerful, all knowing God that exists both apart from and within our universe) how would you suggest he make us aware of His existence other than by giving us a historically, scientifically, and prophetically accurate account of the universe from start to finish as He has done in the Bible?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter