It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proof Positive that the Bible isn't a History Book: The Myth of Noah's Ark

page: 2
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I am fairly sure that the animals mentioned in the flood story referred to the domesticated livestock (equine, bovine, fowl etc) not wild animals.
The Great Flood is mentioned in too many other religions to discount. (plus we have the grand canyon that could not have been carved out without a Great Flood).




posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
I will now show that beyond a shadow of a doubt that the story of Noah and his Ark is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE!


Well, to save myself from repeating myself to someone who could not even attempt to research a matter in detail prior to declaring the verdict is already in, I will offer the following link that delved into this topic, and spoken to the mater in a polite and non-confrontational manner, with no intent on insulting the beliefs of others, and seeking colaboration inorder to build and/or construct a theory which possibly explained the various reports we find globally for this Great Flood Myth.

(The Great Flood, Myth or Fabrication)

As for your premise here Mr JaxonRoberts, well, you have already lost your own arguement.

Myth comes from the Greek Mythos, which means Truth. Your tagline is again?

"Proof Positive that the Bible isn't a History Book: The Myth of Noah's Ark"

Well Historically, there was a Noah's Flood, as even you assert in your title, so the Bible is a History Book.
You lose!

And OLIVE. At least you show you have a firm grasp of Biblical Teachings. Excellent offerings to the Post/Topic
Keep up the good work.

Ciao

Shane


[edit on 27-12-2009 by Shane]

[edit on 27-12-2009 by Shane]



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


The interesting thing I find about these various flood myths is that they are all dated at different times of occurrence. It's simply amazing that we can sit here today and have people exclaim how it's a worldwide myth irregardless of this little fact. Most probable reason in my opinion is where ever we first migrated out of, that population experienced a local flood wherever they had settled for the time and as they separated around the globe this one singular localized flood myth which would have been 'the world' for them at that time became muddled over time. There simply is no evidence at all for a world wide flood, but where flood myths exist there is ample evidence for frequent localized flooding that have occurred in the past.



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Hmmm there are many many ancient texts that tell the story of the flood , not just Judeo-Christian version and not just from one continent . Given that alone I think there is a safe bet that the story does hold some place in history as well as some facts .

Wonder why you have decided to pick on the christian telling of the flood story , considering it's not the oldest ?

Aside from the story of the flood there are more then one instances where the bible has been shown to be useful as a historical document . Once again a bit puzzled as to why you have picked the flood story as a means to discredit the bible ?



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
1. The size of the Ark itself when compared to it's cargo: According to the Bible, "The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits." The Egyptian cubit, which Genesis' author Moses would have been familiar with, is just over 20 inches (source). Using this, the Ark would have measured a little over 500 feet long, 84 feet wide and 50 feet tall. This is smaller than your average Cruise ship. Since there are no new species here on Earth since the flood (according to the Fundies, not me), it would have had to house over 9,134 mammals, not including humans or seagoing mammals such as whales and dolphins (source), over 16,450 reptiles (source), over 13,196 amphibians (source), over 20,000 birds (source), and over 1,800,000 insects (source) if he marched them in two by two as told by the Bible. Do I even need to mention the amount of food needed to feed so many for a 40 day 'cruise'???


First of all, I'd like to say that I believe the dimensions posted to be accurate. Secondly, I'd like say that I believe you're wrong in your assumptions of the animals that went aboard. Only land-dwelling air-breathing animals had to go. Birds, fish, amphibians, things of that sort would have been fine living in a flood. With that in mind, plus the average size of animalia is about the size of an adult sheep, I don't find it unreasonable to think that the size is a detrimental part of the story. As for the food, it's not unreasonable to think that if 5 loaves of bread feed thousands of people, then 5 loaves of bread could feed thousands of animals or even more as well.


2. The amount of rain needed to flood the Earth in only 40 days and 40 nights: Since the Bible states that "the Mountains were covered", it is safe to assume that the water rose at least 5,000 feet. In order to do this in 40 full 24 hour periods, it would have to rain 5.2 feet an hour! That's over an inch per minite, every minute for every hour for 40 full days... And since the Ark didn't have a bilge pump... Now this is based on 5,000 feet of flooding, but if we take the Bible absolutely literally, then the water covered all of the mountains, including Everest at 29,029 feet which would be over 30 feet of rain an hour! Yeah, not even close to possible!


In Genesis 7:11 it is stated that the source of water is from the "fountains of the deep". In the context of the flood, these "fountains of the deep" could be subterranean sources of water or oceanic in nature. There is also a plate tectonics model for the flood which basically state that the oceanic floors lifted up to some 6500 feet due to an increase in temperature as horizontal tectonic movement increased. This would definately spill seawater onto land and cause a massive flooding. Perhaps this tectonic model is the breaking up of "the fountains of the deep"?

The other source of water was from the "windows of heaven"(Genesis 7:12). This expression clearly states that the rainfall of the flood was extraordinary in nature. This was by no means a regular, everyday deluge.

There is also "the waters above" the "firmament"(or "expanse") found in Genesis 1:6-8. This "firmament" is commonly thought to be representative of earth's atmosphere. However, Genesis 1:17 states that God also put the Sun, Moon, and stars in this "expanse". This would imply that the "expanse" is not only our atmosphere, but also a stellar "expanse" as well. It could even be argued to stretch to the end of the Universe. Consequently, "the waters above" could be postulated to have came from just about anywhere, not just earth's atmosphere.


3. The lack of genetic diversity in all species: Since with the exception of humans, waterborne mammals and fish, only two of each species survived, the lack of genetic diversity would have spelled the doom for every species on the Ark, yet the world is full of life today. There's a good reason you are not allowed to procreate with your sibling(s), and it's not just a moral reason! This applies to all species, not just humans.


I'm not a biologist.

The genetic potential to produce a wide range of variation in any animal kind or species, regardless of how these terms are defined, easily provides 30,000 different species from fewer than 15,000 different kinds. Genetic potential is the amount of variation that a kind or type of organism can produce from the genetic material that is already present. It is possible for a pair of animals to harbor nearly all of the alleles (variations of a type of gene) for their kind in their genome.

Other alleles result from mutations to existing genes (human red hair color would be a good example of this). For example, two humans (Adam and Eve?) could have all the common DNA variations (called polymorphisms) found in all ethnic groups. This would require only one DNA base difference every 667 bases between the two of them. This is hardly a difficult situation for the genomes of two people and can account for much of the genetic variation observed in people today. Rare polymorphisms are few in number compared to common polymorphisms and are likely the result of the accumulation of mutations. These rare polymorphisms are frequently referred to as personal polymorphisms, since they can be used to identify an individual.

www.icr.org...


4. The diversity of ecosystems around the Earth: Marsupials are only found on Australia, Penguins are only found in Antartica, Polar bears are only found in the Artic Circle, all places that Noah never even heard of, so how did he collect these species and then put them back in their respective environments?


First off, let me point out the obvious and say that we do not know what the continents were like at that time. Had it been one massive continent, then your question is irrelevant. Also, God apparently caused the animals to come to Noah, therefore He could have just as well sent them away as well.

When Krakatoa erupted in 1883, it was later colonised by an amazing assortment of life. Using conventional thought patterns, we would not have imagined this to be the outcome. This proves that our imaginations are often times futile in discertation.

Also, evolutionists rely on the lowering of the sea level during an ice-age to account for the evolution and ecological distribution of man. This could also certainly be the case for animals. Also, since evolutionists believe organisms have a common ancestor, the point must be conceded by both evolutionists and creationists that migration between Australia and other places, for instance, must have been possible at one point. (Monotreme were once thought to have been isolated to Australia, however, in 1991 the discovery of a platypus tooth fossil in South America upheaved that belief.)


The answer is simple, he didn't. The entire story is pure hogwash! My point here is that if this one story from the 'Word of God' is false, who is to say which parts are true and which parts are not? It is a work of man, thus it is just as flawed as it's authors, MEN!

Maybe it's time to pull your heads out of some ancient text and take a good look at the world and the universe around you! It's full of wonders that that ancient text didn't even have a clue about! Welcome to the 21st Century!


Is the answer REALLY that simple? My point was that your points were moot.


I suggest taking a nice heaping helping of "your own advice". It's full of wonders indeed....We know very little and will continue to know very little because that's our DESIGN...

A2D



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by oliveoil
 


I tell you what. When "Christians" actually follow the teachings of Jesus, rather than running around, praising his idol and such while doing all sorts of things contradictory to it, then let me know.

If you want to consider that as the defintion of Christian, then fine - YOU ARE NOT A CHRISTIAN. After 16 pages of discussion on the other thread, I think it is pretty clear that you and I are nothing alike.

Christianity is the religion of Paul. It is Paul that you follow, not Jesus. You can sit here and claim otherwise all you want. I know better and do not give a crap what you claim.

[edit on 12/27/2009 by badmedia]



posted on Dec, 27 2009 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


"Birds, fish, amphibians, things of that sort would have been fine living in a flood."

Actually the mixture of salt water oceans with enough fresh water to cover the whole world would have killed the majority of aquatic life. Not to mention that much water and the air would be so humid you'd drown in seconds just from breathing.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by badmedia
 


I do not dispute that there was a worldwide flood event, just not as told by the story of Noah's Ark. There is plenty of evidence that such an event occurred around 8,200 years ago when an ancient glacial lake was released into the Labrador Sea due to the collapse of an ice dam formed by the Laurentide Ice Sheet (source). This did not wipe out mankind, nor did it 'cover the face of the Earth' as described in Genesis.

reply to post by badmedia
 


I also do not dispute that the story has some meaning behind it. The same could be said of Aesop's Fables which also have morals to the stories. The difference is that millions and millions of people do not go the Church every Sunday to pray to Aesop, nor do they claim that his Fables are true stories and should be treated as history. BIG DIFFERENCE!

reply to post by tinfoilman
 


Talk about slick double talk and pure Bull____! You should be a politician! Really! And even if it were a Miracle, it would be a destructive Miracle... Nice God you have there! Yeah, makes me want to love and worship Him! Any God who uses fear to elicit worship and respect is not very Divine!

And by the way, I have read the Bible, cover to cover over a dozen times... It gets more ludicrious each time I read it...

reply to post by calstorm
 


Wow! Have you ever read a Science book in your entire life??? Or were you homeschooled by Kent Hovind, aka Dr. Dino??? Seriously, that post was just pure, unfiltered Bull____! I lost IQ points just reading it!


Originally posted by oliveoil
First off your confusing the word "species" with the word "kind" which is the term used in the Bible. There were probably only a few hundred different kinds of of land animals which they would of took.And this would have probably been limited to his own geographical area and not the whole world.The sea animals would have been left in the sea.Many of the animals would have been in egg or seed form.(ever try catching a bird?) Oh and you forgot to mention that the ark had three stories,which tripled its space to over 1.5 million cubic feet. plenty of room.


Math apparently is not your strong suit. The Ark would have encompassed 2.1 million cubic feet, but it would have only had a floor space (the real important measurement) of 126,000 square feet. Now as to the term kind:


2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. 3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth. 4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Genesis 7: 2-4

Pretty specific that he was to take at least two of every species, or kind, with him, and that the flood would wipe out "every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth." Not just Noah's neighborhood, but the entire planet!


Your forgetting that right before it started to rain the springs of the great deep burst forth.(Genesis 7:11) This could of very well meant that there was tsunamis and title waves.This would have brought the water level up in seconds.Also it states that the waters covered the face of the earth and not the whole earth.So this to was most likely in one certain geographical area. Oh, And BTW, the waters only went up 15 cubits (20 feet)


The first part I will give you, since it coincides with the Laurentide Ice Sheet giving way. As to the second part...


20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.
Genesis 7: 20

Actually, 15 cubits would be a little over 25 feet, but what's a few feet when we are talking about covering mountains that are thousands of feet high! I think we already covered the 'geographical area' argument...


Who ever said that we today are pure bread humans. Maybe we are the result of inbreeding. (Just a thought)


I suggest you reread the original part of the OP that covers this. I was refering to the lack of genetic diversity necessary for the non-human passengers of the Ark, not Noah and his family... Anyone with just a mild understanding of genetics knows that a species that is down to it's last two members is doomed to extinction due to the lack of genetic diversity.


Maybe you should not be so narrow minded and diligently seek out your own answers before you attempt to justify some ancient text.


I'm not the one trying to justify some ancient text, but you give yourself some damn good advice there! Now the question is, will you take it?


Originally posted by ..5..
I am fairly sure that the animals mentioned in the flood story referred to the domesticated livestock (equine, bovine, fowl etc) not wild animals.
The Great Flood is mentioned in too many other religions to discount. (plus we have the grand canyon that could not have been carved out without a Great Flood).


And I'm fairly sure you are wrong... please review the quote from Genesis given above refering to the 'kind' of animals... Not one mention of domesticated livestock, just clean and unclean... As to the Grand Canyon statement, please go out immediately and purchase 'The Complete Idiot's Guide to Geology'! That has to be one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read here on ATS! (There goes another couple of IQ points!)


Originally posted by Shane
Myth comes from the Greek Mythos, which means Truth. Your tagline is again?

"Proof Positive that the Bible isn't a History Book: The Myth of Noah's Ark"

Well Historically, there was a Noah's Flood, as even you assert in your title, so the Bible is a History Book.
You lose!


To paraphrase Dan Aykroyd from the 'Point/Counterpoint' segments of the original 'Weekend Update' on Saturday Night Live, Shane you ignorant...


myth 

–noun 1. a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, esp. one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
2. stories or matter of this kind: realm of myth.
3. any invented story, idea, or concept: His account of the event is pure myth.
4. an imaginary or fictitious thing or person.
5. an unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution.

Origin:
1820–30; < LL mȳthos < Gk mŷthos story, word

Source.

Did you pay close attention to the last part in bold type??? Mythos means story (as in fiction), or word... NOT TRUTH! In other words, YOU LOSE! ROTFLMAO @ you!

reply to post by Agree2Disagree
 


Refer to the first two sentences in my reply to tinfoilman... And for every 'creationist biologist' that you can quote, there are 99 real biologists who will laugh themselves off their chairs disputing him... Gimme an accredited biologist who is associated with a respected unbiased institution, or save your time and mine... IRC is as biased as it gets!



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 06:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
I will now show that beyond a shadow of a doubt that the story of Noah and his Ark is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE!


The sad thing is, that years ago, an attempt to discredit the Biblical account with such weak/foolish accusations would have been embarrassing. This entire post is packed with "straw man" fallacies. However, even though I am certain no one (including yourself) will even read my response, nor ponder on it, I will answer every single argument, with a non supernatural, easy to understand reply.



1. The size of the Ark itself when compared to it's cargo: According to the Bible, "The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits." The Egyptian cubit, which Genesis' author Moses would have been familiar with, is just over 20 inches (source). Using this, the Ark would have measured a little over 500 feet long, 84 feet wide and 50 feet tall. This is smaller than your average Cruise ship.


According to Genesis 6:15, the Ark measured 300 x 50 x 30 cubits, which is about 460 x 75 x 44 feet, with a volume of about 1.52 million cubic feet. Researchers have shown that this is the equivalent volume of 522 standard railroad stock cars, each of which can hold 240 sheep. By the way, only 11% of all land animals are larger than a sheep. Without getting into all the math, the 16,000-plus animals would have occupied much less than half the space in the Ark (even allowing them some moving-around space). (From Answers in Genesis)



Since there are no new species here on Earth since the flood (according to the Fundies, not me), it would have had to house over 9,134 mammals, not including humans or seagoing mammals such as whales and dolphins (source), over 16,450 reptiles (source), over 13,196 amphibians (source), over 20,000 birds (source), and over 1,800,000 insects (source) if he marched them in two by two as told by the Bible. Do I even need to mention the amount of food needed to feed so many for a 40 day 'cruise'???


Straw man #1:

God specifically commanded Noah to bring land animals ONLY on the ark. Insects and aquatic animals would not need saving for 2 reasons. There would be water covering the entire earth (making it uneccessary to save aquatic life, enough would be preserved on its own), and there would be plenty of floating plant debris and animal/human carcases (insects can float and feed on these, eliminating their need to be on the ark as well.).



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 06:10 AM
link   


2. The amount of rain needed to flood the Earth in only 40 days and 40 nights: Since the Bible states that "the Mountains were covered", it is safe to assume that the water rose at least 5,000 feet. In order to do this in 40 full 24 hour periods, it would have to rain 5.2 feet an hour! That's over an inch per minite, every minute for every hour for 40 full days... And since the Ark didn't have a bilge pump... Now this is based on 5,000 feet of flooding, but if we take the Bible absolutely literally, then the water covered all of the mountains, including Everest at 29,029 feet which would be over 30 feet of rain an hour! Yeah, not even close to possible!


Straw man #2

Yes the Bible says that it rained for 40 days, but this is NOT where the Bible says the water that covered the Earth came from. If you read the creation account in Genesis, the earth was not mostly ocean as it is today. The land was placed on top of water, and the globe was covered by a sort of vapor canopy. It did not rain prior to the flood because there was a sort of greenhouse effect, hence reptile and tropical plant fossils existing all over the planet (including Antarctica). The water the we see on the surface today, was subterranean. It came from the fountains of the deep that burst open, not the rain. Also, the after effects of the flood is what formed the mountain chains and many (if not all) of the geological features we see today, so Mt. Everest didn't even exist at +29000ft during the flood.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 06:33 AM
link   


3. The lack of genetic diversity in all species: Since with the exception of humans, waterborne mammals and fish, only two of each species survived, the lack of genetic diversity would have spelled the doom for every species on the Ark, yet the world is full of life today. There's a good reason you are not allowed to procreate with your sibling(s), and it's not just a moral reason! This applies to all species, not just humans.


Straw man #3

Humans and the animal today should not procreate with their siblings because of all the mutations and flaws to our genetic code. It's called biological entropy (should make you question Darwinian evolution, but that is another argument). Pre-flood civilization had not yet accumillated all the harmful defects the we have now, so close relation procreation would not have been an issue. Two nearly perfect organisms offspring would be nearly perfect as well, regardless of their genetic relation.
As for genetic diversity, even the modern evolutionist will admit that all dogs came from wolves. There are hundreds of dog species today, from great dane to pekineese. Most of these breeds were developed within the last couple hundred or so years. Is it really so difficult to imagine that the same applies to other kinds of animals having been given 3000+ years?


4. The diversity of ecosystems around the Earth: Marsupials are only found on Australia, Penguins are only found in Antartica, Polar bears are only found in the Artic Circle, all places that Noah never even heard of, so how did he collect these species and then put them back in their respective environments?


Straw man #4

You are assuming the earth looks the same as it did prior to the flood. You are also failing to see that these species are simply genetic variations of the bird, and bear kind. This is simply natural selection at it's finest. Animals migrated themselves after the flood, and their chosen environments took over from there. Keep in mind that during the ice age following the flood, ocean levels were much lower, so the island we now have in the south Pacific, were not yet islands.



The answer is simple, he didn't. The entire story is pure hogwash! My point here is that if this one story from the 'Word of God' is false, who is to say which parts are true and which parts are not? It is a work of man, thus it is just as flawed as it's authors, MEN!


I agree with your logic 100%, if one story is false, than who can believe what is true? Unfortunately for the non-believer, it is all true, and it will survive another 1000+ years of ridicule, ban, torture, and imprisonment of its followers because God always wins and will win in the end. Ever wonder why no one even attempts to discredit any other holy book? Hint, they don't have a leg to stand on, so you can't even try to knock them over.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   
heres a question for ya´ll

what animal was excluded from the ark ?



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 06:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
I do not dispute that there was a worldwide flood event, just not as told by the story of Noah's Ark............ This did not wipe out mankind, nor did it 'cover the face of the Earth' as described in Genesis.


You are a piece of work. Ignorance knows no bounds with you, does it.

The BIBLE Accord to JaxonRoberts and I quote

"I do not dispute that there was a worldwide flood event, just not as told by the story of Noah's Ark............ This did not wipe out mankind, nor did it 'cover the face of the Earth' as described in Genesis."

A: So, you pick and choose your flood stories to fit into your marrow minded view of the Earth. Sad inditement of the ENLIGHTENED.

B: Are you aware of what a Face is? Of Course you do. It's PART of your Body. It's Not All Your Body.


I also do not dispute that the story has some meaning behind it. The difference is that millions and millions of people do not go the Church every Sunday to pray to Aesop.


I wouldn't be to certain about that. It frightens ME to see how the CHURCH has wallowed with the swine like you, to dilute the WORD of GOD into something you carry with you but never open and study. But Alas, Ignorance knows no Bounds. The Enlightened they are. Woe to the Wolves!


And by the way, I have read the Bible, cover to cover over a dozen times... It gets more ludicrious each time I read it...

Wow! Have you ever read a Science book in your entire life???


Have your ever STUDIED before? And as I have noted previously, I have no problems with Science. Science provides us with evidence that BIBLICAL TEACHINGS are based in Truth. It's your choice to accept to believe Science or not.


Pretty specific that he was to take at least two of every species, or kind, with him, and that the flood would wipe out "every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth." Not just Noah's neighborhood, but the entire planet!


Again, your making a BIBLE of your Own again.

A: The Face, is not your entire body.
B: No where does the BIBLE Spell Out "Not just Noah's neighborhood, but the entire planet". It's your FACE Buddy.


6440 paniym paw-neem' plural (but always as singular) of an unused noun (paneh [paw-neh']; from 6437); the face (as the part that turns); used in a great variety of applications (literally and figuratively); also (with prepositional prefix) as a preposition (before, etc.):--+ accept, a-(be- )fore(-time), against, anger, X as (long as), at, + battle, + because (of), + beseech, countenance, edge, + employ, endure, + enquire, face, favour, fear of, for, forefront(-part), form(-er time, -ward), from, front, heaviness, X him(-self), + honourable, + impudent, + in, it, look(-eth) (- s), X me, + meet, X more than, mouth, of, off, (of) old (time), X on, open, + out of, over against, the partial, person, + please, presence, propect, was purposed, by reason of, + regard, right forth, + serve, X shewbread, sight, state, straight, + street, X thee, X them(-selves), through (+ - out), till, time(-s) past, (un-)to(-ward), + upon, upside (+ down), with(- in, + -stand), X ye, X you.


And it's Root


6437 panah paw-naw' a primitive root; to turn; by implication, to face, i.e. appear, look, etc.:--appear, at (even-)tide, behold, cast out, come on, X corner, dawning, empty, go away, lie, look, mark, pass away, prepare, regard, (have) respect (to), (re-)turn (aside, away, back, face, self), X right (early).



Actually, 15 cubits would be a little over 25 feet, but what's a few feet when we are talking about covering mountains that are thousands of feet high! I think we already covered the 'geographical area' argument...


Really, are they REALLY 1000's of Feet High? REALLY?


2022 har har a shortened form of 2042; a mountain or range of hills (sometimes used figuratively):--hill (country), mount(-ain), X promotion.


Har is the word used in the Genesis account of the Flood. But lets check the Root to be sure.


2042 harar haw-rawr' from an unused root meaning to loom up; a mountain:--hill, mount(-ain).


Are you even able to comprehend the embarassment you are when you twist and manipulate the WORD of GOD to suit your illconcieved notions?

Oh, of course not. You lack the ability to STUDY. Ignorance knows no bounds. Truly Enlightened, yeah!

Let's look from an other angle. Moses, is the Originator of the Genesis Account as told to him by GOD. It became scripted much later in the course of time, but it is part of the Books of Moses.

Take a snapshot now. Mt Sinai is a good Mountian example. Several 100's of feet up. Not 1000's ie 29000'.

Mt Sinai

The Sinai peninsula has traditionally been considered Sinai's location by Christians

Mount Seir designates the mountain range in the centre of Edom.

While equating Sinai with Petra would indicate that the Israelites journeyed in roughly a straight line from Egypt via Kadesh Barnea


Three areas for Mt Sinai, and NONE of these are EMENSE in proportions. Little more than the Niagara Escarpment to those living in Toronto, yet in the winter, they flock to Blue Mountain to Ski down those 100's of feet of slope.

This is the Area inwhich the Hebrews lived and traveled. From Ur to Egypt and back. Perspective man, get some perspective.

Use the brain GOD gave you man. Oh sorry, I forgot, yours is still evolving



And I'm fairly sure you are wrong... please go out immediately and purchase 'The Complete Idiot's Guide to Geology'! That has to be one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read here on ATS! (There goes another couple of IQ points!)


YOUR TRUE COLORS SHINE FORTH MR ENLIGHTENED ONE!!!!!



To paraphrase Dan Aykroyd from the 'Point/Counterpoint' segments of the original 'Weekend Update' on Saturday Night Live, Shane you ignorant...

myth

Did you pay close attention to the last part in bold type??? Mythos means story (as in fiction), or word... NOT TRUTH! In other words, YOU LOSE! ROTFLMAO @ you!


Certainly, I comprehend the manner inwhich words have changed in Meaning. The Root is Truth. The Implication became is Fable.

An example

A faggot was a bunch of twigs and branches that are bound together. Well we have seen that word manipulated in less than 30 years into something completely different, and that only took 30 years or so.

Another thing

Ignorance as implied and refered to you by me

7684 shgagah sheg-aw-gaw' from 7683; a mistake or inadvertent transgression:--error, ignorance, at unawares; unwittingly.


Ignorant as implied and refered to me by you

3045 yada` yaw-dah' a primitive root; to know (properly, to ascertain by seeing);..........


But as enlightened as your are, I expect you already understood this.


Ciao

Shane



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 07:07 AM
link   
well the answer was fish

and scientificly you still need a male and a female to produce offspring in the human genre of space dust

but as the poster above implied very clearly is that translation of the stories has gone lost ages ago due to lingual misunderstanding , back then it was a poem of inhaling thru the nose and how not to bake cake , now days its a man on a boat with to many animal whistling for land while sumerians do not make fires at the shore.

back then you had one go at translating a book to an other format, its not like they had ctrl c ctrl v and a goldfish in the ear, much got lost, much got translated , much got made up , the truth can only be found by looking at all data and preferably without the "modern" biblia



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 



Math apparently is not your strong suit. The Ark would have encompassed 2.1 million cubic feet, but it would have only had a floor space (the real important measurement) of 126,000 square feet. Now as to the term kind:

Lol, no math is not one of my favorite topics However, the Bible is, and it really makes no difference as to the correct figures (no one knows for sure). Its all about probability and all these probabilities, a man making an ark, a man collecting animals and putting them on this ark, Flooding, Raining, all seem to contain one thing in common, Truth that These events that supposedly took place could have very well happened. Even if this is just a made up story,
It still doesn't prove that the Bible doesn't contain history and truth. People always fail to see the meaning behind things.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Flooded what was the known world at that time.

THE END.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


So what happened in your life recently to put you on this mission of anger and bitterness, to try to disprove the Bible? You obviously don't come into this 'discussion' with any sort of any open mind at all.

Until you can somehow get yourself to face the fact that God can do anything he wants and doesn't have to leave evidence with every detail for you to 'rationalize' it, you'll continue to be angry and frustrated with his message.

The point is this. God created everything, he answers to nobody, and he deosn't have to explain all the details of his actions to anybody.

We're darn fortunate that we've even got a Bible to use. Without it, we wouldn't have a chance of understanding the big picture.



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Angus123
 


That's assuming that you know the circumstances in which the flood occurred....

Assuming that the animals were divinely lead to Noah...the rain somehow defied what we know today as physical limitations...What more is it to toss in a little "it was fresh water" or "it wasnt an atmospheric deluge"....

Assuming that the circumstances in which the flood occurred are a mirror of the physical limitations we observe today...yes...the flood seems to have some boundaries that it cannot cross...however, in the realm of the supernatural...ANYTHING is possible.


A2D



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 



Refer to the first two sentences in my reply to tinfoilman... And for every 'creationist biologist' that you can quote, there are 99 real biologists who will laugh themselves off their chairs disputing him... Gimme an accredited biologist who is associated with a respected unbiased institution, or save your time and mine... IRC is as biased as it gets!


Can you not REFUTE the statement? Attacking the credibility of the author on behalf of his "biased" doesn't refute the statement........it just makes you look foolish

A2D



posted on Dec, 28 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   
If anyone here can show me the archaeological record for a world wide flood , I'm all ears.

Our lovely earth has many imprints. Please find me the year in which all land animals and humans died of a flood, now when a site is water logged, remains survive just as well in the mud as if they were dried out in the desert. The remains would be abundant worldwide.

Zip none zilch.

Localised flooding yes.
Current excavated sites of importance include Ashkelon, Hazor, Megiddo, Gamla and Rehov but nothing definitive yet.

No biblical sites have definatively proven a widespread flood. Rather only localised flooding at different times. The is no evidence of a world wide same time flood.

The earth would also show this world wide flood of 40 days in its geological layers, this cannot be hidden such a vast flood

The villages of humans would show it in their foundations that they were destroyed by flood.
We are having floods in OZ after a prolonged drought....it happens

They say it didnt rain on earth in the bible before the flood which is nothing short of ludicrous, we may aswell believe in the tooth fairy.

As I said the earth keeps her history and all we have to do is read it like the rings on a tree.
Geological evidence proves rainfall everywhere before the flood, California as an example, reserach is convering rainfall there for millions of years.
These samples go back to 60 million years in the clay for the Sierra Nevada:

To determine when the Sierra rose to its current height, the scientists used an increasingly popular research tool that combines geology and chemistry to create a record of prehistoric rainfall patterns dating back millions of years. This technique relies on the fact that in nature, hydrogen and other atoms occur in different sizes called isotopes. Deuterium, for example, is a slightly heavier form of hydrogen, and drops of rainwater that contain deuterium isotopes often fall at lower elevations.

Over time, some raindrops are incorporated into molecules of clay and other minerals that form on the ground. These clays provide scientists with a geologic record of ancient precipitation, which can then be compared with samples of modern precipitation collected at the same altitude. If the comparison reveals similar isotopic ratios, then the elevation of the mountain must have been similar in ancient and modern times.


news.bio-medicine.org...

Why believe it must have rained, and understand there was uneducated ancient foklore involved in the flood story and not the other parts of the "story"?

I do think with the NO RAIN part in the Noah family myth they are referring to a drought. Floods can come by breaking the river banks after a drought period. Local foklore is interesting, and why people follow someone elses ancestors tales of argricultural woe as spiritual lore because they were sat down as children and read it, I will never know.

Also, North American Indigeounous people, Mohave I think from memory asked the spirits to break a drought, it is in a old cave painting, now that was pre flood, about 9 or 10 000 BC and guess what they survived the flood, they werent all wiped away, nor where the Indigenous Australians who have been here for over 60 000 years....Please tell me, dont they count?
They depicted this on cave art, not oral tradition which has a longer lasting effect and impact on ancestral tales. The Jewish Oral tradition was the best in human history other than the Australian Aboriginal as their oldest torah dates back only about 1000 years. You are following someone elses ancestral stories passed down to keep a clan identity going, SIGH~....

Linguistal misunderstandings are mentioned, then why believe it as fact? that it was world wide? Also The Jewish Tradition is actually pretty steady the Book of Isaah found in the dead sea scrolls writen by the Essenes is word for word to its next contemporary writing of it in the jewish torah about a 1000 years later.

To assume that all life on earth was able to replicate from about 4000 years ago to todays levels is really a sign of fear, and clutching blindly to something you have been enslaved to, heaven help you if what you were taught was wrong! If noah had the bronze or iron to create a ark, this means we arent going back too far in history.....Please think logically about this, other wise you are just enslaved to someone elses family tradition.

If there wasn't modern record keeping, how do you think the Boxing Day Tsunami would have been recorded in ancestral lore? Would they have said it was a message from God? I think so...Would one local who survived with his or her livestock have designated divine intervention for that which they did not understand?.... I think so.

We have a plethora of Earth historical data for
life
life
life
Not a mass global catastrophy.
If there is a GOD it gifted us life, appreciate it and honor it, and dont insult this creator by making it out to be some lunatic mass murderer.
The archaeological record or earth record completely anhialates this family myth. This guy made out he was holier than though to his kids, he survived a flood, I think thats great, but do we all have to hear about it to this day.....you all have kept their tradition going for millenia...Sigh~



[edit on 28-12-2009 by zazzafrazz]



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join