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

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

In an attempt to get others to pull the wool from their eyes, and think for themselves, I will now show that beyond a shadow of a doubt that the story of Noah and his Ark is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE!

You miss the point entirely. You cannot be that literal with the early Bible.

The Ark of Noah is the Egyptian Barque of Nu - the Solar Barque that took the god across the waters of Nu - the cosmos.


Here is an artistic depiction of the Ark of Nu-ah







And here is the actual Ark of Nu-ah - the original real example.






.

Click here for more information.

reply to post by miriam0566


Putting forth strawmen and ad hominems is not debate. It's just the usual bag of tricks from Fundamentalists. After over a year of such 'debates', I am no longer interested in dealing with such posts with kindness. Call me arrogant, or anything else you want, it will not make you any more right or your points any more valid. And I came to my conclusions due to the evidence, not the other way around. I once was as deluded on the subject as you are. It was the overwhelming evidence that made me take off my blinders and reconsider my positions on the subject of Biblical accuracy. I also no longer believe in Santa Claus, nor do I believe that a Stork delivers babies...

reply to post by ralphellis2


Read the entire thread... Many, many Fundamentalists DO take the Old Testament that literally!!!

Ruse,
I didn’t mention any of those that you did now did I?

You are totally on the wrong page of thought there.
The point here is that the Exodus and its continued story of the wandering in the desert and the march inot "Canaan" is either a total fiction or it happened somewhere else, another place with another name.

Gday,

Originally posted by miriam0566
im only citing this link in particular because it states both sides of the argument
www.answersingenesis.org...

Hahahaha!

Do you REALLY believe that site gives "both sides"?
Seriously?

Because everyone else knows this is the most famous biased nonsense religious site on the entire web.


K.

Gday,

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Kapyong

 

Your universal genetic code posesses a language, an exquisite language composed of about three billion genetic letters.

Recent studies in information theory have come up with some astounding conclusions—namely, that information cannot be considered in the same category as matter and energy. It's true that matter or energy can carry information, but they are not the same as information itself.

For instance, a book such as Homer's Iliad contains information, but is the physical book itself information? No, the materials of the book—the paper, ink and glue contain the contents, but they are only a means of transporting it.

If the information in the book was spoken aloud, written in chalk or electronically reproduced in a computer, the information does not suffer qualitatively from the means of transporting it.In fact the content of the message is independent of the physical makeup of the medium.

This type of high level information has been found to originate only from an intelligent source.

Namely God.

Rubbish.
This is the standard creationist bable about 'information'.

No biologist believes any of this nonsense at all.

We have DIRECTLY OBSERVED mutations adding new bases,
We have DIRECTLY OBSERVED mutations adding new features,
We have DIRECTLY OBSERVED new species forming.

So, what do creationists do?

IGNORE all the new bases, mutations, features and new species we have OBSERVED forming, and claim "no new 'information'"

Truly bizarre.

We can and have and do SEE new species forming - but creationists like randy can still fool themselves that there is "no new information" by closing their minds to the NEW SPECIES and NEW FEATURES that we DO see !

Examples of NEW SPECIES :
www.talkorigins.org...
which randy ignores



K.

reply to post by Kapyong

Rubbish.
This is the standard creationist bable about 'information'.

Ok so now information means nothing



I'm sorry pal but even logic dictates the existence of a supreme being.

How does the systematic logic found throughout the universe happen
at random. Randomness is never a constent. Therefore I.D.

reply to post by randyvs

How does the systematic logic found throughout the universe happen
at random. Randomness is never a constent. Therefore I.D.

Randomness and chance do not exist. There, problem solved. No need for a creator or for ID.

reply to post by sirnex

Randomness and chance do not exist. There, problem solved. No need for a creator or for ID.

All right Sirnex you know if you keep eliminating things from existence pretty soon we're all gonna disappear.
I'll just leave this thread alone how 's that?
Just because you and I disagree so ademently(sc) dosn't mean we have to wipe out existence.

Everybody take cover Randy and Sirnex are at it again!!!lol

Jaxon Roberts

Read the entire thread... Many, many Fundamentalists DO take the Old Testament that literally!!!

Well why would anybody not take a piece of literary art work literally?

[edit on 3-1-2010 by randyvs]

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'???

I would argue that it's possible new species from the same genus to be created, thus you could probably halve each of the numbers...think donkey+horse = mule (only able to reproduce), zebra+donkey = zonky, etc...I don't know the species names, but these are real, and come from two different original species of the same genuses.

Furthermore, a Christ follower/believer in YHWH (just a Jewish person, even) would agree that due to the fact that the Creator is outside of the laws of nature here on Earth and in the universe, He could provide for their needs and also fit as many things as he wanted into a thimble, let alone an ark.

Therefore, it could've been the new species theory or God allowed for all of them to fit. Think Doctor Who and the TARDIS, bigger on the inside than the outside.

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!

Again, all things are possible through an omnipotent Creator who resides outside of the laws of science and nature becuase He in fact created them.

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.

In the grand scheme of known human history, and believing in the Creation story, we could say the first two people were genetically perfect. Their offspring would have remained as such without the occurance of the fall. Due to the fall, their gene pool did get diluted over the years (look at the people on earth...we're all genetically traceable back to one single Black African Mother). This would've been the case with the first two of all animals as well, meaning that despite the genetic problems that get mutated in and such through offspring, it's possible for them to still survive.

In the torah, they rarely mentioned women, even offspring. Therefore, Adam and Eve likely had daughters, who mated with their sons...during that time it wasn't unacceptable, which is why the law eventually makes it a sin once too much inbreeding has happened...(and animals are not as intelligent as humans, thus it's harder to find inbred problems in them unless they are outwardly physical).

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?

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!

[edit on 27-12-2009 by JaxonRoberts]

Well, you deny an all-powerful Creator again. Furthermore, you can't say that it's impossible that the ship within 40 days on a sea that's risen above the surface dropped species off at appropriate places...or that by, I donno, Divine Will and providence they were placed appropriately after disembarkment.

Originally posted by randyvs
Well why would anybody not take a piece of literary art work literally?

If this is your evil plan to confuse the living crap out of me... It's working like a charm!!

Originally posted by randyvs
Funny. The proof for the Arc seems to far out wiegh the proof against.
If I were to wonder why that is, I would have to say the reason there is
a simalar story in so many different cultures from all over the Globe.
Not to mention the fact there are so many civilizations the ignorant
archeologists admit" then one day they all just disappeared" how lame and stupid are these people with educations.
There is a story handed down for ages that tells what happened to them,
but "oh that's just a fairytale". My white rosy azz. I don't remember ever seeing it in any book of fairytales. So it isn't. It is our history. Don't
believe it? Then you are a fool.

Here's where you said what you said...
Good thing hell isn't real, because that's where liars supposedly end up.

reply to post by JaxonRoberts


You make good points, as far as they go. But you are assuming that "worldwide" means "worldwide".

Did the Romans or the Greeks conquer the entire world? How about any of the other "worldwide" empires? No. They claimed it, though. All of them are listed as worldwide empires by those that equate the symbols used to describe them in prophecy. So it's not as if the (mis)use of the words translated as "worldwide" aren't already in the Bible.

There was an interesting recent program on the History Channel (I think) on this. It might have been Nat Geo. They made the case that it was local to the Black Sea area.

If that is the case, then the number of animals you listed would not be accurate.

About the size of the ark: The cubit used could have been as short as 17.5", instead of the 20" you use, but who knows? I sure don't.

If all of this has been mentioned already, I'm sorry. But I'm not going to read thru 8 pages to check on it.

[edit on 8/1/10 by PSUSA]

[edit on 8/1/10 by PSUSA]

reply to post by PSUSA


OK, while the Jews might not have known the size of the world, I would assume their omniscient God would, and since it was 'God' speaking to Noah, then yes, worldwide would mean worldwide...