Insurmountable Difficulties with Noah's Ark (Jesus, Earth, crucified, tradition)

[Fluffy]

Which dating techniques are used now? What is the one dating technique that is 100% reliable. I take it all dating techniques always give the same answer within their margins of error?

All empirical methods are subject to error. That is why we have a whole mountain of statistical theories that allow us to determine the likelihood of error, the significance of that error and therefore the chance that one theory will be correct over another theory. Creationist evidence does not score as well when tested under such methods and therefore it is not as credible.

I still don't see any "insurmountable difficulties with Noah's Ark" that cannot be explained by God's omnipotence.

[Æsahættr]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

I still don't see any "insurmountable difficulties with Noah's Ark" that cannot be explained by God's omnipotence.

Yes, you could explain it by saying that God is not bound by the laws of nature, but presumably if God exists then he made the laws of nature. So why would he ever need to break them? When He made them, He, being omniscient, would be able to know everything that would ever need to be done, and would create laws that allowed everything that needed to be done to be done.

[Brother Jeffrey]

There are indeed many "difficulties", if you look for scientific evidence, or explaination of Noah and the deluge. No reliable evidence has ever been found. Details of the account fly in the face of current scientific theories.
We don't believe in science , and I hold religious beliefs which prohibits the worship of false gods (like Einstsin, Goddard, Mendelev, Pythagorus et al.) the need for scientific understanding drives the human race toward a mindset whose default position is doubt, scepticism, and criticism. Faith and Patience is the way of the Nazarene. To us the account of Noah is 100% accurate. For those who do not believe, no evidence (if it did exist), would ever be enough to convince you of our point of view. For us no evidence is needed. I am more interested in what the meaning of the story imparts; than in finding evidence, organizing facts and such.
Whatever any of us wish or believe or say changes the truth of what really happened. Because we do belive, it is understood that we see every person as a sibling, or perhaps cousins?. So whatever opinion you might side with, or compromise with we are all in the same boat (so to speak). I think others' beliefs should be respected, no matter how far that view may be from our own.

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

We don't beleive in science.

Thank you. Tells us all we need to know about your position.

B.

[Opethian]

Obviously you don't believe in science, since you can't believe in science. You can only accept it...

[Zsr1973]

I respect all people's belief systems and by no means do I wish to insult anyone.

But I find it interesting when religious people say they don't believe in science. That would imply they have never:
1. Taken an aspirin or medicine - Uses the science of bio-chemistry.
2. Driven a car - Uses the science of mechanics and physics.
3. Flown in an airplane - physics
4. Had a vaccination
5. Hired an accountant - mathematics
6. Used a computer (which also includes holding bank accounts, credit cards, debit cards, listen to a cd, spoken on the telephone, play video games, watch television, etc.)
7. Worn clothes tailored by sewing machines
etc.

There are so many ways we take science for granted. This isn't to say one should put science over faith in our heavenly father. We should recognize that science used correctly is a gift from the heavenly father.

[Brother Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Zsr1973

I respect all people's belief systems and by no means do I wish to insult anyone.

But I find it interesting when religious people say they don't believe in science. That would imply they have never:
1. Taken an aspirin or medicine - Uses the science of bio-chemistry.
2. Driven a car - Uses the science of mechanics and physics.
3. Flown in an airplane - physics
4. Had a vaccination
5. Hired an accountant - mathematics
6. Used a computer (which also includes holding bank accounts, credit cards, debit cards, listen to a cd, spoken on the telephone, play video games, watch television, etc.)
7. Worn clothes tailored by sewing machines
etc.

There are so many ways we take science for granted. This isn't to say one should put science over faith in our heavenly father. We should recognize that science used correctly is a gift from the heavenly father.

When someone refuses to believe in G-d, they still exist, breath, wake up in the morning, the sun rises and so-on. Without G-d none of this would happen. When I say I believe in G-d, the implication is that I trust in Him. I do not trust in science, and don't find it neccesary to believe that if I use my computer it works because of this-or-that. As some of the less-than 'pen-minded atheist-types have said " you don't have to believe, just accept it, it's a fact" (refering to science, evil-ution etc), I n I say the same about the Most High, blessed be His Name.

[stemann]

As some of the less-than 'pen-minded atheist-types have said " you don't have to believe, just accept it, it's a fact" (refering to science, evil-ution etc), I n I say the same about the Most High, blessed be His Name.

I doubt that a true scientist, whether she be an atheist or otherwise, would ask you to 'just accept' something as fact. Science is based on observation of evidence coupled with logical evidence. If Intelligent Design were somehow logically proven beyond all reasonable doubt tomorrow, then all true scientists would posses the humility and professionalism to accept this. Likewise evolution.

[Tiberius]

If we are to explain away the impossibilities in the Bible by saying, "God can do it," then we are left with only one conclusion:

God could have simply snapped his fingers and blinked all the things he didn't like in the world away.

So why didn't he?

(Because it makes for a boring story.)