Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
I am not the one calling myself a Christian.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Would sharks and T Rex buried together lean toward the flood?
- Thread starter whirlingmerc
- Start date
I am not the one calling myself a Christian.
Lee Hays
Member
UH - ok
What’s trolls? What’s primer?
You sound more like a person who believe in unicorns and fields of lollipops....
your a perfect candidate - to start believing
You probably think I already know - and reacting as if I really knew
Audie
Veteran Member
I will assume you would consider Churchill to have
been smarter and better educated than you.
Perhaps you are not yet lost unto us, (sad, really,
if you are) and can learn something from him.
I did not worry about the inconsistency of thinking one way and believing the other. It seemed good to let the mind explore so far as it could the paths of thought and logic, and also good to pray for help and succour, and be thankful when they came. I could not feel that the Supreme Creator who gave us our minds as well as our souls would be offended if they did not always run smoothly together in double harness. After all He must have foreseen this from the beginning and of course He would understand it all.
Accordingly I have always been surprised to see some of our Bishops and clergy making such heavy weather about reconciling the Bible story with modern scientific and historical knowledge. Why do they want to reconcile them? … These matters may be puzzling, but they are certainly not important. What is important is the message and the benefits to you of receiving it. Close reasoning can conduct one to the precise conclusion that miracles are impossible:
But of course, your thing about spirits and testimonials
is just more of your so-typical diversions and irrelevancies.
You very obviously do not know much about science.
Changing the subject and bringing up something about
me is just one of the ways you show it; it would really
would be more honest and insightful of you to just
admit you are not skilled in the art.
Lee Hays
Member
Neither am I - when did I say I was a Christian on this thread?
I said I’m not qualified to be a Christian
I’m a failure, lacking in success - I need Jesus!
Lee Hays
Member
If you think that comment is being a jerk - your probably right - I’m kinda a jerk to myself...
Audie
Veteran Member
Like I said, not putting on a very good show.
No more of it for me, he is off to ig city.
Part of the evidence for the validity of the Flood included the Ark's modern ratios, but you've ignored it so far, or give some vague reply, trying to derail the conversation, like "Moses didn't write Genesis" (How did whoever get that accurate seaworthy information?)
You can't answer it for fear of giving the event credibility, disturbing your world-view, so you -- and other skeptics -- ignore it. It's the only recourse you have.
No, maybe not...you readily believe in serendipitous accidents, so Moses' (oops!...whoever) writing the Ark's ideal seaworthy ratios -- 30-5-3 -- is just chalked up to being an accident.
‘Noah’s Ark would have floated’
Audie
Veteran Member
We kind of suspect there were boats around for a long time
and that taking the same general proportions then
scaling it up is no accident.
As evidence for a flood, that is pretty thin stuff, but
we understand that if ya had to get out of your bible
and into the real world, things would go spinning
seemingly out of control for your fairy tale.
You think so? Then why does the Epic of Gilgamesh describe Noah's Ark as '120 cubit^2, 90 cubits high'? No stability at all! That would just bob in the water.
sooda
Veteran Member
The Epic of Gilgamesh is also a myth.
Ancient Mesopotamia Sailboats: An Introduction
www.brighthubengineering.com/marine-history/...
Ancient Mesopotamia were the first people to ever invent and build sailboats. The sailboats of ancient Mesopotamia were simple in design and fulfilled the primary objective - transportation.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That would not be a valid test. It is far too open to confirmation bias. One counts only the hits and ignores the misses.
A valid test would include a very real chance of failure. There is a reason that the Bible tells you not to test your god. Do you know why?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And you think that the Ark would do any better? Without a well formed keel it would almost certainly roll in the first broadside wave that it felt.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
And to others. Funny how you don't even notice it.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Wow! On the internet a troll is just a troublemaker.
And a primer is an introductory course. You do speak English, don't you?
Lastly you are the one that believes in magical beings. Why do you think that others have your flaws?
Lee Hays
Member
We kind of suspect there were boats around for a long time
and that taking the same general proportions then
scaling it up is no accident.
As evidence for a flood, that is pretty thin stuff, but
we understand that if ya had to get out of your bible
and into the real world, things would go spinning
seemingly out of control for your fairy tale.
Yes - it would spin out of control - but not nearly as bad as your life - if you have found out that your wrong...
I did agree with ya - you know
I think that means I noticed
Lee Hays
Member
Uh I don’t think others have my flaws -
Putting words on my mouth again huh?
OK internet troll (never really knew what that meant - thanks!!)
Yes I speak English - that’s not obvious to you?
Are you able to read English ? Because I’m not speaking to you am I?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
But they aren't "modern". Ships have been made with roughly those ratios for ages. And they are far from perfect. There is a variance depending upon the use of the ship.
You still do not appear to know what is and what is not evidence.
And yes, we have agreed that an Ark with too few animals and almost no provisions would have floated. Once again, so what? That such a boat would have floated does not mean that it was seaworthy. You refer to modern boats in one sentence and ignore them in the the next. The USS Wyoming which had powered pumps, and steel reinforcements, neither of which were to be had for the Ark, still failed in moderate seas and you want to put an boat with no pumps, and no metal reinforcements in the worst storm ever by several orders of magnitude. The Ark might have floated but it was not seaworthy.
And the Ark itself is only a small part of the evidence against the myth. Did you forget that waking up in a bathtub in a seedy motel missing a kidney is not a reality?
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
You agreed that you were being a jerk to yourself. Did you not notice how you were being a jerk to others in my previous post? As I said, you don't seem to notice.
Lee Hays
Member
Dude - your all over the place
USS Wyoming, the Ark, bathtubs oh and water pumps...
What a nice word salad
Lee Hays
Member
Ok
Again why would I care if you think I’m a jerk
I think I asked this before - and you had nothing