Moderator: Moderators
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.Not quite, here is an analogy, if a flat Earther posted an argument for a flat Earth, one that is not immediately/obviously faulty, I would feel the need to do the research necessarily to debunk it; at the same time, I would not be comfortable voicing support for a globe Earth until I felt the point have been adequately dealt with, no matter how sure I am of a globe Earth.JehovahsWitness wrote: If you look back, I didn't address the point about the air density at all; I already knew from study that the ark would float and theoretically hold the animals assigned to it so those were the points I addressed.
I'm happy to hear both sides of the argument and learn where I can, if I don't know the answer to something I will say so - nobody can know everything. If I think I know I will say what I understand and listen to the counter arguments to see if I find them convincing; if I feel I have been mistaken I have no problem at all with saying so.
Hope that answers your question.
Bust Nak wrote:It's one thing to not have an answer to every counter-argument, it's quite another to defend a position while knowing there is a seemingly sound counter-argument against that position.
I have absolute faith and an unshakable confidence in the bible narrative, for me it's like having first hand experience of the facts; there may be counter-arguments but none of them are, in my opinion "sound".To illustrate: Imagine a man is convinced his house has burnt down because he is standing and looking at that charred remains of where it used to be. What if he was asked "Do you know when, how and for what reason your house was burnt?" and the man answered "No, I cannot answer those questions at the present time. Do you think that because of that he would therefore doubt the house was burnt? What if someone told him that it has been scientifically proven (and all the most intelligent people in the world have concluded) that the material his house was made of cannot burn? how "convincing [an] argument do you think he would consider that?
God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.Tired of the Nonsense wrote: Johan's Ark: Noah's Ark Replica Crashes Into Moored Norwegian Coast Guard Vessel, Officials Say
The crash occurred in Oslo, Norway, Friday. A military patrol boat and the 230-foot long replica created by Dutch carpenter Johan Huibers, who reportedly used the Bible's measurements, were damaged.
Two of every species of animal in the entire world and all of the food necessary to feed and maintain them all for months was going to fit into that? REALLY?
Does anyone foresee any problems here?
I'm lost. Are you saying there were animals created after the flood?Hawkins wrote:God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.Tired of the Nonsense wrote: Johan's Ark: Noah's Ark Replica Crashes Into Moored Norwegian Coast Guard Vessel, Officials Say
The crash occurred in Oslo, Norway, Friday. A military patrol boat and the 230-foot long replica created by Dutch carpenter Johan Huibers, who reportedly used the Bible's measurements, were damaged.
Two of every species of animal in the entire world and all of the food necessary to feed and maintain them all for months was going to fit into that? REALLY?
Does anyone foresee any problems here?
It is rather a test of faith for the righteous Noah to show how obedient he is. In revelation it is said that there is "no sea" in the New Heaven and New Earth. in Isaiah it is said that lions won't bite in that new world. So it is very possible that whatever species Noah can catch will be the only species one can still see in the New Heaven and New Earth, living along with other species created not in our current world.
It seems that the person you replied to hasn't thought through the logical implications of what they wrote. If God just poofed more animals into existence after the flood this just means the flood was completely and utterly pointless.Kenisaw wrote:I'm lost. Are you saying there were animals created after the flood?Hawkins wrote:God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.Tired of the Nonsense wrote: Johan's Ark: Noah's Ark Replica Crashes Into Moored Norwegian Coast Guard Vessel, Officials Say
The crash occurred in Oslo, Norway, Friday. A military patrol boat and the 230-foot long replica created by Dutch carpenter Johan Huibers, who reportedly used the Bible's measurements, were damaged.
Two of every species of animal in the entire world and all of the food necessary to feed and maintain them all for months was going to fit into that? REALLY?
Does anyone foresee any problems here?
It is rather a test of faith for the righteous Noah to show how obedient he is. In revelation it is said that there is "no sea" in the New Heaven and New Earth. in Isaiah it is said that lions won't bite in that new world. So it is very possible that whatever species Noah can catch will be the only species one can still see in the New Heaven and New Earth, living along with other species created not in our current world.
WOW, just WOW -- a proposal that "God" killed off the entire human population and all animals except those aboard the ark to test the faith and obedience of NoahHawkins wrote: God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.
It is rather a test of faith for the righteous Noah to show how obedient he is.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I believe in an omnipotent God. At least intellectually you must be able to grasp that people that believe in an omnipotent God have different paremeters about what is possible and impossible. You are essentially arguing, an omnipotent God cannot have kept Noah and the animals alive under certain circumstances. At least intellectually you must be able to see the flaws in that position.Bust Nak wrote: So the air pressure being so thin that Noah couldn't breath, that it would be so cold, well below the freezing point of water, (before you knew the science behind those claims doesn't work) didn't seem like sound counterarguments against the Ark? How could Noah's Ark possibly be true, if he and his animals couldn't breath and were frozen?
When one believes in an omnipotent god ANYTHING is possible in their imagination. However, that extends only to them and not to anyone else and not to the real world we inhabit.JehovahsWitness wrote: Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I believe in an omnipotent God. At least intellectually you must be able to grasp that people that believe in an omnipotent God have different paremeters about what is possible and impossible.
If one accepts the hypothetical omnipotent god they can accept whatever the tale tells or whatever they make up.JehovahsWitness wrote: You are essentially arguing, an omnipotent God cannot have kept Noah and the animals alive under certain circumstances. At least intellectually you must be able to see the flaws in that position.
Thank you.JehovahsWitness wrote: Listen I'm not here to convince you of anything and I'm sure you're not here to preach to me (ie change my beliefs),
Of course, anyone is free to disregard information provided. However, doing so indicates or suggests an agenda of maintaining one's beliefs in spite of contradicting evidence.JehovahsWitness wrote: I appreciate the information you provided, but its still just widow decoration, pretty and interesting but nothing more.
Same hereJehovahsWitness wrote: I don't go through life bothered in any way what so ever by what people do or don't believe. I'm happy to share my take on things but if I meet someone that believes their dentist is a 6foot pink rabbit from the planet Zorf, I'll not lose sleep over it.
DittoJehovahsWitness wrote: Nothing personal and absolutely no offense intended.
What you've done here is removed the concept of Noah's Flood and the ark away from falsifiability. If you allow for God to have kept Noah and the animals safe, despite all the dangers of a flood, then the same logic applies to any claim one cares to make.You are essentially arguing, an omnipotent God cannot have kept Noah and the animals alive under certain circumstances.
