Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why is a Literal Ark Important?
AustinG
Member (Idle past 5169 days)
Posts: 36
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 1 of 22 (505131)
04-07-2009 11:13 PM


Just as warning, this post will be an informal regurgitation of some ideas of mine. If I don't make sense, just ask for clarification : ).
Something has been bothering me. There is so much debate about the Flood Story and Noah's Ark, and I think it clouds the issues. Most folks on the creation side of the argument go on as if Noah had no help from God. Honestly, Noah's Ark doesn't Occur without the help of God. There is no way 2 of every animal can fit onto a ship. The Ark would not have landed on Mount Ararat; it would have been bigger than Mount Ararat itself. Think about it. I don't care how many "kinds" there were (I want to throttle Kent Hovind right now for coining that rediculous word).
If you want to believe in the Flood Story, fine, but it has to happen something like this:
God tells Noah to build an ark, Noah builds the Ark, and since Noah obeyed, God helped Noah just as he helped Abraham, and gave the inside of the Ark infinite space. God kept all the food stuffs filled,just as Jesus filled the baskets of fish and bread, until the waters subsided.
Oh yeah, and God poofed and unpoofed the water. Simple as that. Can anyone prove me wrong?
See, the thing about God, Noah, Jesus, and all that stuff is, it requires faith. To try and explain it all with simple, earthly science only cheapens it; plus, you make yourself look like an ass.
Look, what I'm saying here is, God gave you senses and reason so that you may percieve and make sense of the world (i.e. science), so use those God-given eyeballs, like mainstreem scientists have, and accept reality like God intended.
Now, I'm not saying accept every theory or hypothesis blindly, but quit supporting crack pot ideas about the world. Use your head; God gave it to you for a reason.
So, nevermind all this debate about "kinds". Intelligent Design may have some truth to it. Think of God as a potter. Instead of poofing everything into existence (I'm sure he got bored of poofing after an eternity or two) He/She/It molded everything. Evolution could be Gods way molding and shaping his favorite (most obnoxious) creation, mandkind (and womankind for you ardent femenist out there). Its intelligent, its design, and its evolution...
Questions? Comments? Complaints?

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Phage0070, posted 04-08-2009 4:22 PM AustinG has replied
 Message 4 by Rahvin, posted 04-08-2009 5:17 PM AustinG has replied
 Message 7 by Taz, posted 04-08-2009 9:35 PM AustinG has not replied
 Message 9 by doctrbill, posted 04-09-2009 2:49 AM AustinG has replied

  
AustinG
Member (Idle past 5169 days)
Posts: 36
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 5 of 22 (505202)
04-08-2009 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Rahvin
04-08-2009 5:17 PM


I'm actually agnostic (leaning towards deist). All the scientific evidence is against any world wide flood, so I go with that.
My point was not to argue for the flood scientifically or any other way. I was just pointing out that if I world wide flood did occur and Noah indeed saved two of every animal the only way to explain it is with the "poof theory". Anyone who trys to explain it scientifically is being....well...ignorant. I hate to say that, but since this is an informal discussion on my part...I will.
I havn't seen anyone trying to scientifically explain how Jesus turned water into wine...or hell...how he rose from the dead for that matter. These are miracles, and for people of faith, they don't need to be explained. How his the flood story any different? If it did indeed happen, it was a mircale, plain and simple, and cannot be explained with earthly techniques.
Anyone who trys to explain miracles with science is only displaying their insecurities with their own faith.
Do you see what I mean?
p.s. Is your name from TWoT Series?
Edited by AustinG, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Rahvin, posted 04-08-2009 5:17 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
AustinG
Member (Idle past 5169 days)
Posts: 36
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 6 of 22 (505203)
04-08-2009 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Phage0070
04-08-2009 4:22 PM


quote:
The problem here is that if you do not take the Bible literally in all areas then you are hard-pressed to justify taking it literally in certain areas. Sure, a literal ark is impossible according to what we know about science, but that also applies equally well to Jesus's miracles such as returning from death. If it is reasonable to use our brains and reasoning to figure out what is real in the ark story, why not do the same in every other part of the Bible?
'
Point taken. Let me adjust my topic title to "Why is a scientific explanation of the Ark Important?"
Edited by AustinG, : No reason given.
Edited by AustinG, : No reason given.
Edited by AustinG, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Phage0070, posted 04-08-2009 4:22 PM Phage0070 has not replied

  
AustinG
Member (Idle past 5169 days)
Posts: 36
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 12 of 22 (505286)
04-09-2009 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by doctrbill
04-09-2009 2:49 AM


Re: Point of Fact
quote:
FYI: Kent Hovind did not coin the term "kinds." The expression comes directly from the Bible itself.
By coined, I mean popularized.
quote:
Please do not make the mistake which so many others have made: of debating a biblical issue without reading the relevant text (in this case the first page of the first book of The Book). Or does your Bible use a word other than "kind"?
I don't pretend to have read the whole Bible. I have, however, read Genesis.
quote:
BTW. Both "genus" and "species" are Latin Words which may be translated "kind."
Semantics only cloud the issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by doctrbill, posted 04-09-2009 2:49 AM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by doctrbill, posted 04-09-2009 9:43 PM AustinG has not replied

  
AustinG
Member (Idle past 5169 days)
Posts: 36
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 19 of 22 (505376)
04-10-2009 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by doctrbill
04-10-2009 6:57 PM


Re: Point of Fact
I still would like to know why a few people (who call them selves creationist or IDist), within the last ten years, insist on refuting hundreds of years of scientific research in order to explain their faith based beliefs.
Its seems as though they (Creationists/intelligent design advicates) are attempting to legitimize their world view through science. To me, this is totally unneccessary. If there are problems with scientific theory, sure, these errors must be pointed out; however, I'm not convinced that's their entire agenda.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by doctrbill, posted 04-10-2009 6:57 PM doctrbill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Coyote, posted 04-10-2009 9:17 PM AustinG has not replied
 Message 21 by doctrbill, posted 04-11-2009 1:35 AM AustinG has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024