Are my spirtual beliefs wrong?

[quote name='Friend of Sonic']Or, I should say, lack therof. I am Atheist and just to make myself clear, I don't mean to trash talk religion at all. I've had strange occurences and it's really making me scratch my head.

First things first, day one. There's an odd group with bullhorns and the such outside of McDonalds. I peer from across the street after coming out of the restaurant I had dinner in and overhear that they are born-again Christians. They were singing and even trying to talk to the cars that stopped at the traffic light.
Now, maybe this was immature on my end (although at the time I found them to be yelling in bull horns and stopping people in cars immature) but after I got in my car, I drove by and shouted, "Religion is meaningless rhetoric and you are going to lead pointless lives!" This one guy simply smiled and waved, which I found odd.

Now, day two. I was getting out of work (probably about 20 miles away from where I was in day one) and I noticed an even stranger oddity. There was a man on the sidewalk, on his knees, with a giant Vash\Trigun cross over his shoulder. Just sitting there. I drove by and this time I decided not to shout anything immature since, you know, he was just chilling on the sidewalk with his cross.

The third day, I was driving to work and something in me strongly prompted me to look at the car that was ahead of me and its license plate. I did so and noticed the plate read, "R U SAVED."

I'm not making any of this up. These series of events have me questioning my belief system. Could I be wrong? Before this decision was very easy for me to make. But I just saw two strange events right in a row after some religious dude waved and smiled at me. I'm kind of freaked out. Advice? Also, I welcome the funny, smart ass, and serious replies. Thank you![/quote]

Things very similar to this have occurred to me in the past 2 and a half years, and it was quite dawning to me, considering i had been going through a rough time in life. About a year ago and a half i had been attending church regularly and everything, but what really ruined it for me was this particular church's focus on money.

Now i don't mean the whole, "money is evil and it destroys men's lives" kind of rhetoric, but rather the fact that they'd make up events for people to give money. And even more. Oh give a 20 dollar bill today and it might save your life. :roll:

That alone pretty much pushed me away from mainstream religious groups and so on, but i still happen to believe in a god. You can always keep your heart and mind open, i mean, who's to say i might not find an actual church entity which is honest and full of good people? Who knows, life is always throwing surprises at you.

:D
 
As soon as I saw the topic, I expected something other than what I've seen here.

Props to CAG. Mad props. The Crotch - thanks for asking about the Resurrection bit, that's the first thing I thought of as soon as I noticed that people who know a thing or two were kind enough to answer questions - thanks...

There was a question asked earlier by I believe Daroga - about "who would defend Crusades?" The sad truth about the situation that I've heard several evangelical fundamentalists bring up that very wording several times (we'd be speaking muslims). Tom Short is the one that is quite famous in Texas Universities.

All you need to know that when Short was asked if Jesus Christ would wear a Rolex, his response was a certain and definite "yes." (Sorry for an out-of-context quote there, I do certainly dislike Tom Short).

Friend of Sonic - I suggest keeping any deeply personal beliefs as close to yourself as possible, and to challenge them all every chance you get. My political side is telling me to include "if that is your choice" in conjunction with the previous sentence. My persona, however, is rather incapable of understanding why you wouldn't. You're likely to draw certain conclusions regarding my beliefs from this paragraph. Don't. You haven't the slightest idea.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']That's your crisis of non-faith? A guy smiling, a cross, and a vanity plate? Wow. How long have you been an atheist, man?[/QUOTE]
Seconded.
 
Personally i believe that if people put as much energy into the sciences that some do into religion, we'd be much further along as a species. I'm not talking jetsons future here, but further along still. Especially in curing/preventing diseases since there is a bit of an religous blockade on things which could help the race as a whole. It still amazes me that some catholics won't even use protection during sex, STD anyone?
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Seconded.[/QUOTE]
Not only did you bump a month old topic, but you seconded a post that twenty people before you already did.
Be more original!
 
In retrospect, there were better questions to ask Daroga than the one I did - which creation story was the "correct" one, his explanation for some of the "faith by acts" passages, and there was one about Jesus in the garden.

...

T0llenz?
 
Creation? As in creation of the universe creation? I felt like that topic was discussed -- and I'm a follower of the theistic evolution concept -- no literal 7 days for creation and evolution worked its majic because God more or less set it in motion. I see no reason why the Bible contradicts this...and I'm sure there are others who would disagree.

Jesus in the garden? When he prayed before his crucifixion? What's really the question there...?
 
Yeah, we went over the Genesis bit in a previous thread. Not sure how far we got, but I'm pretty sure I know your position. That was a question more for Daroga.

As for the garden? It's admittedly minor, and yes I am aware of the fact that the oldest of the gospels was written decades after Jesus' death. However, my inner nitpick is very much bugged by one detail: there was no-one around (Mark 14:32)/awake (14:37, 14:40) to record that bit. Not sure about the other books (damn Catholic elementary school education), but that one's bugged me for some time.
 
Doesn't concern me. Anyone knowing they're about to die would pray if they had any faith at all...there's no doubt in my mind that Christ prayed before he died. It was discussed that Jesus and the disciples went to a common place, and is pointed as Gethsemane in Mark with awake disciples...they fell asleep as he prayed because it was late at night and they were tired. So, we don't know how he prayed. What he said? If his sweat looked like blood (see Gospel of Luke/Mormon teachings)? We have no clue. I'd guess that the details are all conjecture by the writers of the Gospel based on what the spirit led them to write, considering most Christians, myself included, believe that the Gospels were divinely inspired. Really doesn't change much about that whole passage not knowing exactly what Christ's prayers were like.
 
Just found this thread; thought I'd chime in on the Crusades.

What's especially fascinating and despicable about these campaigns is the actual target. Although Jerusalem was the rallying cry, there are strong arguments that the real intent was the sack of Constantinople, the world's wealthiest city at the time, and a christian city. Given the money-driven papacy of the day combined with the ire leftover from the Great Schizm, Rome stood to benefit greatly from a crumbled Eastern Orthodoxy--much more so than a recaptured Jerusalem.
 
Tollenz your last post made me laugh. I just got a mental picture of what jesus "praying" would look like to a christian:

J: Dad, can I have five rubles to go to the theatre? (talking to G-d/asking for somethign is praying right?)
G-d: Did you do your homework?
J: Aww, come on dad I'll do it later.
G-d: Get that homework done, I command it!

Later at the theatre:

J's freinds: What took you so long!?
J: My dad was being an ass. (
 
I am a Christian and have really strong feelings about most of these things. The mistake that almost all churches make is the way they conduct themselves. The way they relentlessly bash someone over the head with Christianity trying to convert them. If they just were more subtle and less forthcoming about their religious beliefs they wouldn't push people away like they do. There is no doubt that there are some Religious nuts out there, people that have a voice in the media that never should. I like to believe the majority of Christians are more tempered in their beliefs.

I don't go to church as much as I probably should, mostly because churches make me feel uncomfortable. I'm not one of those people who sings and raises my arms to the heavens, its just not who I am. But I pray alone quite a bit, although once again not as much as I should. There is just something great about believing in something way bigger than you. You feel a connection with other people who share your beliefs. My life is much easier to handle when I am strong in my faith.

I don't personally know how athiests deal with the hardships of life. It has to be harder when you don't really believe in anything religious (generally speaking). I have a peace about me, a calmness to know that whatever happens to me in my life I can always look forward to where I'm going afterwards. I know that a lot of athiests (but not all) view things from a scientific point of view. Sometimes I hear people say things to contradict my beliefs using scientific evidence to back up their points. All I ever say to that is of course there are going to be things that don't always match up as well as one would want. If you want to believe there is no God then you will turn any information you discover into something that can support your beliefs. We Christians (and people of all faiths) do the same thing.

In the end you will believe what you want to believe. If someone has the steadfast belief that there is no God then generally they will take that belief to the grave. I just tell people to listen to that deep voice within, if you feel like God is trying to reach out to you in some mysterious ways then follow up on it. Read the Bible for yourself, study places of history and events from history. Do research, find more out about what exactly these feelings you're having might mean.
 
First of all: Look at Daroga's user title. Welcome back, man.

Second:
I don't personally know how athiests deal with the hardships of life. It has to be harder when you don't really believe in anything religious (generally speaking). I have a peace about me, a calmness to know that whatever happens to me in my life I can always look forward to where I'm going afterwards.
Click to expand...
Speaking for myself and others: the difference is negligible, really. As a species, we're pretty good at dealing with that sort of shit regardless of metaphysics. The only significant advantage a Christian would have in this area is that a church automatically provides a person with a circle of friends/support group. But hey, that's what we have UUs for.

I know that a lot of athiests (but not all) view things from a scientific point of view.
Click to expand...
"E" before "I" except after... aw, dammit.
Sometimes I hear people say things to contradict my beliefs using scientific evidence to back up their points. All I ever say to that is of course there are going to be things that don't always match up as well as one would want. If you want to believe there is no God then you will turn any information you discover into something that can support your beliefs. We Christians (and people of all faiths) do the same thing.
Click to expand...
Major nitpick: with the exception of positive/strong/gnostic atheism (we have too many god damn words for ourselves), there is no faith or belief in atheism.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']
Major nitpick: with the exception of positive/strong/gnostic atheism (we have too many god damn words for ourselves), there is no faith or belief in atheism.[/quote]

I didn't really mean beliefs in a religious sense I meant it more as things that you believe to be true. Sorry I kind of made that confusing.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']As for the garden? It's admittedly minor, and yes I am aware of the fact that the oldest of the gospels was written decades after Jesus' death. However, my inner nitpick is very much bugged by one detail: there was no-one around (Mark 14:32)/awake (14:37, 14:40) to record that bit. Not sure about the other books (damn Catholic elementary school education), but that one's bugged me for some time.[/quote]I think it's pretty probable that Jesus talked about it with the disciples after his resurrection. Of course, the biblical teaching of the inspiration of Scripture doesn't need anyone to have been there. God certainly could have just given the writers that piece of information. But I don't think it's even remotely necessary to play that card in this case.

Neat to see this thread back. It's the one I've sorta been paying attention to CAG for these last 2 months.

[quote name='kevlar51']Just found this thread; thought I'd chime in on the Crusades.

What's especially fascinating and despicable about these campaigns is the actual target. Although Jerusalem was the rallying cry, there are strong arguments that the real intent was the sack of Constantinople, the world's wealthiest city at the time, and a christian city. Given the money-driven papacy of the day combined with the ire leftover from the Great Schizm, Rome stood to benefit greatly from a crumbled Eastern Orthodoxy--much more so than a recaptured Jerusalem.[/quote]They eventually did sack Constantinople (dang They Might Be Giants song stuck in my head now...), but I think it's a pretty gigantic stretch to say that was the point of the crusades at large. If it was, why didn't they do anything to the city until the fourth crusade?
 
That's right, bitches. He's back.

An' I gots another question for him. This is a bit of a break from the usual questions that I've asked thus far. It's probably the least biblically significant thing ever, but it's another one of Those Things that Bug Me.

Genesis 30:37-39

"And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chestnut tree; and pilled white streaks in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods. And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink. And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstreaked, speckled, and spotted."

What the fuck?
 
[quote name='The Crotch']What the fuck?[/quote]hehe

There's a lot of questions about this little section, all probably summarized well with the question above.

It is possible that Jacob was pruposefully doing something they knew to cause minor birth defects in the livestock. Perhaps the stripped wood emitted a chemical that would mess with the babies right from their conception. Perhaps it was something akin to an Orca whale being born in captivity and having its dorsal fin slumped over. Truth is, we just don't know. I'm inclined to put my hat in the superstition camp dur to what follows.

What's really significant here is not what Jacob did but why he did it. "Jacob" means heel-grabber, which was appropriate since he was grabbing his twin-brother's heel at birth, but in a figurative sense that also means someone who's going to deceive and scheme and do everything in his power to get his way. We see this when Jacob "lovingly" sells his starving brother a bowl of stew for his birthright (something that God has already promised to Jacob, that the older brother would serve the younger, and thus completely reverse the inheirtance order of the time, but Jacob didn't rely on God's promises). Likewise, not trusting that transaction, Jacob and his mother sought to trick his aged father and played dressup so that Jacob could get the blessing Isaac intended for Esau (Isaac, too, wasn't following God's "change the paradigm" directions/promises).

So now we see Jacob getting the run-around by Laban. God had promised to be with him and bless him no matter what happened. But Jacob, once again, wanted to take matters into his own hand. So he did what we thought he could to force the flocks into being blesmished and thus his and not Laban's. I have to believe that this was a case of God simply blessing Jacob, as he had promised, despite Jacob's lack of faith and resorting to questionable husbandry tactics and perhaps even superstition to get what he wanted.

So, The Crotch, I imagine a question not totally unlike yours going through the mind of everyone who saw what Jacob was doing. It's an account showing Jacob's lack of faith and self-reliance in the face of God's clear promises, not a guide to breeding animals.
 
...

And here I thought he just wanted to get a stranglehold on the Zebra-trade.

And I always thought the whole "Oh, God said that he wanted me in charge, not you, Esau." thing seems an awful lot like post-hoc justification. "What? That thing about me pretending to be you to trick dad? Oh, um, well... yeah, that was totally God's will."

Reminds me of all of the Greek demigods. Alcmena: "No, honey, I haven't been sleeping around with the pool boy. It was - um - it was Zeus! He... he was just taking the form of the pool boy."
 
Sorta... except the promise was made to his parents before he was born, it wasn't something he declared after the fact. It wasn't God's will to trick his father. As I said before--that was a sin and complete lack of faith that God could accomplish what he had promised.

I do like the thought of Jacob trying to corner the Zebra trade, though. I might use that for something ;)
 
[quote name='daroga']Sorta... except the promise was made to his parents before he was born, it wasn't something he declared after the fact. It wasn't God's will to trick his father. As I said before--that was a sin and complete lack of faith that God could accomplish what he had promised.[/quote]Yeah, but you see I was getting at oh never mind.

[quote name='daroga']I do like the thought of Jacob trying to corner the Zebra trade, though. I might use that for something ;)[/quote]I'm sure you'll have better luck with that than me. The circles I travel in don't really appreciate jokes based on semi-obscure Genesis passages.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']I'm sure you'll have better luck with that than me. The circles I travel in don't really appreciate jokes based on semi-obscure Genesis passages.[/quote]That's sad.

Or good. Bible puns/jokes are never funny. Puns/Jokes based on the original Greek or Hebrew are even worse.
 
It's the hats.

We never should've gone in together on that buy-1-get-1-50%-off deal at Lids. It's been disastrous for our independent identities ever since.
 
Hey, I was just replacing my old, warn-out tuque. You were the one who thought it was a "good fashion statement" and insisted on getting one, too!
 
Theres this preacher here who has these really weird commercials for his church. He's kind of a biker/preacher, makes the ads really strange.

In one he has what looks like a real gun, talking about how he once thought of killing himself.

Not sure thats a great way to recruit new members, but what do i know.
 
Eh, it could be. As long as the man is being honest and not just trying to do things for shock value. Those suffering with depression with suicidal thoughts might find great comfort in knowing that their pastor has suffered through the same sorts of things.

It's kind of the same thing as people feeling uncomfortable going to a Roman Priest for marital counseling. "You've never been married; how could you understand what's going on in our lives?"

It's not accurate to say that just because someone hasn't experienced the troubles you have they aren't able to help. But it can be a blessing to have someone who suffers. But, I'm certainly not about to get strung out on crack just so I can help people who are addicted to drugs. But a pastor who HAS been there before is in an amazing position to help people in that situation.
 
[quote name='daroga']I'm certainly not about to get strung out on crack just so I can help people who are addicted to drugs. But a pastor who HAS been there before is in an amazing position to help people in that situation.[/QUOTE]
You're a pastor? (or becoming one?)

'Didn't know that.

(Or am I inferring improperly?)

[quote name='The Crotch']Daroga's, actually. But people mix the two of us up all the time.[/QUOTE]
Ah, you're just going about an extremely platonic dialectical method of teaching.

I recommend daroga wear his hat backwards. Not only would he look extra hip, but we'd be able to tell you two apart.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']You're a pastor? (or becoming one?)

'Didn't know that.

(Or am I inferring improperly?)[/quote]I'm about 5 months from it. Finishing up my Seminary schooling as we speak.

[quote name='PyroGamer'] I recommend daroga wear his hat backwards. Not only would he look extra hip, but we'd be able to tell you two apart.[/quote]Done. I feel my hipness climbing already.
 
[quote name='daroga']I'm about 5 months from it. Finishing up my Seminary schooling as we speak.

Done. I feel my hipness climbing already.[/QUOTE]What denomination, if you don't mind me asking?
 
[quote name='JolietJake']In one he has what looks like a real gun, talking about how he once thought of killing himself.

Not sure thats a great way to recruit new members, but what do i know.[/quote]

Is that the church of Persona 3?
 
Its noobs like you that make it so fun to flame on message boards. (I'm not talking to anyone in particular).
 
[quote name='pittpizza']Its noobs like you that make it so fun to flame on message boards. (I'm not talking to anyone in particular).[/quote]So you're insulting everyone in this thread?
 
[quote name='daroga']I'm about 5 months from it. Finishing up my Seminary schooling as we speak.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='daroga']Wisconsin Synod Lutheran. http://www.wels.net I can't take any blame for that site's design. ;)[/QUOTE]
Lutheran... so they believe in Biblical inerrancy.

Tell me, what do they say about

Gen. 4:12/Gen. 4:17

Jeremiah 36:30/II Kings 24:6

Ezekial 29:11, Ezek 30:10

Jer 29:10

The whole "bunnies chew the cut" "bats are birds" "insects have four legs" "birds with four legs" etc stuff in Leviticus.

Exodus 34:1/Exodus 34:28

The fact that the Bible teaches the world is flat and doesn't move (let alone rotate around the sun), and has a hard glass sky-dome.

Creation in six days.

And other false prophecies, glaring inconsistencies, contradictions, and blatant evidence of the Bible's constant penchant for self-evident falsity.

And what is your own opinion on Biblical "infallibility"?
 
As far as I know, Daroga is a YEC (Young Earth Creationist), so the whole creation bit doesn't give him any problems.

I'd have to look up everything else. For my part, I still want to know which creation story is the "correct" one. And what his thoughts on the Flood are.
 
Good questions! Thanks!

I'm a tad pressed for time at the moment so I'll need to get back with you on some of these. A few brief thoughts:

Ezekiel 29:11/30:10 passages -- you're going to need to clear up for me what the problem is between those passages.

Jeremiah 29:10 -- The exiles' return from Babylon was 70 years later. You'd need to count from the first group led out, not the destruction of the temple in 586. I don't have ready command of those dates right now, but I can look into it if you'd like.

I need to see some specific passage references to help you with the difficulties in Leviticus. Just a general observation though, many times the words used to identify species of animals or types of gems, etc. in Hebrew are hard to nail down just what we're talking about in modern day English. It's always possible that it is a animal type that is unknown to us in this day. A lot of that confusion can stem from poor translation work or simply translations of things we just don't know what they mean.

Exodus 34:1/34:28 -- Once again, what's the problem there?

The science aspect of the Bible is interesting. It's often written in the ways that people of the day understood it. I'm assuming you're mostly referring to the sun standing still in the sky. We certainly say that it was the earth stopped moving around the sun, but as an observer on earth, there's not a difference when observed here. And even in our "enlightened" era we still speak about sunrise and sunset, right? Same thing. (I'm unfamiliar with the hard-glass sky dome concept--got a reference on that?)

The universe was created in 6, 24 hour days.

It is my belief that the Bible is inerrant. That's not to say that there are not difficult sections of it or things that seem to be off. There's usually a fairly easy explanation. A lot of times the seeming contradictions in the Bible with itself or history tend to stem from our own ignorance of the times it was written in.

Belshazzar is a good example, whom the Bible says was the last king of Babylon, but history for so long KNEW that the last king of Babylon was Nabonidus. Suddenly, an inscription was found that showed that Belshazzar, son of the king, reigned in his stead while the king was at war.

I gotta bolt (already late!) but I'll get back to you on some of those other ones tonight or tomorrow.

EDIT (still late): The Crotch, could you elaborate on the "which creation story" question? I'm assuming you're dealing with Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, but I want to be sure. Also, what about the Flood?
 
So much for you "lurking", Daroga. Come back to the GGT! You know you wannnnnna![quote name='daroga']I'm unfamiliar with the hard-glass sky dome concept--got a reference on that?[/quote]I'm 95% sure I know what bit Pyro's talking about - some description of the firmament - but I have no godly idea where it is.
[quote name='daroga']EDIT (still late): The Crotch, could you elaborate on the "which creation story" question? I'm assuming you're dealing with Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, but I want to be sure. Also, what about the Flood?[/quote]Went over this with T0llenz earlier. Let's see...

Genesis 1:25-27 - animals before humans (And God made the beast of the earth... and God saw that it was good. And God said, let us make man in our image.). No mention of women after men.

Genesis 2:18-19 - humans then animals (And the LORD God said, it is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, etc., etc.). Eve made from Adam's rib.

Aside from that, there's also the rather weird order of things - the Earth before the sun, for example. And then there's the... no, I'm gonna stop there.

Re: The flood? Assuming it occurred between 4000 and 3000 BC, why didn't the Chinese notice? How did any plants survive? What happened to all the water? How did the Earth's population rebound so frigging quickly? Etc.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Genesis 1:25-27 - animals before humans (And God made the beast of the earth... and God saw that it was good. And God said, let us make man in our image.). No mention of women after men.

Genesis 2:18-19 - humans then animals (And the LORD God said, it is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, etc., etc.). Eve made from Adam's rib.

Aside from that, there's also the rather weird order of things - the Earth before the sun, for example. And then there's the... no, I'm gonna stop there.[/quote]
Genesis 1 is sort of an overarching account of creation, where as Genesis 2 zooms in and has special focus on mankind, the crown and ruler of God's creation.

It's pretty clear that God made the animals first and then man. Genesis 2 simply says the God HAD made the animals and then brought them to Adam to have him name them. Genesis 2 also fills in the gaps of the details of both Adam's and Eve's unique creation that we didn't get in the brief run down in chapter 1.

There's a lot of interesting things in the Creation account. Light is made before the sun. We can't really separate the two in our minds, but evidently they're separate entities. If you want me to explain how THAT works, you're just going to get a blank stare from me.

[quote name='The Crotch'] Re: The flood? Assuming it occurred between 4000 and 3000 BC, why didn't the Chinese notice? How did any plants survive? What happened to all the water? How did the Earth's population rebound so frigging quickly? Etc.[/quote]We're not given a lot of the how details in the Flood account. Just that the living creatures of the earth were wiped out save for those saved in the ark. I could speculate on the plants survival, but that's all it'd be is speculation. I'm not entirely sure the population really rebounded all that quickly. Some calculations that I've heard estimate a worldwide population at the time of the flood at about 6 billion, or roughly where we're at now (thanks to the much larger window for reproduction given 800+ year life spans). But that's all speculation as well; I don't think we have any way of knowing how populous the earth was at that time. I do wonder what their technology level was before the flood. Maybe they had PS4 already! ;)

I think the important thing to remember about the Bible is that it is sufficient, not all-encompassing. It doesn't tell us every last detail about every event that we'd like to know (see Jacob's husbandry a page or so back). It is sufficient to tell the story of Salvation through Christ's blood, from the Garden of Eden promise to the fulfillment in Jerusalem and then on.
 
[quote name='daroga']
It's pretty clear that God made the animals first and then man.[/quote]Orly?

[quote name='daroga']Genesis 2 simply says the God HAD made the animals and then brought them to Adam to have him name them. Genesis 2 also fills in the gaps of the details of both Adam's and Eve's unique creation that we didn't get in the brief run down in chapter 1.[/quote] Genesis 2: "And the LORD God said, it is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field."

[quote name='daroga']There's a lot of interesting things in the Creation account. Light is made before the sun. We can't really separate the two in our minds, but evidently they're separate entities. If you want me to explain how THAT works, you're just going to get a blank stare from me.[/quote]Or the Earth before the sun? If you want me to explain how THAT works, I'll tell ya: it don't.

[quote name='daroga']We're not given a lot of the how details in the Flood account. Just that the living creatures of the earth were wiped out save for those saved in the ark. I could speculate on the plants survival, but that's all it'd be is speculation. I'm not entirely sure the population really rebounded all that quickly.[/quote]It's going to take me a while to find my numbers, but they're a little on the OMGWTFBBQ side. Assuming 8 people start reproducing in about 2400 BC, the growth rate would be 0.0047/year to get to the population we have today. That would mean there were only about 350 people on the planet when the Israelites left Egypt. When they entered Canaan in 1180, the world's population would have been about 2000 - that leaves, what, ten or eleven people to make up all of Israel?

Also worth noting: many, many species of fish would have died due to changing salinity, pressure, the fact that an inch of rain was coming down every ten seconds, etc.

[quote name='daroga']Some calculations that I've heard estimate a worldwide population at the time of the flood at about 6 billion, or roughly where we're at now (thanks to the much larger window for reproduction given 800+ year life spans).[/quote]Oh, my...

[quote name='daroga']But that's all speculation as well; I don't think we have any way of knowing how populous the earth was at that time. I do wonder what their technology level was before the flood. Maybe they had PS4 already! ;)[/quote]Sadly, we will never know how Lair 2 turned out.


There's also the whole "how did the penguins get to/from Antarctica?" question. And the "how did Egypt (who were more-or-less at the height of their power), China, etc. not notice that they were all underwater?" question.
 
The NIV's rendering of "Now the LORD God HAD formed..." is pretty good. There's a break in thought there; it's not indicating chronology. Simply stating a fact to setup the naming scene. A recap, if you will. Like I said, it's pretty clear that the animals were made first, then Adam and Eve.

I'm not sure that the dating of the flood is as precise as you seem to indicate. I don't think we can narrow that down real well, so it's not necessarily in conflict with Egyptian or Chinese history.

Remember, also, that it wasn't raining 1" every ten seconds. Water reserves from the deep burst open too. As to the water chemistry and fish mortaility, you're well beyond what the Bible tells us about the Flood.
 
[quote name='daroga']The NIV's rendering of "Now the LORD God HAD formed..."[/quote]Noted.

[quote name='daroga']I'm not sure that the dating of the flood is as precise as you seem to indicate. I don't think we can narrow that down real well, so it's not necessarily in conflict with Egyptian or Chinese history.[/quote]Egyptian and Chinese history are, simply/crudely put, fucking long. It doesn't really matter whether it was 2000 or 4000 - there were other civilizations out there that didn't even notice the flood.

[quote name='daroga']Remember, also, that it wasn't raining 1" every ten seconds. Water reserves from the deep burst open too. As to the water chemistry and fish mortaility, you're well beyond what the Bible tells us about the Flood.[/quote]1: There is nowhere near enough water underground to flood the entire planet. And when I say "nowhere near enough", I don't mean "only half as much". I don't mean "only a quarter as much". I don't even mean "only ten percent of what is required". I mean something like one percent.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Egyptian and Chinese history are, simply/crudely put, fucking long. It doesn't really matter whether it was 2000 or 4000 - there were other civilizations out there that didn't even notice the flood.[/quote]True. And if the flood were at 6000 BC, 8000 BC?

[quote name='The Crotch'] 1: There is nowhere near enough water underground to flood the entire planet. And when I say "nowhere near enough", I don't mean "only half as much". I don't mean "only a quarter as much". I don't even mean "only ten percent of what is required". I mean something like one percent.[/quote]mmhmm. Not now, certainly... probably because it all came out to flood the world. ;) Seriously, though, a theory floating (ha!) around is that much of what is now the poles' ice was the floodwaters (wouldn't that coincide with all the global warming panic?). I have no idea if that's true or if it even mathmatically would work out, just something I've heard.

Ultimately, the flood changed the whole ecosystem of the earth. If I'm not mistaken it hadn't actually rained before then (how on earth did things grow? Did the people freak out at the first rain?). What is interesting to note is that life spans fall off the map after the flood. What exactly changed then?
 
[quote name='The Crotch']As far as I know, Daroga is a YEC (Young Earth Creationist), so the whole creation bit doesn't give him any problems.[/QUOTE]
No problems, besides, you know, being forced to deny truth, empirical evidence, rational thought, and mankind's scientific accomplishments.
 
[quote name='daroga']Exodus 34:1/34:28 -- Once again, what's the problem there?[/quote]
"Cut two stone tablets like the former, that I may write on them the commandments which were on the former tablets that you broke."

"Then the LORD said to Moses, "Write down these words, for in accordance with them I have made a covenant with you and with Israel."

"So Moses stayed there with the LORD for forty days and forty nights, without eating any food or drinking any water, and he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."

The science aspect of the Bible is interesting. It's often written in the ways that people of the day understood it.
Click to expand...
So while God was whispering to the authors what to write down in the bible, did he just forget to mention to the ignorant authors that their cosmology and geography was dead wrong, so that the false "understanding of the day" managed to leak in, or did God actually whisper to them lies about the cosmos and the shape of the earth?

A quick google search got me this for the sky dome:

http://www.goatstar.org/the-bibles-flat-earthsolid-sky-dome-universe/

Talk about great pillars and mountains so high that they could see the entire earth. Talk about how god created the earth by drawing a circle in the firmament. Calling the earth a flat "circle", instead of the Hebrew word that is used in the bible when referring to spherical objects.

It's interesting to note that everything in the Bible is consistent with the ignorant, dead-wrong cosmological and geographical assumptions and beliefs of the primitive people of the time it was written. What the Bible is not consistent with, is with a view that it was written in conjunction with an omniscient being who knew better.

[quote name='The Crotch']As far as I know, Daroga is a YEC (Young Earth Creationist), so the whole creation bit doesn't give him any problems.[/QUOTE]
No problems, besides, you know, being forced to deny truth, empirical evidence, rational thought, and mankind's scientific accomplishments. ;)


Why is it important to your theology to believe in a worldwide flood or six 24 hour days of creation, and yet not believe the world is set immobile upon pillars, is a flat circle, and has a hard sky dome around it? Each of these beliefs has the same amount of "evidence" in the Bible, yet you are able to easily reject the latter ones to such a point that you're oblivious to their existence.
 
[quote name='daroga']True. And if the flood were at 6000 BC, 8000 BC?[/quote]That doesn't make you much of a YEC, now, does it? And even then, you've still got a literate Chinese people as far back as 7000 BC.
[quote name='daroga']mmhmm. Not now, certainly... probably because it all came out to flood the world. ;)[/quote]Would have left evidence. Lots of evidence. I don't just mean the massive cracks and fissures that would be made by all that water flowing out in such a short period of time. The water would bring with it noxious gases and enormous amounts of lava. With all of that, we wouldn't have much of an atmosphere anymore.
[quote name='daroga']Seriously, though, a theory floating (ha!) around is that much of what is now the poles' ice was the floodwaters (wouldn't that coincide with all the global warming panic?).[/quote]How so?
[quote name='daroga']I have no idea if that's true or if it even mathmatically would work out, just something I've heard.[/quote]It doesn't. There is nowhere near enough water underground, in the clouds, and at the poles to flood the world.
[quote name='daroga']Ultimately, the flood changed the whole ecosystem of the earth. If I'm not mistaken it hadn't actually rained before then (how on earth did things grow? Did the people freak out at the first rain?).[/quote]Hey, that's your problem, not mine.
[quote name='daroga']What is interesting to note is that life spans fall off the map after the flood. What exactly changed then?[/quote]Again, that's a question for you, not me. I ain't the inerrantist here. I'd rather not try and reconcile ancient goat-herders living 800+ years with reality. Angries up the blood.

Pyro: Yeah, but... look at how cool his hat is.
 
Note to The Crotch - if YECs/OECs didn't have answers for the simple questions there's no way they could hold on to their beliefs.

daroga are you a young earth creationist? If you take the Bible literally and follow that chronology there is no 6000 or 8000 BC. Do you/your denomination accept Ussher's chronology or do you have others/are you old earth creationists?

And as to the comment of life lengths after the flood, Abraham and his descendents still had unreasonably long lives - 175, 147, 110, 120, etc. (even after God had apparently limited humans to 120 years).

What I wonder is why God gave Sumerian kings around 30,000-year lifespans and Methuselah got a lousy 969.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Note to The Crotch - if YECs/OECs didn't have answers for the simple questions there's no way they could hold on to their beliefs.[/quote]Um. Okay? What's that in response to?
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Um. Okay? What's that in response to?[/quote]

Well the whole endeavor I guess. Your questions/responses, Pyro's responses, my questions/sarcasm. None of it really matters to a creationist, if it did they wouldn't believe what they do, at least for the people who have thought about it at all. Some people just accept it and don't think about it, but daroga has himself pretty invested in it and it's not hard to find reasons/explanations for creationist claims, especially when they're accepted even if they're unreasonable/don't explain anything.

When any evidence/explanations run out, it'll go to faith.

Not that you shouldn't necessarily ask daroga questions (I did, afterall), just don't be surprised when it doesn't get anywhere :p.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top