The Flood

dassercha
Superfan
Posts: 233
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
The Flood

I am trying to create a list of concrete logical improbabilities/impossibilities for my Fundy Folks, so if anyone can generate some more gems, add to or critique the following argument, please do.

So, Creationists think The Flood was around 2500 or so BCE. Noah's descendants would eventually leave the beautiul Ararat area for some reason and finally, for example, move as far away as modern China and found the Shang Dynasty (ca.1700 BCE). All within 800 years or less. Plus their eyes developed epicanthal folds (thanks Triften) within that time frame as well. Guess anything is possible with God, huh?

EDUCATION! EDUCATION! EDUCATION!


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
What about the fact that

What about the fact that there were cultures that existed with writing at the time that somehow failed to notice their own destruction?

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13488
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
dassercha wrote: I am

dassercha wrote:
I am trying to create a list of concrete logical improbabilities/impossibilities for my Fundy Folks, so if anyone can generate some more gems, add to or critique the following argument, please do. So, Creationists think The Flood was around 2500 or so BCE. Noah's descendants would eventually leave the beautiul Ararat area for some reason and finally, for example, move as far away as modern China and found the Shang Dynasty (ca.1700 BCE). All within 800 years or less. Plus their eyes developed epicanthal folds (thanks Triften) within that time frame as well. Guess anything is possible with God, huh?

Humn?

Two of everything? REALY! THATS FRIGGEN AMAZING!

Two scorpians

Two cobras

Two hippos(violent btw, kill more people on the Nile than aligators)

Two dart frogs

Two black widdows

And isnt it amazing that there is absolutly no explination of Noah's animal training? Steve Erwin must have spent his entire life saying, "How the hell did Noah do that?"

Well unfortunatly for the believer the answer is delusionaly simple. It needs no explination because the cop out standard like a broken record is, "God did it". 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Krehlic
Silver Member
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
Somehow all of the animal

Somehow all of the animal species survived, despite having limited or no food and being only two of each, and traveled to wherever they are today before reproducing. So, I guess the predators, such as the lions, tigers and bears (oh my), didn't eat for a few generations.

 

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


triften
Silver Member
triften's picture
Posts: 591
Joined: 2007-01-01
User is offlineOffline
Just so we need not

Just so we need not re-invent the wheel:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html#CH400-CH599

-Triften 


Krehlic
Silver Member
Krehlic's picture
Posts: 240
Joined: 2006-12-29
User is offlineOffline
triften wrote: Just so we

triften wrote:

Just so we need not re-invent the wheel:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html#CH400-CH599

-Triften

Woah! Great link! Thank you, Triften.
Why haven't I found this before?

Flying Spaghetti Monster -- Great Almighty God? Or GREATEST Almighty God?


Symok
Symok's picture
Posts: 63
Joined: 2006-12-09
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: What

MattShizzle wrote:
What about the fact that there were cultures that existed with writing at the time that somehow failed to notice their own destruction?

 

Haha Good one :D 


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: What

MattShizzle wrote:
What about the fact that there were cultures that existed with writing at the time that somehow failed to notice their own destruction?

Which cultures? I'm not challenging you, I'd just like to learn more.


triften
Silver Member
triften's picture
Posts: 591
Joined: 2007-01-01
User is offlineOffline
MrRage wrote: MattShizzle

MrRage wrote:
MattShizzle wrote:
What about the fact that there were cultures that existed with writing at the time that somehow failed to notice their own destruction?
Which cultures? I'm not challenging you, I'd just like to learn more.

Nah, challenge all you want. That's what this place is here for. Challenge, question, and doubt. 

 Looks like Egypt's culture is continuous across that period... unless Noah's offspring headed down to Egypt and adopted Egyptian culture somehow. (Insert joke about Creationists and "De Nile".)

And the Sumerians were also around from almost 5300BCE to about 2000BCE.

-Triften 


22jesus22
22jesus22's picture
Posts: 208
Joined: 2006-12-18
User is offlineOffline
In the New International

In the New International Verision Bible I have, it gives the measurments for the boat, which is completely ridiculous seeing how all the animals could not possibly have all been on the boat.  Especially when God wanted 7 pairs of every clean animal and 2 pairs of every non-clean animal.

 

Another argument for the flood that doesn't deal a whole lot with logic, but I still find interesting is how Christians believe that their God is all-loving.  I still haven't found out why an all-loving God would take such a destructive approach to destroying sin.  He drowned the whole friggin' world! ...well besides a certain amout of animals and the 8 people on the boat.  How can an all-loving being watch his creation drown?? 


triften
Silver Member
triften's picture
Posts: 591
Joined: 2007-01-01
User is offlineOffline
22jesus22 wrote: In the

22jesus22 wrote:

In the New International Verision Bible I have, it gives the measurments for the boat, which is completely ridiculous seeing how all the animals could not possibly have all been on the boat. Especially when God wanted 7 pairs of every clean animal and 2 pairs of every non-clean animal.

And even if the animals could have fit on the boat, how could 8 people care for all those animals? 

  

22jesus22 wrote:

 Another argument for the flood that doesn't deal a whole lot with logic, but I still find interesting is how Christians believe that their God is all-loving. I still haven't found out why an all-loving God would take such a destructive approach to destroying sin. He drowned the whole friggin' world! ...well besides a certain amout of animals and the 8 people on the boat. How can an all-loving being watch his creation drown??

Especially since, if he were all-knowing, he would have known from the start that it would have gotten that bad. And if he were also all-powerful, he could have made things differently so he wouldn't have had to kill all those people.

-Triften 


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
triften wrote: Nah,

triften wrote:
Nah, challenge all you want. That's what this place is here for. Challenge, question, and doubt.

Touche. I've recently been posting a lot on a Christian forum. I think my brain hasn't turned overt-politeness mode off.

Thanks for the info.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Not only couldn't they all

Not only couldn't they all have fit on the ark, but I have read engineers say there is no way a wooden ship that size could float for long. And of course, you're talking about a ship the size of a luxury liner or aircraft carrier with ONE FUCKING WINDOW about 20 square inches! Be kinda hard to breathe!

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10502
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
It's likely that the whole

It's likely that the whole flood story is merely an embellishment of the tale of a civilization that was destroyed by tsunami. There are a number of possible scenarios.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Two hippos(violent btw, kill more people on the Nile than aligators)

The Nature Nazi says, "It's true that hippos are the most dangerous large vertebrates; however, there are Nile crocodiles in African, not alligators. There are only two species of alligators: the American alligator and the Chinese alligator. Alligators and crocodiles are both crocodilians, but there are more DNA differences between them than there are between chimps and humans."

Iruka Naminori says: "Even if Noah got 'two of everything' into the ark, you need at least twenty individuals of a species to flesh out genetic diversity.  Fewer individuals means certain extinction." 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I've always thought the

I've always thought the Noah story proves what a dick god is if he exists.

Why flood the earth and make some dude build an ark and then alter the laws of the universe within the ark?  It's so stupid sounding that no one with any sense will believe it.  And yet... that's exactly what we're supposed to do.  In fact, many Christians will tell you that if we don't believe the bible is inerrant, we'll go to hell.  

Doing something completely irrational, then asking rational beings to believe it, then punishing them when they don't?  Sounds like an asshole to me.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


22jesus22
22jesus22's picture
Posts: 208
Joined: 2006-12-18
User is offlineOffline
Another even more ridiculous

Another even more ridiculous thing about the Flood is the emotion God shows.  I don't even understand how a perfect being can show emotions.  God gets angry, sad and disappointed all during the process of the flood.  This does not make sense.  Even if God can feel emotions you would think an all-powerful being could control them.  Also he is all-knowing, so he knew this event would happen and if God has been around Forever you think he would have been a bit more prepared for the Flood.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10502
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I remember a creationist

I remember a creationist claiming that the himilayas were shorter at the time of the flood, and were therefore covered as the rest of the world. I have no idea if this is true, since it's irrelevant. What about the 65+million year old rockies?

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


manhammmer
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-01-30
User is offlineOffline
I have thought about this

I have thought about this one over and over ever since I was a kid. From the disproving standpoint to the proving standpoint.

 

One main problem with trying to prove or disprove the Bible, is whether or not we choose to take its writing literally, which we quite often decide on based on what fits our own personal agenda.

 

For a bit of outside of the box thinking as far as the whole Ark thing is concerned. Imagine if you will instead of God flooding the WHOLE EARTH in a mere 40 days and 40 nights, He flooded the "known world" to those people. It is possible and even probable that 40 continuous (sp) days of Hurricanes in a land surrounded by seas and mountains could have been flooded and utterly destroyed. Given that Asian culture as well as others have no account of this, it is improbable that it covered the globe.

 

However, if you go through the histories of Native American tribes as well as Polynesian and Native South American peoples. they share the story of the "Great Flood" They also have stories of Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden, Christ, and much more. Depending on the faith, or lack thereof these stories can be accounted for in many ways, including that these people either descended from nomadic people that carried histories from Judeo-Christian cultures, or that the Apostles really did scatter and come throughout the whoe world when Europe and the Middle East would have nothing to do with them follwing Christ's death.

 

So looking at the question rationally, which most of you claim to be - rational. Look at a rational scenario that through oral traditions and translation has been embellished into the fairy tale that we so often want to debunk rather than search out plausible truths.


triften
Silver Member
triften's picture
Posts: 591
Joined: 2007-01-01
User is offlineOffline
manhammmer wrote:

manhammmer wrote:

One main problem with trying to prove or disprove the Bible, is whether or not we choose to take its writing literally, which we quite often decide on based on what fits our own personal agenda.

And the main problem with not taking the Bible literally is that it is then open to interpretation and thus can't really be the inerrant word of god (as many claim.) So, when deriving morals in this manner, one is actually using one's own internal morals (the ones that evolved) and not having wisdom handed down by an all-knowing god. But that's a discussion probably occuring in a dozen other threads.

Creation myths are so disparate (even the handful that I know of differ wildly). Please cite some which do, in your eyes, line up. (Also: please take a gander at http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG201.html )

-Triften


StMichael
Theist
StMichael's picture
Posts: 609
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
This problem of personal

This problem of personal interpretation only arises in Protestant Christianity. If the interpretation proceeds from God, through the Church, there is no such issue.

 

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,

StMichael 

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13488
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
StMichael wrote: This

StMichael wrote:

This problem of personal interpretation only arises in Protestant Christianity. If the interpretation proceeds from God, through the Church, there is no such issue.

 

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,

StMichael

Ok big guy, why dont you debate a Protestant?

You are just like them and you are too deluded to see it. YOU BELIEVE IN A FICTIONAL CHARATER THE SAME AS THEY DO,

"I got it right and they got it wrong" is hogwash.

We have the guts to face all fiction head on and call it what it is and you are no different than any Protestant or Muslim who believes in a tyranical hero who will beat the crap out of anyone who doesnt kiss is butt!

STOP PLEASE! You are embarrassing yourself here with that garbage and you are saying "fuck what you think Protestants" 

We have the guts to tell you, and a Hindu or Scientologist, or whatever sect of fictionaly mythology you call yourself and call it what it is.

YOUR FICTION IS THE SAME AS THEIRS, hate to burst your bubble but you are not special, your daddy wont save you because a fictional being is not real, nor is a Protistant claim.

Same blind "I want my fictional super hero to be real"

That is all you are phycologically doing to yourself and there is no magic causing it. There is no disimbodied voice telling you what to do. There is no being manipulating ever atom in the universe. It is just another claim you have amongst many and just as rediculous and absurd as if I had claimed I could fart a Lamborginni out of my ass. 

Blah blah blah, my daddy is real I SWEAR!

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 

I'd be more impressed if you claimed you could fart a Lamborginni out of your ass, at least that would be an original claim of fiction.

Your daddy did not knock up a girl and he had no son that stayed dead for three days and assended into heaven. Fiction is fiction and is just as absurd as farting a Lamborginni out of my ass.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


StMichael
Theist
StMichael's picture
Posts: 609
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
You have not disproven my

You have not disproven my God. Calling Him fictional doesn't make Him go away, no matter how hard you try. You haven't made an argument; you've just called me names.

 

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,

StMichael 

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10502
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
You had no arguement

You had no arguement yourself, so that's a pointless comment.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
StMichael wrote: This

StMichael wrote:

This problem of personal interpretation only arises in Protestant Christianity. If the interpretation proceeds from God, through the Church, there is no such issue. 

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,

StMichael

 So how do you "personally interpret Genesis through the Chruch?" Is Genesis metaphorical or literal? If it is metaphorical, how do you distinguish such things; for example what can you take as literal and what must be taken as metaphore - is metaphore only the things trounced by science? If you think it is literal, how do you manage to chew gum and breathe at the same time?

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


StMichael
Theist
StMichael's picture
Posts: 609
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
For example, Christian

For example, Christian tradition, like Saint Augustine, has always interpreted the passages in the first part of the book as metaphor; namely, the six days of creation. God created the world instantly, and the divisions are metaphorically interepreted. Saint Augustine saw in the divisions an outline of the various parts of creation, according to the works of God as known by the angels. It has been agreed today that a purely literal interpretation of Genesis' six days is false. Further, the Church has proposed some things to be held in this book in a definitive manner; for example, that would be the truth that there are two parents of the human race and that at some point God infused a soul into the human being (either through evolution in His Providence, or by a special act of creation). Also, original sin is a reality and the story in the first part of Genesis accurately conveys that the sin itself was an act of pride on the part of man, which led to the fall of the human race. While this is not exhaustive, these are those things which clearly are proposed for belief in the first part of Genesis and its account of creation.

Yours In Christ, Eternal Wisdom,
StMichael

Psalm 50(1):8. For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
More problems with the

More problems with the flood: 1. How did they dispose of all the waste? 2. What did the carnivores eat for more than a year? 3. How was ventilation handled on a ship larger than an aircraft carrier that only had one small window? 4. How did plants survive more than a year under miles of water? 5. How did the fish survive without aquariums on the ark (the change in salinity brought on by the flood and the bringing of seawater into freshwater areas would kill fish.)

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


American Atheist
American Atheist's picture
Posts: 1331
Joined: 2006-09-03
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: More

MattShizzle wrote:
More problems with the flood: 1. How did they dispose of all the waste? 2. What did the carnivores eat for more than a year? 3. How was ventilation handled on a ship larger than an aircraft carrier that only had one small window? 4. How did plants survive more than a year under miles of water? 5. How did the fish survive without aquariums on the ark (the change in salinity brought on by the flood and the bringing of seawater into freshwater areas would kill fish.)

Some theists would say that God made it all possible.