|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Pastor Dave
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
 |
|
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 01:19:38 -0700 (PDT), Snowman
<jkelley@zoomnet.net> spake thusly:
| Quote: |
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
|
Not true. But rather than get into word arguments,
let me say flat out, that what you are trying to do is
to find a way to compromise with man, because they
claim that you are stupid for believing what you do
and that "science proves you wrong", when no such
thing is true and in reality, you're just too lazy to
find out. And the time when you are "stupid",
is when you take the word of those who claim that
ideas based on an atheistic world view are true
and don't do REAL RESEARCH for yourself!!!
Now like I said, I won't bother with word arguments.
I will simply ask you... If the flood was only regional,
why didn't God just tell Noah to MOVE??? Hello??? :)
--
The Last Days were in the first century:
"For then must he often have suffered since the foundation
of the world: but NOW once in THE END OF THE AGE hath
He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself."
- Hebrews 9:26
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 7:00 pm Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
In alt.religion.christian John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Come on, Vern. Put your money where your big, fat, stupid mouth is.
Show us how the flood story is in any way compatible with what we know
of physics. Prove it's anything other than a Bronze Age fairy tale.
|
This is stupid. He believes God is omnipotent. If there is anything
said in the Bible that is incompatible with physics, then God changed
Physics in that instance, or performed some other Miracle. To show that
Bible stories are compatible with science is to deny that the stories
recount miracles.
Faith dictates that the Bible not be riddled with lies. The Faithful
need answer only that "I bleeve in God and the Bible".
THose with insufficient faith try to show that no miracles are recounted
in the Bible. Those who bleeve in God need no rational explanations
for the events in the Bible. You may as well ask how a virgin birth is
possible, given our understanding of biology. Sorry - but God performs
Miracles (or so say the Faithful). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ken
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 10:56 pm Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
On Jul 1, 3:13 pm, "vernono" <vern...@there.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
"Sam Buckland" <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4e56j$sop$2@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4e4p9$sop$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4due1$tic$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4dsm6$jm4$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote in message
news:682ae38a-770f-4c22-8d6d-1e556f504477@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups..com...
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
That's a very common interpretation. Country or entire region. It
could easily be what was said.
BUT independent of any biblical connection, the entire earth has
been under water several times
Not all at once, it wasn't.
ALL AT ONCE
Nope. Never happened.
Oh, gee you better tell that to the majority of geologists.
Why? They already KNOW it never happened.
The earth STARTED as completely covered in water.
In a word, "bullshit".
No, water.
No, bullshit was correct.
get an education. You have ZERO.
And yet, mine is apparently MUCH better than yours...
Go figure.
Here's another couple.to tax you little brain
Africa, SE Asia and South America were all one continent / island at one
time with no real mountains.
The tallest mountain peak on earth is completely under water.
The Earth and Mars originated at some place other than our solar system.
There is question about the moon.
None of these facts have anything to do with the bible.
Now go play with yourself.
(PLONK)- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
While most of your "facts" have NOTHING to do with reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Cory Albrecht
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:30 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
vernono wrote:
| Quote: |
"Snowman" <jkelley@zoomnet.net> wrote in message
news:682ae38a-770f-4c22-8d6d-1e556f504477@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
That's a very common interpretation. Country or entire region. It could
easily be what was said.
BUT independent of any biblical connection, the entire earth has been under
water several times
|
Cite the evidence for that. Or, you can just do as you normally do and
never provide any evidence for your claims.
| Quote: |
and there was a mantle of high moisture above the earth
at one time.
|
The vapor canopy story, eh?
First, let us look at atmospheric pressure. For the earth's atmosphere,
the pressure is almost exactly hydrostatic, since it is held to the
earth by gravity and velocities are too low to significantly change the
pressure. In plain language this means that the air pressure at any
point is equal to the weight of the air in a unit area column above that
point. At sea level, air pressure in US engineering units is about 14.5
pounds/sq inch because a column of air one inch square extending to the
top of the atmosphere weighs (Guess what!?) 14.5 pounds. On top of Mt.
Everest, the pressure is lower because the lowest and densest 9km of the
atmosphere is below that point.
Now the "vapor canopy" would form a part of the atmosphere, being a body
of gas (water vapor) gravitationally held to the earth. It would in fact
be most of the pre-flood atmosphere. There would have to be enough vapor
to form 9km of liquid, when condensed, and, therefore the vapor would
weigh as much as 9km of water. The pressure at the earth's surface,
where Noah and family lived, would be equal to one atmosphere PLUS the
weight of a 9km column of water of unit area. This is equivalent to the
pressure 9km deep in the ocean. What is this pressure? Well, each 10m of
water is roughly equivalent to one atmosphere, so the pressure would be
900 atmospheres. The atmosphere would also have a composition of about
900 parts water vapor to one part of what we call air today.
How could an atmosphere almost 100% water vapor not condense? The
temperature would have to be raised to the point where the partial
pressure of water equals 900 atmospheres, i.e. the boiling point at that
pressure. So we find Noah et al. living in a 13,000psi boiler. Is this
credible?
Taken from <http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/canopy.html>.
| Quote: |
These situations didn't occur at what most people consider the time of Noah.
Personally I don't go along with modern assignment of days, hours and years
from the first few books of the bible.
|
So? All that means is that your an OEC rather than a YEC and still
ignorant about science.
Call me when you actually get around to citing evidence for your claims
for once. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ken
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 12:45 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
On Jul 1, 5:40 pm, Sam Buckland <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: |
vernono wrote:
(PLONK)
Monty Python
RUN AWAY!!!!!
/Monty Python
LOL!
|
Ummmmm
Verno reminds me of ASSman's and christ's love posting habits, both of
whom have recently disappeared |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
vernono
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:34 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4due1$tic$1@registered.motzarella.org...
| Quote: |
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4dsm6$jm4$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Snowman" <jkelley@zoomnet.net> wrote in message
news:682ae38a-770f-4c22-8d6d-1e556f504477@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
That's a very common interpretation. Country or entire region. It
could easily be what was said.
BUT independent of any biblical connection, the entire earth has been
under water several times
Not all at once, it wasn't.
ALL AT ONCE
Nope. Never happened.
|
Oh, gee you better tell that to the majority of geologists.
The earth STARTED as completely covered in water. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
vernono
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:40 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
<EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com> wrote in message
news:g4dut2$c79$6@reader2.panix.com...
| Quote: |
In alt.religion.christian John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
Come on, Vern. Put your money where your big, fat, stupid mouth is.
Show us how the flood story is in any way compatible with what we know
of physics. Prove it's anything other than a Bronze Age fairy tale.
This is stupid. He believes God is omnipotent. If there is anything
said in the Bible that is incompatible with physics, then God changed
Physics in that instance, or performed some other Miracle. To show that
Bible stories are compatible with science is to deny that the stories
recount miracles.
Faith dictates that the Bible not be riddled with lies. The Faithful
need answer only that "I bleeve in God and the Bible".
THose with insufficient faith try to show that no miracles are recounted
in the Bible. Those who bleeve in God need no rational explanations
for the events in the Bible. You may as well ask how a virgin birth is
possible, given our understanding of biology. Sorry - but God performs
Miracles (or so say the Faithful).
|
And you have no idea what you are talking about.
How do I know?
You have never read the bible.
You have never studied geology and the history of the earth.
You did learn how to lie.
I never said that which you accuse me of.
OOPS sorry ignorance outplays lies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sam Buckland
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:41 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
vernono wrote:
| Quote: |
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4due1$tic$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4dsm6$jm4$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Snowman" <jkelley@zoomnet.net> wrote in message
news:682ae38a-770f-4c22-8d6d-1e556f504477@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
That's a very common interpretation. Country or entire region. It
could easily be what was said.
BUT independent of any biblical connection, the entire earth has been
under water several times
Not all at once, it wasn't.
ALL AT ONCE
Nope. Never happened.
Oh, gee you better tell that to the majority of geologists.
|
Why? They already KNOW it never happened.
| Quote: |
The earth STARTED as completely covered in water.
|
In a word, "bullshit". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
vernono
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:43 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
<Esk@spamblock.panix.com> wrote in message
news:g4dubu$c79$5@reader2.panix.com...
| Quote: |
In alt.religion.christian vernono <vernono@there.com> wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
Too bad you have no education and have never researched this before.
Noah's flood or not, the size of the supposed ark has been shown feasible
over and over.
Only those with insufficient faith need to show that the events of the
Bible are "Feasible".
With God, all things are possible. If He wanted, He could have made Noah
and the animals spout gills to survive the flood. He could have
miniaturized them all. He could have made it so that they need not eat
for 10 months.
Feasibility is for those who do not trust their Faith in God. There is NO
reason for the sufficiently Faithful to "test" the feasibilty of the
inerrant word of the Lord.
|
Again ignorance and lies about what I even said. Total ignorance and
incapable of understanding.
You don't even know what the bible states. Of course you are no better off
than most so called Christians. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
vernono
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:46 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4e4p9$sop$1@registered.motzarella.org...
| Quote: |
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4due1$tic$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4dsm6$jm4$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Snowman" <jkelley@zoomnet.net> wrote in message
news:682ae38a-770f-4c22-8d6d-1e556f504477@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
That's a very common interpretation. Country or entire region. It
could easily be what was said.
BUT independent of any biblical connection, the entire earth has been
under water several times
Not all at once, it wasn't.
ALL AT ONCE
Nope. Never happened.
Oh, gee you better tell that to the majority of geologists.
Why? They already KNOW it never happened.
The earth STARTED as completely covered in water.
In a word, "bullshit".
|
No, water.
get an education. You have ZERO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sam Buckland
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:48 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
vernono wrote:
| Quote: |
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4e4p9$sop$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4due1$tic$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4dsm6$jm4$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Snowman" <jkelley@zoomnet.net> wrote in message
news:682ae38a-770f-4c22-8d6d-1e556f504477@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
That's a very common interpretation. Country or entire region. It
could easily be what was said.
BUT independent of any biblical connection, the entire earth has been
under water several times
Not all at once, it wasn't.
ALL AT ONCE
Nope. Never happened.
Oh, gee you better tell that to the majority of geologists.
Why? They already KNOW it never happened.
The earth STARTED as completely covered in water.
In a word, "bullshit".
No, water.
|
No, bullshit was correct.
| Quote: |
get an education. You have ZERO.
|
And yet, mine is apparently MUCH better than yours...
Go figure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:52 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
In alt.religion.christian vernono <vernono@there.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
You have never read the bible.
|
Wrong again. Oops!
| Quote: |
You have never studied geology and the history of the earth.
|
Oops!
| Quote: |
You did learn how to lie.
I never said that which you accuse me of.
|
So you DON't think that God is omniopoitent? That unless the story of
Noah is physically possible, it could not have happened?
Do you have insufficient faith to just bleeve it? Why do you need to
confirm that it is "possible"?
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:54 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
In alt.religion.christian vernono <vernono@there.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Esk@spamblock.panix.com> wrote in message
news:g4dubu$c79$5@reader2.panix.com...
In alt.religion.christian vernono <vernono@there.com> wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
Too bad you have no education and have never researched this before.
Noah's flood or not, the size of the supposed ark has been shown feasible
over and over.
Only those with insufficient faith need to show that the events of the
Bible are "Feasible".
With God, all things are possible. If He wanted, He could have made Noah
and the animals spout gills to survive the flood. He could have
miniaturized them all. He could have made it so that they need not eat
for 10 months.
Feasibility is for those who do not trust their Faith in God. There is NO
reason for the sufficiently Faithful to "test" the feasibilty of the
inerrant word of the Lord.
Again ignorance and lies about what I even said.
|
I made no claim that you said anything. Instead, I accused you of having
insufficient faith.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ralph
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:02 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
"vernono" <vernono@there.com> wrote in message
news:qGuak.43883$8k7.18611@fe111.usenetserver.com...
| Quote: |
"Wombat" <trigby@multiweb.nl> wrote in message
news:a344f765-f677-4721-85be-65afa294bc31@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On 1 Jul, 11:49, Pastor Dave <ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 01:19:38 -0700 (PDT), Snowman
jkel...@zoomnet.net> spake thusly:
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
Not true. But rather than get into word arguments,
let me say flat out, that what you are trying to do is
to find a way to compromise with man, because they
claim that you are stupid for believing what you do
and that "science proves you wrong", when no such
thing is true and in reality, you're just too lazy to
find out. And the time when you are "stupid",
is when you take the word of those who claim that
ideas based on an atheistic world view are true
and don't do REAL RESEARCH for yourself!!!
Now like I said, I won't bother with word arguments.
I will simply ask you... If the flood was only regional,
why didn't God just tell Noah to MOVE??? Hello??? :)
So when the gospel states that Caesar Augustus sent out a decree
saying the whole world was to be taxed (Luke 2:1) he was expecting the
civilisations in South America would send in their wack?
Wombat
Cute.
Always watch for context.
In my dealings with Nasa astrophysics. I heard several use the terms, four
corners of the earth or four corners of the universe.
At lunch one time someone said " the other side of the moon". Other said,
" there aint no sides."
It led to a full, fun discussion of how should we term
|
How much do those janitorial jobs at 'Nasa', pay? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ralph
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2008 2:04 am Post subject: Re: More scientific evidence of the flood of the BibleA new |
|
|
"vernono" <vernono@there.com> wrote in message
news:mYuak.187293$WG2.17993@fe117.usenetserver.com...
| Quote: |
"Sam Buckland" <nothing@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:g4dsm6$jm4$1@registered.motzarella.org...
vernono wrote:
"Snowman" <jkelley@zoomnet.net> wrote in message
news:682ae38a-770f-4c22-8d6d-1e556f504477@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
From what I've read,the word translated as "world" in the flood
account is more often used to mean "country" or "reigon".
"World" is a rather unusual translation for it.
That's a very common interpretation. Country or entire region. It
could easily be what was said.
BUT independent of any biblical connection, the entire earth has been
under water several times
Not all at once, it wasn't.
ALL AT ONCE
It started as totally under water. It was covered again several times
before the tectonics finally pushed very high mountains and very low spots
in the sea.
Did you know that the highest mountain (not highest above sea level) is
under water in the ocean?
|
The earth was never totally under water at the same time. It started out in
a molten state but it sure as hell wasn't water. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
