Fighting the fight

[astroron (Ron)]

Nevyn, you may as well ask the question, why do we have two nostrils, two eyes or any other organ, just to say we can get by with only one makes no sense.
Earlier in our evolutionary past we may have needed two, more so than today

[Nevyn]

So, I find it somewhat difficult to reconcile the literal interpretation of the story of the flood and the ark with my common day knowledge. I even wonder if today, with all our science and engineering abilities, could we build a vessel large enough to house all these creatures, which would also hold enough food and water to sustain them for seven weeks? How long would it take to find these creatures, then transport and shepherd them into this ark?

Dennis, I hope you read the artical I have supplied on the Ark. It does a very good job of pointing out that the Bible says "two of every kind" and not two of every living species, the latter being the "Bible illiterate's" take on events. Here is the link titled "How did the animals fit on the ark?" I hope it helps you see from a different perspective
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home.../arksize13.asp

Originally Posted by Glenn Dawes

Dennis,

You have made a great observation here, which goes to the heart of this discussion. The literal interruption of the bible is filled with examples like that. The Noah’s arc story is small compared to creating the Universe and world in 7 days. The experts will tell you, over the few thousand years claimed by ID, the Earth’s human population could not have grown to where it is now, not to mention the level of diversity in the gene pool across all species, not just Man. I suppose the Creationists comeback would be God can do anything – he just waves his hands. Maybe, but it is impossible to have a rational discussion around this – you either believe it or not.




I have enjoyed all the posts and would like to thank everyone for opening up and I have the deepest respect for those who were willing to stick their necks out. However, I see little benefit in continuing the thread but would prefer to continue with a chat over a beer, under the stars (maybe at Kulnura?). It’s a subject I’m always happy to discuss.

Regards

Glenn

Actually Glenn, Creation only took Six days! God rested on the seventh
I might take you up on the beer one day

Cheers Brad

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by Nevyn

Creation only took Six days! God rested on the seventh

and you would know? Maybe the laws of quantum mechanics that suggest a few billion years are wrong?


and which came first, beasts or man?

was it:

GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

or was it:

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.


Sir I am confused by my Bible!!!!!

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by Nevyn

the Bible says "two of every kind" and not two of every living species, the latter being the "Bible illiterate's" take on events.

It actually says:

GEN 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.


but then goes on to say....


GEN 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, GEN 7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

does anyone really believe this stuff???

[Dennis]

The Memphis Zoo's Annual Grocery List. 3,000 hungry mouths each day

Fresh Foods:
15 tons carrots
15 tons apples
7 tons oranges
9,000 eggs
8,500 heads of lettuce
1,200 pounds onions
60 miles of bananas

Prepared and Frozen Foods:
100 tons calf feed
50 tons horse feed
12 tons feline diet
10 tons dog feed
20 tons herring
18 tons dry primate diet
5 tons bird of prey diet
8 tons smelts, sardines & other seafood
15 tons canine diet
2.5 tons bird seed
600 pounds shrimp

Grasses:
60 tons grass hay
55 tons alfalfa hay
1,200 bales wheat straw
30 tons alfalfa cubes

Other foods:
800,000 crickets
40,318,000 meal worms
200,000 minnows
97,680 rats and mice
30 pounds other worms

The Memphis Zoo's Annual Grocery Bill: US $300,000

[ving (David)]

and in the other foods section you would have to make sure you saved 2 of every item so they didnt get eaten.

[Argonavis (William)]

Numbers of species:

As a guide the numbers of identified species can be broken down as follows:

287,655 plants, including: 15,000 mosses, 13,025 ferns, 980 gymnosperms,
199,350 dicotyledons, 59,300 monocotyledons; 74,000-120,000 fungi;
10,000 lichens;

1,250,000 animals, including: 1,190,200 invertebrates: 950,000 insects,
70,000 molluscs, 40,000 crustaceans, 130,200 others; 58,808 vertebrates:
29,300 fish, 5,743 amphibians, 8,240 reptiles, 9,934 birds, 5,416 mammals.

However the total number of species is thought to be much higher.

These are all held in the big Ark we call Earth.

[ving (David)]

is it posible that thru some sort of divine intervention (cause lets face it god gets what he wants as he is all powerful) the animals didnt need feeding during the period of the flood and for some time after while species of plant and animal restocked?

[xelasnave]

What a difference a day makes.. look at the erxciting things we are learning here... not as much as to the beliefs of each person but the fact that we can be absolutely opposed to the other persons point of view and still manage a civil responce. These conversations can be frustrating in so far as you can feel as if you are banging your head against a brick wall in respect of gaining a simple admission from the other side.. and I sense that frustration is on both sides.. I can see people wringing their hands, breath shortning as they pull their chair closer to the screen to deliver a lethal blow in a answer all responces.
But just to show I dont accept "accepted" science I reinterate my belief that the current most popular and suposedly most proved scientific theory ... the big bang is in error... well thats my view. Big bang turns on inflation and although the background radiation results support the big bang (because that finally supports inflation) I still question the proposition that all we see could grow at the rate of a trillion times in the space of a mere "split" second...
This to me is as fanciful as saying God created the Heavens and Earth etc in six days... Why a God would need to rest one day out of seven completly eludes my reason..I am not a God (I only believe I am as good as one) but when I am building something I dont rest when it is still incomplete...and if God walked away on day 6 I say he left a lot of "paper" undone..work that humans are trying to still sort out 6000 years later..
I still say can we not embrace the concerns of religious folk by letting them have a scripture class and teach intelligent design, ark building and decency.
I agree with Dough that the evolutionary approach lets man off the hook from an emotional and a moral point of view somewhat but the alternative to say he has dominion over the animals etc also leaves room for a belief that everything is here for mans use and consumption. I dont agree with Dough that the Bible of reason was written in a manner that was clear even to those of that time being left soley to interpret its meaning on a "clear" speaking basis. My references to the horsemen and the Book of Proverbs is a good place to start to provide evidence for my belief as to the merit of meaning within the Bible...all the Bible. But faith alows one to read and accept what sits well and disregard that which does not..science does not in fact support such a system it requires proven fact.. The reason why so much effort is placed on "proving" background radiation has to do with if its not there big bang is dead in the water..still big bang has this over ID ..it is going thru the motions to turn the idea to theory with observation and experiment.
All sides have their story.. (and to mind comes a nice writting contained in???? ..something that is famous enough all should know of itwell from where ever it came here it is...
"Listen to the dull and the ignorant for they to have their story"..that is not to say anyone fits that bill here but it is a reminer that even in the simplest of stories there is a message.
I will come forward and rightfully claim the title "dull and ignorant" and with such authority say to everyone... Whoever gave it to you, history or God, you have brain with the ability to assess the facts, simply make sure you work on the facts you can reasonably rely upon. Always be prepared for the disappointment that your Santa does not really exsist.. and then remember that even so one can still enjoy the event and the feasting ..the show can really go on without Santa ..when you think about it... and the Pope did not help me with that one but maybe he thinks similar .. There are so many sites on the net one can find support for any thing you wish... So be careful, be reasonable but be responsive in a proper fashion.
alex

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by ving

is it posible that thru some sort of divine intervention (cause lets face it god gets what he wants as he is all powerful) the animals didnt need feeding during the period of the flood and for some time after while species of plant and animal restocked?

maybe divine intervention made them float on water and become breatharians, but this minor detail is overlooked in the good book

what other laws of nature would you like to suspend to hold on to your beliefs?

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

But just to show I dont accept "accepted" science I reinterate my belief that the current most popular and suposedly most proved scientific theory ... the big bang is in error... well thats my view. Big bang turns on inflation and although the background radiation results support the big bang (because that finally supports inflation) I still question the proposition that all we see could grow at the rate of a trillion times in the space of a mere "split" second...
alex

The Big Bang has stood the test of time, and is almost universally accepted since the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation that permeates the cosmos.

The inflationary epoch is also becoming accepted as evidence to support it mounts. True, it is not known what initiated this event, but given time this will be discovered.

There is just no other explanation for the observations, other than divine treachery in making it look like it is.

[Argonavis (William)]

I don't suppose I can help myself, but for people who take literal truth for literal truth, here is my favourite quote from my favourite TV program (you need to look at it all till the end)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHaVUjjH3EI

[Argonavis (William)]

or the short version

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBwHu...elated&search=

[xelasnave]

We need a "Third Testament" I recon.. fixing the minor problems in the "old" parts of the book..which of course with a "Third Testament" means both the Old and New Testament will be the old parts of the book.
I have been told by those of faith that God guided the hands of the writers and the editors of the Bible so that one could rely upon the truths contained therein.. The fact that I thought to write the third testament must mean devine inspiration I guess.. me who would have thought.. mmm AND when God saw the way his words had been misconstruded he sent his angle to visit upon the mountain with alex to intruct him with words that he may take to the rest of the human race to enlighten them.. OK then..you had better listen, this is not just any fool speaking but an extra special fool.. er that didnot go over the way it should have...well my prophesy is that we all leave the planet for the heavens..not live in heaven that is one of the misconceptions I have to fix.. and judgemnet day is only a day when the Sun goes to being a full red giant..but in my version we will all be long gone by then our decendants who having evolved under Gods plan can stand back and what the show.
But if I admit to devine guidance and hearing the word of God (like so many before me and recorded in the bible as recieving Godly news in that fashion) who would come forward and say.. he has it! read his words! this it is true it came to him in a dream where an angle told him to write the next testament..Who would say he heard the words from God? as they did so many times when talking about various propositions in the Bible where some one literally "heard" the word.. I think I may be diagnosed with a mental disorder by both sides...
Still a third testament would be timely to fix up the little hickups various folk have pointed out with both of the "older" books.
My point is... faith is faith.. and faith answers any question so as to support the belief of the proponent..
Take my idea on gravity rain (dont worry if its news to you it is an example of a belief as oppossed to a scientific fact..a theory shall we say if it had experiment to back it up.. I say everything I read supports it.. people who know I am wrong simply shake their heads and say .."let the poor fool be..there is no point arguing with him he is lost in a Universe filled with gravity rain". AND they would be right.. if I am right or wrong has little to do with my faith in my idea..any thing that seeks to overthrow it I sortta leave out of my thinking for the time being until I can fit it in my Universe the way I want it to fit.. is there a message here for others who have more smarts than me?.. still explaining my condition and making you understanding of my morosophic condition again does not make gravity rain science.. faith can not be science.. that is what all here for the "faith" side seem to step around.. and I know you will correct me if that is an unfair call but is it an unfair call?.. thats the way it seems to me.
All please agree to disagree this fence sitting is a pain in the butt.
aklex

[xelasnave]

Argonavis said..........
"The Big Bang has stood the test of time, and is almost universally accepted since the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation that permeates the cosmos".
I know that and possibly a little more however my point is to demonstrate that at a personal level even though there is "possible" evidence for me I have not excepted the evidence for inflation simply as I think it is possible that the background radiation is misinterpreted..now it matters not if I am right or wrong but I would like to think that as I have misgivings I simply just dont say "they know better" "I have faith" or similar..I look at the evidence until it makes sence..to me..at this stage it does not sit well... I dont like those of "faith" simply let the world tell me they know it all... The reason I mention this is there seems to be a problem with many that past a certain recognition of the content they look no further..
It is not easy turning your back on the big bang and creationist at the same time..everyone thinks you are crazy in truth whereas all you have before you is someone who says I aint heard enoughto convince me.. I say its a pity (not only referring to the big bang but other matters mmmm well in the bible that dont convince me..a fair minded cynic.
Give me about two years and big bang will be a thing of the past..ha ha thing of the past..it is now I guess.
Thanks but my mind is made up..there was no big bang, there is no santa clause and there is no justice dealt out by fundamentalists of any group who seek to rule science with mere faith.
alex

[Argonavis (William)]

Science will espouse the big bang and inflation until it is falsified - until the evidence proves it wrong. Then science will modify or junk the big bang.

Alex - what evidence would convice you that you are wrong?

How amenable are you to evidence - whether it is evidence based medicine or cosmology?

[Nevyn]

Originally Posted by Argonavis

and which came first, beasts or man?

was it:

GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

or was it:

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.


Sir I am confused by my Bible!!!!!

This fella does a way better job of unconfusing you than I could! http://www.answersingenesis.org/crea...i4/genesis.asp

Originally Posted by Argonavis

It actually says:

GEN 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.


but then goes on to say....


GEN 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, GEN 7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

does anyone really believe this stuff???

Argonavis, I see you have conveniently skipped;
‘And you shall bring into the ark two of every kind of every living thing of all flesh, to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. Two of every kind shall come to you to keep them alive; of birds after their kind, and of beasts after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind.’ (Gen. 6:19–20)

Genesis 7:2 talks of clean.....not clean. Here the distinction is to do with sacrifice (Gen8:20); later, with eating.
Genesis 7:8-9 is a basic description of everything entering the Ark "as God had commanded Noah."

does anyone really believe this stuff???

Yes! If you want to do a Bible study, I'm up for it But if you really want to believe by flapping your arms that either you or your offspring will grow wings, thats up to you (thats a joke btw)

[ving (David)]

Originally Posted by Argonavis

maybe divine intervention made them float on water and become breatharians, but this minor detail is overlooked in the good book

what other laws of nature would you like to suspend to hold on to your beliefs?

I was poking fun a bit... like i have said, i am not a religious person at all. but why not? god could in theory do anything.

Originally Posted by Nevyn

But if you really want to believe by flapping your arms that either you or your offspring will grow wings, thats up to you (thats a joke btw)

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by Nevyn

‘And you shall bring into the ark two of every kind of every living thing of all flesh, to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. Two of every kind shall come to you to keep them alive; of birds after their kind, and of beasts after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind.’ (Gen. 6:19–20))

so it was only a few of every kind - so how many were there? and how did we end up with 1.8 million species on the Earth at present?

if you could fit even a fraction of 1.8 million in an Ark I would recommend you a career working at the docks.

and of course there is no evidence of a world wide flood or deluge, nor is there evidence of an Ark, despite the attempts of some to look for it and even fabricate it.

Originally Posted by Nevyn

Yes! If you want to do a Bible study, I'm up for it But if you really want to believe by flapping your arms that either you or your offspring will grow wings, thats up to you (thats a joke btw)

I don't believe that and I don't know of anyone who does. That is not how evolution works.

speaking of wings, i like this:

http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1795700.htm

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by ving

I was poking fun a bit... like i have said, i am not a religious person at all. but why not? god could in theory do anything.

I clearly have yet to capture the essence of ving humour