Documentary About The Flood and Noah's Ark

by Blue Grass 121 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • parakeet

    Perry: Everyone must place his trust in someone....don't you think?

    Islamic terrorists place their trust in Allah. Germans placed their trust in Hitler. The Inquisitors placed their trust in God. That all turned out well.....don't you think?

    The problem with totally trusting a human, a "god," or an ideal is that you're abdicating your responsibility as an adult human being to think for yourself. By allowing the human, god or ideal to do your thinking for you, whatever you do in his/her/its name results in actions that have not been critically considered. Belief in a deity can and often has allowed believers to commit atrocities without remorse.

    Grow up and take responsibility for your opinions instead of childishly repeating propaganda fed to you by people you probably should not have trusted.

    Floods, arks, and fairy tales. Grow up.

  • villabolo

    Parakeet said: ". . .Germans placed their trust in Hitler. . ."

    The nazis had a belt buckle that said, "Gott mit uns", meaning "God is with us". So Islamics, Inquisitors, Nazis and fundamentalist worshippers of American Jesus are all in the same God boat. All deities are projections of your own ego.


  • parakeet

    villabolo: All deities are projections of your own ego.

    And the ultimate excuse for evil.

    "'God' told me to do it." "It's God's will to slaughter innocents." "It's God's will to hate unbelievers." "It's Allah's will to fly jetliners into buildings." "It's God's will for me to believe in global floods, magical arks, and other fantasies written by ancient nutcakes."

  • darkl1ght3r

    parakeet - Tru dat. As silly as this might sound to a fundamentalist... I place my trust in myself. I trust my ability for reason, logic, and rationalism. As those are the only tools I have at my disposal to determine fact from fiction. (And you've also proven Godwin's Law!)

    villabolo - Good point. And to be fair, one can't say Hitler was necesserily a Christian either (not saying you did, but for the sake of clarity...), since his beliefs were rather murky. At times that he deemed it politically expediant, he professed anger at Jews for "killing the savior" and used other Christian themes in his speech. While there were also times that he expressed hatred towards Christianity. He was a savvy politician and often spoke out of both sides of his mouth. The one thing that can be certain however is that he was at least a deist, and believed he was doing God's work (whatever that meant). There's lots of good articles on the subject. Bottom line: No one knows for sure, but it's enough to say that he was just an evil bastard.

  • Billy the Ex-Bethelite
    Billy the Ex-Bethelite

    Here's the biggest problem I have with the story of Noah's ark...

    For forty days the flood kept coming on the earth, and as the waters increased they lifted the ark high above the earth. The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet.

    Every living thing that moved on the earth perished--birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died.

    Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

    The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days." Genesis 7

    Okay, only the animals... species... on the ark survived. Did anybody happen to mention that to this gal?


    So, there had to be a pair of kangaroos on the ark... or would it have to be 8 kangaroos, since there are actually four different species called kangaroos... well unless they all evolved from just the one pair. Wait, no evolution. Anyway, just to keep it really simple, suppose there were two generic kangaroos on the ark. And, let's just ignore the question of where they came from before the whole Noah story. Because at disembarkation with Noah's family and the sheep, and the cattle, and the goats, and the crocodiles, etc., where did the kangaroo go? Australia, of course... and only Australia... none stayed in Turkey or Iraq, or Europe, or Asia, or traveled to Africa, or the Americas... only Australia. Not one left behind. No fossils or ancient drawings in any part of the rest of the world. Only Australia. Did they all swim? or did the kangaroos jump all the way from Ararat to Australia? Reniaa once tried to explain that Noah took lots of embryos on the ark... one would think that Moses would have mentioned that detail.

    I don't think the kangaroos believe there was some flood that they survived in a boat that landed on Ararat and they ended up in remote Australia.

    Bears are another story. Noah would have had to take more than a dozen bears that now live around the world. Nope, it couldn't have been just two, because it would take major evolution to result in the differences between polar, grizzly, panda, koala, spectacled, brown, black, etc.

    It's a very logical and valid question how every species fit on the ark and how they got to their current home. To ancient minds, the flood story was completely rational, they only knew a few species that they ever saw in their lifetime. Yeah, that might have fit in the big floating box. Unfortunately for the Big Book of Jewish Fables, time has proven it to be out-of-touch with reality. It would have taken the space of multiple zoos to preserve the animals.

    It just seems bizarre that creationists, like JWs, would laud sky-daddy for the biodiversity... when it all would have been destroyed at the Noachian flood... along with lots and lots of babies.

  • avishai

    Yep, I'm afraid that secularists just aren't doing very well lately. Once, I posted some graphic images of aborted babies after they were chopped up. Needless to say the outcry was immediate and loud. However, it is a fact of modern life.... millions of little arms and legs dismembered, skulls crushed etc. It is legal to present these images to the public, but most simply cannot psychologically handle this reality. Just because it is suppressed, doesn't mean this grim reality doesn't exist. The dino issue is similar.
    To this and many other inconvenient facts I say to my opponents:

    Hell no, I won't "deal with it". Your damn lucky I didn't open that page, especially as I have a 7 year old. Had I opened it and my child was around, getting you kicked off this forum would have been my mission in life. It always blows my mind that assholes like you complain the most about film/video game, etc content, but have no problem with parading abortion and "dead guy on a stick" murder porn around where little ones can see it.

  • The Almighty Homer
    The Almighty Homer

    Perry a weak mind and a lack of critical thinking skills creates a discerningly weak character.

  • darkl1ght3r

    Billy! Great post! But that was going to be along the lines of my next post! You're lucky I'm not as childish or prone to temper tantrums like Jehovah, the cosmicly transcendent 5-year-old. lol Seriously though... very well stated.

  • villabolo
  • darkl1ght3r

    Oh yes, and about your "ancient dino pictures", those have been proven to be a hoax. And the few that arn't hoaxes are so ambiguous that the animals could be almost anything (like the pic you posted). Basically a few smart naitive peoples figured out that stupid fundamentalist tourists would buy folksy trinkets with pictures of dinos on them.

    For example... from the Wikipedia entry on your "Ica Stones":

    "The stones are reported to have been found in caves and stream beds. Because they are rocks and contain no organic material, Carbon-14 dating cannot be used. No other method of radiometric dating has been applied to the stones. Because the supposed locations of their alleged discovery have not been disclosed, it is impossible to estimate their age based on nearby geological strata. Furthermore, even a confirmation of the rocks' age would not prove that the engravings upon them had not been produced at a later date.

    Neil Steede, an archaeologist who was investigating the Ica stones for The Mysterious Origins of Man (a film which attempted to make the case that humans had existed far earlier than previously thought), said that he found no patina on the engravings but that the rocks themselves showed patina, suggesting that the engravings are indeed younger than the rocks. [citation needed]

    In 1998, Spanish investigator Vicente Paris declared after four years of investigation that the evidence indicates that the stones are a hoax. Among the proofs presented by this investigator were microphotographs of the stones that showed traces of modern paints and abrasives. The strongest evidence of fraud as claimed is the crispness of the shallow engravings; stones of great age should have substantial erosion of the surfaces. [3]"


    Ohhhh.... burn. Creationists arn't doing so well lately...

Share this