Did Noahs Arc Really Happen

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
652

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.

Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.

[/quote]

I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.

And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[/quote]

I fail to see where you have debated anything in this entire thread. You make a claim then walk away. You don’t articulate that point, and you don’t defend it. You just make a claim about it. If this is such a waste of your time, then why are you wasting your time posting at all?

Who ever said we would solve this? the whole point of these threads is for people to engage and challenge existing ideas. I have no problem with your view point, I don’t particularly care for your style of make a comment and then leave it with out defending it, or supporting it.

You claim there are volumes of data that affirm your position on the Bible. Great! provide one and then let someone debate it. Other wise stop saying you don’t want to debate it, and then turning around and making a similiar claim.[/quote]

I think theBodyGuard is working on his math homework right now. I also think that he uses Sarcasim all the time, so he really does not beleive the stuff he puts on here. He is just being the good sarcastic troll that he is.

Feel free to talk amongst yourselves.

653

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.

Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.

[/quote]

I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.

And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[/quote]

I fail to see where you have debated anything in this entire thread. You make a claim then walk away. You don’t articulate that point, and you don’t defend it. You just make a claim about it. If this is such a waste of your time, then why are you wasting your time posting at all?

Who ever said we would solve this? the whole point of these threads is for people to engage and challenge existing ideas. I have no problem with your view point, I don’t particularly care for your style of make a comment and then leave it with out defending it, or supporting it.

You claim there are volumes of data that affirm your position on the Bible. Great! provide one and then let someone debate it. Other wise stop saying you don’t want to debate it, and then turning around and making a similiar claim.[/quote]

Let me be clear. I don’t care what iota that you “don’t particularly care for (my) stle of make(ing) a comment”. The arguments for both sides are not original, they have been raging, quite literally for 100’s of years. I make the comment I do b/c there is nothing either side could add to this existing “debate” that hasn’t been chewed on now for a long long time. If you care enough about the so called “debate” you will run along and do YOUR research.

I can provide a reference for just about anything - easy enough to do. However, no one on the other side is going to throw up their arms and surrender and say, “eureka”. The answer will always be to attack the scholarship of the point, point to differing opinions (which there always is among academics) and of course, last but not least, answer with “it’s a matter of faith”. There is nothing new to be debated here sir. It’s ALL old ground.

And I did make a point in my last post! I guffawed at anyone that reads Adam and Eve and the apple as literal. That is a point. By default, my point is that it is not a literal historical occurrence, and that any conclusions drawn from starting with this position is akin to starting your argument with a story about the tooth fairy. Next, I again stated to the particular poster that attempting to prove the veracity of the Bible by referencing the Bible is a non-starter.

Frankly, I don’t care whether you approve of the style by which I expressed the above. So stop wasting your time commenting upon it.

654

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.

Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.

[/quote]

I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.

And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[/quote]

I fail to see where you have debated anything in this entire thread. You make a claim then walk away. You don’t articulate that point, and you don’t defend it. You just make a claim about it. If this is such a waste of your time, then why are you wasting your time posting at all?

Who ever said we would solve this? the whole point of these threads is for people to engage and challenge existing ideas. I have no problem with your view point, I don’t particularly care for your style of make a comment and then leave it with out defending it, or supporting it.

You claim there are volumes of data that affirm your position on the Bible. Great! provide one and then let someone debate it. Other wise stop saying you don’t want to debate it, and then turning around and making a similiar claim.[/quote]

I think theBodyGuard is working on his math homework right now. I also think that he uses Sarcasim all the time, so he really does not beleive the stuff he puts on here. He is just being the good sarcastic troll that he is.

Feel free to talk amongst yourselves.[/quote]

Oh, what is that from you good Christian? Contempt and hatred? Shouldn’t you by lovingly guiding me to the Truth? I’d rather be sarcastic than a hypocrite.

655

If you notice though, in just about every thread about religion somebody shows up, makes a comment, posts a cartoon, or something slamming religion. When somebody tries to debate with the person they just make statements like “religion is a fantasy” and claim you are closed minded for not realizing it. This thread is no different. It may be different people or it may be the same. I say just ignore them. Nothing gets their panties in a wad more than not even recognizing their comments.

656

[quote]BBriere wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.

Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.

[/quote]

This is why I started a new thread trying to make it geared towards a logical discussion. If someone says “your God is fake,” and I say “God is real” then who wins. Nobody. I tried to cite a source on this thread and one person who argued against me said they weren’t my secretary and didn’t have to look anything else up. Fine, you don’t want to do the research. Debate over. Come over the my thread and discuss whatever you like.[/quote]

Why do you think there is a conclusion to reach? Shouldn’t a “debate” reach a conclusion? There is no reference, no source that will ever move this debate to a conclusion. There is a ton of material out there to keep anyone interested busy for the rest of their lives. At the end of the day, it cannot be answered like a math question. It will always be “your God is fake”, “God is real”. If there was a unified truth to reach, don’t you think it would have been reached by now? By the rest of the world? It’s pointless.

657

[quote]BBriere wrote:
Nothing gets their panties in a wad more than not even recognizing their comments. [/quote]

I’d be quite content if you and a few others did just that.

658

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.

Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.

[/quote]

I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.

And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[/quote]

I fail to see where you have debated anything in this entire thread. You make a claim then walk away. You don’t articulate that point, and you don’t defend it. You just make a claim about it. If this is such a waste of your time, then why are you wasting your time posting at all?

Who ever said we would solve this? the whole point of these threads is for people to engage and challenge existing ideas. I have no problem with your view point, I don’t particularly care for your style of make a comment and then leave it with out defending it, or supporting it.

You claim there are volumes of data that affirm your position on the Bible. Great! provide one and then let someone debate it. Other wise stop saying you don’t want to debate it, and then turning around and making a similiar claim.[/quote]

And I did make a point in my last post! I guffawed at anyone that reads Adam and Eve and the apple as literal. That is a point. By default, my point is that it is not a literal historical occurrence, and that any conclusions drawn from starting with this position is akin to starting your argument with a story about the tooth fairy. Next, I again stated to the particular poster that attempting to prove the veracity of the Bible by referencing the Bible is a non-starter.

[/quote]

I never said you didn’t make a point I said you don’t articulate that point

“You don’t articulate that point, and you don’t defend it. You just make a claim about it.”

659

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]haney1 wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

To be absolutely honest with you, I think you’re a certifiable nut. I honestly did not read past the first paragraph or so where you started talking about Adam eating an apple from a tree. You write this tale as if you believe in it literally…and that’s when I knew I didn’t need to read your nonsense anymore. I don’t know what else you wrote, but you claimed ot have done “research”. It appears that your research did not extend beyond the Bible.

Furthermore, and again, I don’t know what else you wrote - I will not read it, you claim God had “no other choice” but to communicate his message thru imperfect humans. LOL. That does not deserve rebuttal. It is a ridiculous claim beyond the pale.
[/quote]
Bodyguard why do you even post in these threads? You don’t want to debate, you don’t have time as you have said over and over again. Most of what you do are drive by quips with very little substance. You constantly appeal to authority, or some form of mass information out there “if we are willing to look”. It is obvious at this point you are doing nothing more than trolling in this thread. So either actually engage in a conversation and post counter points or lets this God forsaken thread die out. Please either make a point and argue that point or move along.

[/quote]

I’m not trolling. And I’m not a librarian. I’m not going to run off and cite references that are there for anyone that wants to do a bit of digging. This VERY “DEBATE” has raged on for centuries. Do you think anyone here is going to bring a “eureka” moment to the thread? No. So, references or not, we’re all trolling? Unfortunately, this is not a math question with a solution, and even if it were, there are those of us here that would simply have “faith” that 2+2 = 5.

And I did make a point in my last post. You cannot “prove” the bible by referencing the bible.
[/quote]

I fail to see where you have debated anything in this entire thread. You make a claim then walk away. You don’t articulate that point, and you don’t defend it. You just make a claim about it. If this is such a waste of your time, then why are you wasting your time posting at all?

Who ever said we would solve this? the whole point of these threads is for people to engage and challenge existing ideas. I have no problem with your view point, I don’t particularly care for your style of make a comment and then leave it with out defending it, or supporting it.

You claim there are volumes of data that affirm your position on the Bible. Great! provide one and then let someone debate it. Other wise stop saying you don’t want to debate it, and then turning around and making a similiar claim.[/quote]

I think theBodyGuard is working on his math homework right now. I also think that he uses Sarcasim all the time, so he really does not beleive the stuff he puts on here. He is just being the good sarcastic troll that he is.

Feel free to talk amongst yourselves.[/quote]

Oh, what is that from you good Christian? Contempt and hatred? Shouldn’t you by lovingly guiding me to the Truth? I’d rather be sarcastic than a hypocrite.
[/quote]

Sarcasim at 30,000 feet. I guess you missed that one.

Contempt and hatred? Come on now. You are older than this.

660


If God really wrote the Bible, this particular pic wouldn’t be here.

It’s not hard to tell someone that a close enough approximation is 22/7.

Even by the standards of the time it was written in, pi = 3.00 is a fucking terrible estimate. The Egyptians and Greeks both had much closer values.

662

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
If God really wrote the Bible, this particular pic wouldn’t be here.

It’s not hard to tell someone that a close enough approximation is 22/7.

Even by the standards of the time it was written in, pi = 3.00 is a fucking terrible estimate. The Egyptians and Greeks both had much closer values.[/quote]

That aint gonna fly, Chuckie. You are truly desperate.[/quote]

Interesting dodge. But a creator who can give instructions on how to make a giant love boat for all the animals he chose to let live isn’t going to be an idiot when it comes to approximating pi.

664

[quote]BBriere wrote:
If you notice though, in just about every thread about religion somebody shows up, makes a comment, posts a cartoon, or something slamming religion. When somebody tries to debate with the person they just make statements like “religion is a fantasy” and claim you are closed minded for not realizing it. This thread is no different. It may be different people or it may be the same. I say just ignore them. Nothing gets their panties in a wad more than not even recognizing their comments. [/quote]

Oh, delicious sweet irony.

665

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:
If God really wrote the Bible, this particular pic wouldn’t be here.

It’s not hard to tell someone that a close enough approximation is 22/7.

Even by the standards of the time it was written in, pi = 3.00 is a fucking terrible estimate. The Egyptians and Greeks both had much closer values.[/quote]

That aint gonna fly, Chuckie. You are truly desperate.[/quote]

Interesting dodge. But a creator who can give instructions on how to make a giant love boat for all the animals he chose to let live isn’t going to be an idiot when it comes to approximating pi.[/quote]

That would be strike 2, Mort.[/quote]

Your ability to dodge the question at hand is legendary pushie, but unless you plan on making a post of substance instead of bad jokes I’m tempted to pull an Ephrem and put you on ignore. I really can’t be bothered scrolling past your posts from here on out.

If we are talking about desperation, how about you look at the fact that:

  1. You stole Sloths line about my parents.
  2. You actually think bringing my parents into this is appropriate. Not just generalizations, which I wouldn’t care about, but you went out of your way to target my parents specifically.

Desperate indeed.

667

[quote]Makavali wrote:
If God really wrote the Bible, this particular pic wouldn’t be here.

It’s not hard to tell someone that a close enough approximation is 22/7.

Even by the standards of the time it was written in, pi = 3.00 is a fucking terrible estimate. The Egyptians and Greeks both had much closer values.[/quote]

I don’t know Mak. If this particular scripture was there to prove the value of Pi then yes there would be serious doubt. But in it’s contexzt its just describing a structure to lay people - in which case pi = 3 isn’t that fucking terrible an estimate.

I’m an atheist and I think there are enough contradictions in the bible and hypocrisy within christendom that you don’t have to resort to taking things out of context and assign them a meaning that isn’t there.

It was an intersting example though. One I hadn’t seen before. I had to look the scripture up.

668

[quote]pushharder wrote:

As far as the Ignore deal…adios, pussy.[/quote]

Aw and you two used to be such good friends. Why can’t we all just get a long? I’m going to go hug a muslim.

670

[quote]Makavali wrote:
If God really wrote the Bible, this particular pic wouldn’t be here.

It’s not hard to tell someone that a close enough approximation is 22/7.

Even by the standards of the time it was written in, pi = 3.00 is a fucking terrible estimate. The Egyptians and Greeks both had much closer values.[/quote]

LMAO - that’s your argument? Seriously? what would have made you happy here, exact formulaic expression to the 10,000th decimal or just 1,000th,maybe 100th

For the measurement unit being used it is as exact as needed. How many .1 cubic measurements expressions do we find anywhere in history? oh right - never happened anywhere . . .

671

[quote]pushharder wrote:

Aw, he’ll come around. He’s not a bad kid. Just an angry one for some reason. [/quote]

He needs to open his heart to Jesus Christ and accept him as his saviour.