Religion

[Deleted member 77198]

Did he allow ants on board ?

If so what about termites, I think it is only fair that they have a chance on the last boat to salvation.

Maybe he wanted them eradicated like in Devon

 

[Deleted member 77198]

Well I think that the problem is pride , man thinks he is wise in his own eyes. We so often deny reality and don't face up to ourselves so that we get to the end of ourselves and resolve to turn to the Almighty.
Everyone is religious in that they have an ideology to promote. Atheists believe matter comes into existence uncaused. It is delusional. But that doesn't stop it from being promoted in every university , school government etc. Others we the same ilk say we get reincarnated incessantly and finally into annihilation , existence memory obliterated. Pretty grim. But what is the best ideology? What is the truth?What is the true faith? They cannot all be true because they are so different. Christ says His Word is true. He tells us not to be proudful as none of us can boast. We have all done some not so good things in our lives if we are honest . Our pride stops us from admitting it. But He has provided a joyful blissful way out of that despair if we can humbly face reality.

No we don’t. We just don’t believe it was created by the fiction of humans minds called god or gods.

And like I asked a few pages ago, what created and caused “god” into “existence”? If you don’t have an answer, that’s actually exactly what religious people think, if you think “god” came into existence uncaused.

 

[Blue Mist]

Maybe he wanted them eradicated like in Devon

Well he clearly failed.

Tosser

 

[Elbow beards]

All them animals were clever cunts, they all managed to find their way home from Turkey, cross oceans and seas, all without leaving a trace of their existence outside of their natural habitat. Kangaroo's thought 'well we could just live here? No fuck it we'll travel thousands of miles to the far east then have a big swim back to oz'

 

[Blue Mist]

All them animals were clever cunts, they all managed to find their way home from Turkey, cross oceans and seas, all without leaving a trace of their existence outside of their natural habitat. Kangaroo's thought 'well we could just live here? No fuck it we'll travel thousands of miles to the far east then have a big swim back to oz'

I think that you will find that Noah dropped them off (he was good like that) apart from Kanga, he refused to get off and travelled back to the Hundred Acre Wood where he lived happily ever after.

 

[JASR]

I think that you will find that Noah dropped them off (he was good like that) apart from Kanga, he refused to get off and travelled back to the Hundred Acre Wood where he lived happily ever after.

Ahh finally a decent book of multiple stories is mentioned in the thread.

 

[vmsuhail]

So we are now ignoring historical facts? The Arab slave trade is a historical fact a event that happened. That means the arabs travelled to the mainland africa... I cant take you serious if you are going to choose to be ignorant.

As for your question relating to being more moral than jesus, paul etc. This is why i know this is a pointless discussion. It is islam and mohammed that claims to be the perfect moral example for mankind for all times. Islam is the one that makes those claims. Not paul, not aristotle, paul or plato. So why should i have to defend them? You are making the claim, not me. I am simply saying that based on evidence, you have no grounds to make that claim. Mohammed is nowhere close to being a morally / perfect example for mankind. But you still pray to him and see him as an example for mankind.

I dont believe in Christianity or jesus, but i could look at evidence and say he did not enslave people, he did not rape the people he enslaved, he did not wage war or killed people. So Jesus, if he was real, would have indeed lived a more morally righteous life than Mohammed yes.

I'm not denying history. I haven't seen any references to Arabs doing slave trading in Africa when I studied history of Muhammad(saw) (AD 571-AD 623). Even if there was, my point is that Muhammad(saw) and his companions didn't have a hand in slave trade to Africa. You need to first separate Arabs and Muslims of early 6th century A.D. to understand this. You are the one who has got history mixed up and went on to make outlandish claims like there was a slave rebellion against Muhammad(saw).

It's you who made the moral equation saying I'm more moral than Muhammad(saw). So I put the same question back to you in your style - Are "you" more moral than Jesus(as), Paul, Plato, Aristotle as they didn't speak against slavery but you do. You have replied 3 times since and still haven't answered Yes/No. The comparison of Muhammad(saw) with Jesus(as) was also brought up earlier (again you did it, not me) and I've already explained why it doesn't make any sense. It seems you have lost track of all what we discussed. Go back and check it out instead of parroting the same "kill/enslave/rape".

Islam's claim is that all prophets are examples for mankind, not just Muhammad(saw). It's one of the legacies of Muhammad(saw) that today we have a community of believers that love and respect all prophets of the Bible and Qur'an. I see Muhammad(saw) as a reformist and an example in this issue of slavery, and he addressed this issue as well as he could. The Bible also says Jesus(as) is the way, the life and the truth. Every religion makes such claims, not just Islam as you say. What we consider as moral/righteous is based on the divine Laws, not based on 21st century morality. Muhammad(saw)/Jesus(as)/Lord Ram etc. lived a life in accordance with those laws thereby becoming an example for their followers.

I don't pray to Muhammad(saw). Where did you get that from ? I pray to God, not any mortal prophet.

 

[tonea2003]

You present a false dilemma , false dichotomy where you try to make a person choose between two unrelated options. But in this case it so happens there exists a text where ,again, Jesus is proclaiming divinity.
Jesus is rejected at Nazareth Luke 6 saying that the "Scriptures are fulfilled today in your hearing ... a prophet is not welcome in his hometown etc etc " . The Messianic claim in Isaiah 61 was fulfilled and they got hold of Him they were so angry He " insulted" their town for its rejection of Him and brought him to a cliff to throw Him over and kill Him for blasphemy. Nazareth is on a hill ,plenty of cliffs. He escaped from the crowd and they were thwarted.
Any other false dilemmas ;-) ?

it is not a false dilemma, the gospel purported to be written by john paints a picture of a completely different person(one that should of been stoned right out of the gate) to the one lets say purported to be written by mark.
how is it unrelated? we are supposedly talking about the same person, it is as related as it gets

 

[paulsimpson]

Ignorance that's a bit rich coming from an evangelical Christian.

I burst out laughing at the idiocy of your comment.

A great big fucking boat with no sails, no oars, no propulsion system. Bobbing along on a flooded world.

Why does it need a propulsion system, sails etc

?
The boat only needs to float until the flood subsides and it lands on the Mountains of Ararat .

 

[paulsimpson]

it is not a false dilemma, the gospel purported to be written by john paints a picture of a completely different person(one that should of been stoned right out of the gate) to the one lets say purported to be written by mark.
how is it unrelated? we are supposedly talking about the same person, it is as related as it gets

The synoptic Gospels and John's Gospel tell of Jesus' divinity. They talk about the same person. Just because the synoptics don't talk specifically about a stoning event
( but they do mention attempts to kill Him) doesn't mean they are talking about a different person. It just means narrative from differing angles according to each Gospel writer.

 

[Big Joe Corrigan]

I’m a competent diy-er, but I would struggle to make a small water based leisure craft, so I do wonder how Noah was able to make such a huge boat with what I imagine was little in the way of woodworking skills and even less boat building knowledge?

 

[paulsimpson]

Not we don’t. We just don’t believe it was created by the fiction of humans minds called god or gods.

And like I asked a few pages ago, what created and caused “god” into “existence”? If you don’t have an answer, that’s actually exactly what religious people think, if you think “god” came into existence uncaused.

Your question posits an infinite regress. A logical impossibility .
So
Everything that begins to exist has a cause
The universe began to exist
Therefore the universe has a cause.

 

[urban genie]

Why does it need a propulsion system, sails etc

?
The boat only needs to float until the flood subsides and it lands on the Mountains of Ararat .

Because the hull of a boat of such size would flex and buckle and easily sink way before the 150 days were up.

Is it impossible for the boat to have survived just floating and would have broken up if it had been sailing.

 

[JASR]

Because the hull of a boat of such size would flex and buckle and easily sank way before the 150 days were up.

Is it impossible for the boat to have survived just floating and wpuld have broken up if it had been sailing.

As mentioned, the ‘Ark’ part of the Ark story is a mere trifle of idiocy, compared to the supposed getting of all the animals of the world, and then their dissemination back.

But he’s not responded to that. Unsurprisingly.

 

[ZenHalfTimeCrock]

Your question posits an infinite regress. A logical impossibility .
So
Everything that begins to exist has a cause
The universe began to exist
Therefore the universe has a cause.

Why is it a logical impossibility?

Perhaps what we call ‘reality’ requires no starting point. Maybe it consists of an infinite sequence of Big Bangs and Big Crunches.

Or perhaps all there is is an ungraspable, eternally instantiating, unfathomable Now (since all that we ever get to experience - albeit with a slight time lag in terms of cognitive processing - is the present moment).

Or maybe creationist Christians are wrong and the universe isn’t a few thousand years old. I think it was Bertrand Russell who once suggested that the universe could equally have been created a few moments ago with our seeming memories of a past already implanted.


Moving on, ‘cause and effect’ is a basic notion that we take for granted, one that sustains our sense of our own personal history and that of the wider world. Scientific method is also founded on it, as well as Aquinas’s cosmological argument for the existence of God, which presents Him as a causeless cause of the universe.

But - as the wonderful sceptical philosopher David Hume once pointed out - there is no reason to accept this idea because we never actually see it happen. All we ever perceive is one thing taking place after another, a series of what Hume called ‘constant conjunctions’. We never witness the first event making or forcing the occurrence of the second event. Causes and effects are therefore inferred from events not observed.

But suppose, after all, that there is a ‘causeless cause’ of the universe. If so, that does not entail that the God of classical theism was responsible for its creation. Maybe a team of gods working in tandem did the work, or an evil God (an amusing suggestion ventured by the philosopher Stephen Law).




Right. Now that’s sorted, am off to buy the Christmas edition of Viz Comic.

 

[tonea2003]

The synoptic Gospels and John's Gospel tell of Jesus' divinity. They talk about the same person. Just because the synoptics don't talk specifically about a stoning event
( but they do mention attempts to kill Him) doesn't mean they are talking about a different person. It just means narrative from differing angles according to each Gospel writer.

are you deliberately ignoring the question or are you just plain blind faithing me
they may talk of divinity that is the whole point of the bible
but these gospels talk about two different types of person which are pretty much irreconcilable
there is some pious fraud going on, no doubt about it
the synoptic won't talk about stoning because the jesus in those doesn't claim to be god where as johns does

 

[crazyg]

Replace Peppa Pig with the soon to be Birthday Boy in all narratives, and you have stories which are just as believable.

 

[urban genie]

As mentioned, the ‘Ark’ part of the Ark story is a mere trifle of idiocy, compared to the supposed getting of all the animals of the world, and then their dissemination back.

But he’s not responded to that. Unsurprisingly.

The ark story is ripped off from Hinduism and other earlier religions, as is most of the bible. And then christians traditions stole all the pagan rituals and called them their own

It'a what religions do, absorb local beleifs into thier own or copy them to fit their own system

None of it is original or accurate, and it is so obvious to see

 

[paulsimpson]

I’m a competent diy-er, but I would struggle to make a small water based leisure craft, so I do wonder how Noah was able to make such a huge boat with what I imagine was little in the way of woodworking skills and even less boat building knowledge?

He had 100 years to build it as seen from the text .

It didn't need a propulsion system as it was supposed to stay where it was and drop when the water subsided.
Ah, but it ended up on Mount Ararat, so perhaps a propulsion system would have been in order.
Why did it end up on Ararat? Why didn't it just continue to float down to the new sea level as the water subsided? Possibly because god works in mysterious ways, but not half as mysterious as those who write the bullshit.
And where was the water before the flood? That much fucking water couldn't possibly be held in clouds.
The Med floods, it flooded, end of.

71 % of earth's surface is water. Left over after the Flood.
We are told in Genesis 7:11 that the Flood began with the breaking up of “the fountains of the great deep,” a vivid description of catastrophic geologic activity. This implies that whatever caused this “breaking up” was restrained in the pre-Flood world. While the Hebrew phrase translated “the great deep” is used in Scripture to refer to and describe sub-oceanic waters, some uses also refer to subterranean waters (Isaiah 51:10 and Psalm 78:15, respectively)
Some have alleged that Noah’s Flood was
nothing more than a localised event - the Med as you say. But if this were true, Noah and his family could have moved to higher ground to escape. Also,animals outside the flooded area would not be in danger. The flood wiped out all animals except those on the ark.
Since there have been many serious floods in earth history, if the Flood was only local this is akin to accusing God of lying when He promised to never again send such a flood over the whole earth.

Also
Since it was global, it is no surprise that civilizations across the globe have Flood stories with many common features.

 

[urban genie]

Also
Since it was global, it is no surprise that civilizations across the globe have Flood stories with many common features.

That are older timeline wise than the story of noah

Manu/Shraddhadeva 120 million years ago
Gilgamesh 2700 BC
Noah 2104 BC

Easy to tell which one was just a retelling of another faiths tales and is nowt but plagarism by the abrahamic faiths