Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before!
With all the new crazy self-appointed Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars leading various Churches of God today, it is important to hold these agents of deception accountable.
Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web of Corrupt Leaders
We never heard any COG leader explain this issue. Perhaps Dave Pack, Bob Thiel or James Malm can fill us in on this conundrum, since they claim to know everything.
126 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Man, that's too deep! I am sure some COG headgaskets will blow.
Historically verifiable dates using items such as pottery and written records go back 5000, not 6000 years. The food explains the missing 1000 years. After having many dealings with psychos at work, good riddance to that evil pre flood generation. It's comforting to think that they drowned like rats. And a new fresh start for humanity. God is soooo good.
It's really very simple. There was no flood and no tremendous ark. Probably based on the breakup of the Bosporus that flooded a lot of area and forced people to flee.
It is impossible for a ship that size to hold the number of animals the ark would have been required to hold. A ship that size made entirely of wood would have broken apart in seas that are as rough as the normal ocean waves in our regular oceans. These are just a few of the many facts that made the Noah's ark story not possible to have accured.
"t is impossible for a ship that size to hold the number of animals the ark would have been required to hold."
How is it so? Bearing in mind that cats are cats, be they little or big with flowing manes would there have to be a male and female lion, a male and female tiger, a male and female leopard etc? Or, could one pair of "cats" mutate, by 'intelligent design', into several different kinds of cat?
Even today man can breed different 'kinds' of dogs "as illustrated here" and they are still 'dogs'.
You may as well give up on this posting with COG remnants and fundamentalist believers. No matter how much historical, scientific or geological evidence you provide, Noah and his flood story (taken from three previous cultures much older) is simply and literally true for them. It has to be true just like Adam and Eve just has to be true and we may as well throw in the Tower of Babel from which all language sprang , the Exodus and most of Israel's exaggerated history right on down to Solomon and David.
You can show, teach, explain, reason and prove all you want but to the closed minded, God said it, the Bible teaches it, But-you-sees of the Churches who never had a critical thought about the Bible in their lives, it is useless, fruitless and endless.
Ships more then 100 feet long need steel beam reinforcement to keep the structure stable so it doesn't break-up in rough seas. This is a known fact of ship building engineering.
You can't teach the Myth-taken anything new or threatening to their sacred and unshakable stories long ago proven to be less than literally true. You have to think outside the box of literalism and mere Bible reading, which both minister and member of the COGs are stuck in and , in my experience, very unwilling to step out of. I understand the difficulty in coming to see the Bible is much less historically true than it presents itself to be, but the information is out there for those willing to do their homework.
Religious prejudice and need holds the believer in place and in their seats letting others tell them how it all is and they seem more than pleased to have it be so.
I can't tell you how many ministers of many faiths have told me..."I know, I know...but if I teach that I will lose my job," on these and other much more important and assumed religious teachings both OT and New.
Seems "You can't handle the truth" applies to these types of topics and all the defensiveness and unlearned and badly thought out rebuttals it provokes prove it.
I think theories such as Hugh Ross' writings, placing the flood as a regional event, about 20,000 years ago, with the collapse of a land bridge at the mouth of the current Black Sea, due to a global warming cycle, to have some merit.
If the bulk of mankind was there, it could be considered then a "complete" event as was testified, according to their own experience.
The disproofs of the historicity of the flood story are legion, from pre-Jewish mythologies that offer countering flood stories of Atrahasis, Ziusudra, and Utnapishtim, (will the real Noah please stand up?), to the utter failure of "flood geology," to the utter absence of any "flood biology"—perhaps the most significant disproof of them all, to the utter absence of cataclysmic floods in the historical record, the subject of this post, when ancient empires, I suppose, survived by living underwater for about a year without noticing it.
Not to mention how it would have sowed every inch of land with salt, making the whole earth inhospitable to the plant life fundamental to the entire land-based ecosystem. Of course, the bible story forgot to mention Noah's other ark, the floating greenhouse, which saved all our post-diluvian plant diversity. Just to cite one example, how did Noah manage to save potatoes, indigenous to South America and unknown in the Old World until European explorers returned with them four centuries ago? And how did he manage to return them South America afterwards? Why didn't he keep any of them so the ancient Mesopotamians could have fries with their golden calf burgers?
If a person is going to judge the flood narratives of Atrahasis, Ziusudra, and Utnapishtim to not be reliable, they have no excuse to judge Johnny-come-lately Noah as being any moreso. That would be a textbook case of special pleading.
But of course, if the Noah story had any basis in reality, Noah, his family, and his entire zoo would have perished right alongside everything else. Wooden boats 300 feet long, like the six-masted schooners from the late 19th century are already at the practical limits of the material, required iron structural reinforcement, and even so, leaked so badly due to "hogging" and "sagging" of the timbers that they required constant pumping to remain afloat, which is why shipbuilders turned to metal instead. Wyoming at 335 feet is generally considered to hold the record for the longest wooden ship. But a wooden boat 450 feet long, built completely outside of any shipbuilding tradition, and with no metal reinforcement and no bilge pumps, simply could never have survived.
Dennis, answered prayer refutes all your opinions. The holy spirit sometimes puts a certain scripture into people minds, in response to a prayer request. This confirms the bible as Gods inspired word, So yes, your arguments will prove fruitless with people like myself. Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers. Take your own advice by doing this homework.
Anon told me: "Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers. Take your own advice by doing this homework."
Ah...I did this homework from the time I was 14 in 1964 coming into WCG until leaving the ministry in 1998. How much homework am I supposed to do???? When do I see what I see and know what I know about how this reality test does not prove real?
OK folks, Mr Harold Camping figured this all out some time ago by cooking up a clever way to add years to the genealogies in the Bible so as to push Adam back to around 11,000 BC and Noah to about 7000 years back. It's all here...
“Ah...I did this homework from the time I was 14 in 1964 coming into WCG until leaving the ministry in 1998. How much homework am I supposed to do????”
Well, I suppose you should keep on doing your homework until you get it right. Are you sure you were really living by the laws of God? Or, did you somehow “just not get it” and therefore flunked some sort of great test?
How did you “leave the ministry” in 1998? Did you resign or were you terminated? Why were you still in the WCG in 1998 when the Tkaches had already openly changed all the teachings of the church at the start of 1995? Did you disagree with what HWA had taught? Did you agree with the new Tkach teachings? Or, did it not matter to you what the WCG officially taught as long as you got a paycheck? Do you think the church members' tithe money should be spent to hire and support “ministers” who do not believe in the Bible, so they can write and teach against it after reading other books by sinful mortals that they think are better?
"Dennis, answered prayer refutes all your opinions. The holy spirit sometimes puts a certain scripture into people minds, in response to a prayer request. This confirms the bible as Gods inspired word..."
That is the extent of the confirmation of the bible??? Your ability to bring a familiar scripture to mind? By standards this low, the scriptures of every religion pass the test of being confirmed as the inspired words of all those other deities.
"...So yes, your arguments will prove fruitless with people like myself..."
What an embarrassing admission. Shallow, thoughtless ignorance of just how ignorant you really are is the citadel where faith retrenches itself against the onslaught of evidence, facts, and even common sense.
"...Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers..."
Oh. Is that how scientists test reality, by praying for divine revelation? You have a funny definition of "reality." All the probabilities are on Dennis' side. To argue against that which is probable is to argue against reality.
Dennis said: "Ah...I did this homework from the time I was 14 in 1964 coming into WCG until leaving the ministry in 1998. "
I'm going to guess your leaving the ministry didn't exactly coincide precisely with your reaching the point of non-belief. Can I ask about how long you estimate it took for the latter? I ask that, because for me it was approximately a 2-year period (from being a daily on-my-knees bible adherent to being able to say "this book is pure nonsense"). And many, many stories I read of people leaving "faith" usually point to a period of 2-3 years. Could be wrong but my guess is that it requires at least around a 2-year period for any total rewiring of the brain (of a level required to entirely change one's worldview) to occur.
If that is true, then it would imply that any adamant believer, even faced with rock-hard solid evidence against that belief, simply could not switch worldviews in that way unless and until such xxxx amount of time has elapsed. Too many neurons that have to be rewired... Which would of course have implications that might be helpful in guiding others in their journey toward unbelief.
Yes, Dennis, you're supposed to throw all reason, deduction, and any hope of proving anything out the proverbial window, and accept the because-I-say-so of someone who says they heard it from the holy spirit. A convenient assertion, since it can't be proven or disproven.
Ed said... "Ships more then 100 feet long need steel beam reinforcement to keep the structure stable so it doesn't break-up in rough seas. This is a known fact of ship building engineering."
Not true Ed, not a know fact at all, and easy to show otherwise.
Take an actual example in the UK, the ship HMS Victory was completed in 1765. The gun deck was 186 feet long (the overall length was 227feet), and a width of 52 feet. She was made entirely of wood.
She fought in the battle of Trafalgar in 1805 (40 years after she was built). She continued afloat until at least 1903, and is still on show today, and is open daily for visitors, although now in dry dock.
So this wooden ship remained afloat for 140 years, after taking part in several battles. Rather more strenuous a life than something that was basically a raft, and didn't have to be piloted anywhere, it just had to stay afloat for a year.
9.02 PM all you give me is straw man arguments. When I came into the church, I kept wandering wether I was conned. I was suspicious. But I acted on what understanding I had, I didn't give myself the right to any perks (exemptions for some of Gods laws) which is rampant in the church, and lo and behold, a string of prayers were answered. The body of evident was overwhelming. When God puts thoughts into a persons mind, it has a unique feel. This is distinctly different from ones owns thoughts. It's answered prayer that ultimately keeps the churches going. Granted abusive ministers exploit this, but that's another issue.
Connie, you said you believed, "placing the flood as a regional event, about 20,000 years ago, with the collapse of a land bridge at the mouth of the current Black Sea, due to a global warming cycle, to have some merit."
"Some" merit? "Likely"? What are the scientific peer reviewed analyses for what he's proposed happened? I'd like to know.
You don't mention it, but do you believe that even if it was a local event, that the Bible story of Noah building a giant boat and bringing 2 x 2 of all animals onto it is accurate?
Isn't it more likely that the Biblical flood story was usurped by the Hebrews from older and similar flood stories that the Hebrews would have known of, like the Sumerian's Epic of Ziusudra, or the Mesopotamian's Epic of Gilgamesh?
If you don't believe that's likely, I have one other question. It makes me cringe, though: Do you think Satan is causing me to ask these questions to try to get you to question the veracity of the Bible's literalism?
How did kangaroos and other Australian animals get to the ark? They would of had to swim the ocean and walk thousands of miles. Even if you think that there was a land bridge before the flood what about after the flood? There is no land bridge after the flood! How did they get back to Australia?
Ready to be accused of anything you like, I will venture: scripture does not say that the only material used to build the Ark was 'Gopher wood'. Iron and or steel could also have been used in its construction. Scripture says nothing about Noah's abilities as a ship builder nor if, apart from his sons, he had help in building the ship. Like numerous other contributors to this blog I can exercise my imagination and picture sub-contractors being used for the project. Connie suggested that Noah got the necessary funds from trading derivatives on the stock market. I don't agree with that but he must have found the funds from somewhere, perhaps in a similar manner to Warren Buffet. Nor does scripture tell us much at all about Noah apart from neither he nor his predecessors had been subject to genetic engineering as the rest of humanity may have been, remember:- "there is no new thing under the sun"?
Nor does scripture tell us what society was at all like before the flood. At the risk of being classed as 'off balance' I will say that I would not be surprised if someone discovered a pre-flood cell phone.
. . . Are you sure you were really living by the laws of God? . . .
Do the laws of God include the laws of nature, or the laws of physics, or the laws of science of any kind. OR, do the laws of “God” exclude all scientific laws? BTW the term “God” means many things to many people. Is your “God” more important than all other “Gods” like those of the Baptist, Methodist, Jewish, Catholic, Hindu, Buddist, etc, etc, etc.? “But of course it is, because HWA said so,” is likely your answer. Dennis mentioned myths in one of his remarks. Just to be clear, myths are not lies. Myths, as told in the Bible, are stories that were told in any ancient culture to explain a practice, belief, or natural occurrence.
Engineers, chemists, biologists, scientists of all kind work with facts and the laws of nature. Shouldn’t all the laws of nature be the same as the laws of “God” if indeed all that exists were created by the source of all that exists? If any of those mentioned do not work within the laws of nature, their work is fruitless. Failure will be their result. It has been said of an engineer, “Get your engineering mind out of the Bible.”
I used to wonder what the lions and tigers ate on the ark.
Thankfully, Jesus gave me a new TV, and when I turned it on and tuned into the FOX network, it said lions and tigers on the ark ate the bodies of drowned sinners floating near the ark.
Question answered. (however strangely) Miracle validated. (however tenuously) Case closed! Mind closed!
Michael, yes it is a process of several years to be sure. It is easy to spend a few of those thinking "it will get better" but it never did. Transitions of all sorts are messy. The mind leaves long before the body for many many reasons, especially in religion where one believes it matters what you do.
By personality I don't consider myself a mover and shaker or a dominant type. I kept to myself in the ministry because getting drawn in to the drama and personalities of other minister types was too stressful and discouraging. My last congregation in SC was the most difficult in terms of divisive and drama filled fueled by all that was going on with the Tkaches. I dutifully called Joe Sr to clear up rumors about changes rumored to be coming in traditional WCG practices and was told not to worry about it. Everything I was told was not going to change did change and the rumors were always correct.
In hind site I struggled with the classic causes of depression for which I got some help professionally. While getting help, my peers and the head of Ministerial services told me "we think you are just hiding here," referring to a week or so I spent as an inpatient learning the skills I lacked it seemed to cope etc. Long story. I was terminated at the point when the congregation reached a hundred , down from 450 in the day and when HQ types were shifting congregations over to being taken care of by local and unpaid elder types. It was a messy time and for me, one of complete confusion as to what to think much less do. One "good friend" elder to my face told the church when I was later transferred to another I was the worst thing that ever happened to the church. He was a lawman type and pushed members which I was not. Another smiled big to my face while running to my regional director type behind my back reporting on my not going with the program which at the time was my scorn for Promise Keeper mass meeting that we were all told we needed to go to and I said no. I don't do emotional religious crap in crowds too big to fathom getting down on my knees on command by some jerk who will come and go which he did.
See how a posting on Noah's Ark ends up with some deflecting and righteously demanding answers as to one's conversion, prayer life, behaviors, state of mind and the classic, "well did you take a paycheck when you disagreed with..."
I'm content to simply say I am me, doing the best I can and don't really have to give account to anyone but myself concerning my inner experience with the Wildworld Church of God.
PS In my last church transfer to SC I replaced Gerald Weston. When it was clear I was not that type of minister , scores came to me with their stories of hurt and relief for change. The deacons and elders were well trained to think like Gerald and were made privy by him of all the problems members had and such. They were used to being included on problem visits. When I did not take them visiting with me and talked personally and alone with folk about problems, they did not like that one bit it seemed. My SC and last church experience was the worst of my 14 congregation experiences over the years but was also during the worst of times .
Gerald asked me when I transferred in if I would like to go to lunch where he could tell me all about each person in the congregation and I said yes to lunch and no to discussing members. I wanted them to know they had a clean start , whatever that meant and that I knew nothing of anyone's past no cared. Not sure he liked that. It got me off to a good start with the congregation however.
We didn't talk about the truth or myth of Noah's Ark either though so maybe we should have cleared that up then.
Dennis, reread your 5.24PM post. You mention 'mere bible reading,' 'religious prejudices and need..' etc., then complain of people deflecting from Noahs Ark. it's you that kicked off the deflection.
"he could tell me all about each person in the congregation..' That was and is another trait of these churches. They have a dirt/smut file on everyone. They pull it out and use it as a club when church teachings are questioned, or against anyone who resists the ministers 'right' to lord it over them. My first minister deliberately put lies into my smut file, including that I didn't have the holy spirit, even though I had been baptised. I believe Herbie kicked this off with his publicly questioning the conversion of those who disagreed with him,
Dennis said: "Transitions of all sorts are messy. The mind leaves long before the body for many many reasons, especially in religion where one believes it matters what you do. "
Hear you loud and clear. Different (but similar) in my case, where I had a job in Pasadena answering co-worker letters (many of which were extremely heartbreaking, people writing in for advice, help, healing). As I gradually began to lose faith in a non-existent god, my answers (things like, "we know from the Bible that we can trust God's promises to heal" and other such nonsense) came to sound ever more hollow and empty as I wrote them, but because it's a gradual process, there was no exact point at which I realized it was becoming hypocritical. Only in hindsight can you tell that. And besides, it's not just a paycheck, you have responsibilities too. People depending on you to carry out your job and obligations. And like you said, you're in the midst of a personal struggle all the while.
So for those who may be critical of such a journey, I would say they should be much more amazed that one in such a position has the guts and self-awareness (not to mention rationality) to ever leave at all.
You wonder where the water went...? I know the idea, like there isn't enough water to have a global flood...So there couldn't have been one..?
Years ago it was calculated if all continents and all ocean bottoms were made level with each other, the excess water would be over 7,000 feet above our heads...there really is that much water on earth
The deflection comment was of grilling me on my praying, answered prayer refuting all arguments against a literal noah ,keeping God's law etc as the real homework to be done as well as demanding answers to personal questions on my inner experience coming to see WCG was a mistake, in hindsite, for me personally and how that realization played out in my life. And this from golk who won't give their name or current affiliations and what their reasons for those are.
The deflection comment was of the personal grilling me on my obeying, praying, answered prayer refuting all arguments against a literal noah ,keeping God's law etc as the real homework to be done as well as demanding answers to personal questions on my inner experience coming to see WCG was a mistake, in hindsite, for me personally and how that realization played out in my life. And this from folk who won't give their name or current affiliations and what their reasons for those are.
Rubbish, the flood happened and noahs ark existed. The are comments above that are riddiculous. Ships needing this needing that, the vikings never had steel bows in their ships. Where is a shipwright, or a sailor when you need one. You can sure tell the commenters rubbishing the ark building are highly likely to be from land locked, inward looking usa.
I'm 6.55 PM, but I did not post comment 9.39 PM. That's word-smith, a minister or similar. I would not ask/grill you questions on your inner experience. Since you expressed your belief that God and the bible are fairly tales, I do not think it unreasonable to ask you or anyone else to reality check with obedience, bible study and prayer. It's dangerous for me and others to give our real names. It's safe for atheists, but not for believers. That's Satan's world for you.
Just like 1 million Israelites wandering around in the desert for 40 years left not one scrap of debris, broken pottery, grave sites, broken wagon remnants, charcoal from fires that burned continually under the tabernacle braziers or any other casts off that people normally throw away? There is not one scrap of evidence that there were mass casualties and buried cities of a worldwide flood. Noah and his children do not go around the earth knocking down building remnants or burning the carcasses. Birds and fish would have eaten the bones clean, but the bones would still be there to be found and or buried later. If you believe in the flood you have to throw all logic out the door. Which pretty much what the COG has done with most of its theology and "reasoning."
I like these kinds of postings here! They do not discredit this site at all but confirm that it is a site that allows people from all positions and COG's to be able to share their opinions. There are no other site out there that allow this. Bob Thiel doesn't, he does not allow any comments at all. James Malm does only as long as you toe his absurd doctrinal lines, otherwise he makes a public spectacle out of humiliating you.
When are we going to see the bible as one of the most important as not the most important relic of mankind. And see it for what it is. Reporting (grossly exagerating) on a local flood. Perhaps even from oral tradition thousands of years before the hebrews plagiarized it from the mesopotamians. A local flood, heavily impacting societies of the day living in what we now call the Black Sea after the Mediteranean broke through the Bosporus when the Ice melted on the Northern Atlantic.
The Bible wow I love it. But please corrobarate it with the known facts, not fairytales or the History Channel. Wow I just watched something on the History Channel, have to look that channel up what a load of crock on that channel.
11.34 AM bones dissolve in sea water over the years, depending on the acidity of the sea water. Google the topic. Strong currents could have toppled or buried the buildings. Your are also assuming that rock was the building material of choice.
Noahs ark was an ark not a cunard transatlantic passenger ship. It wasn't criss crossing the globe. It just needed to float. Who said the seas were rough ? Steel reinforcement wasn't much help for the Titanic. The all wooden HMS Victory ship survived rough seas and war without having steel reinforcement in her. It still stands to this day.
Anonymous Asshole 6:55PM wrote: "Dennis, answered prayer refutes all your opinions. The holy spirit sometimes puts a certain scripture into people minds, in response to a prayer request. This confirms the bible as Gods inspired word, So yes, your arguments will prove fruitless with people like myself. Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers. Take your own advice by doing this homework."
Anonymous 11:33PM wrote: "9.02 PM all you give me is straw man arguments. When I came into the church, I kept wandering wether I was conned. I was suspicious. But I acted on what understanding I had, I didn't give myself the right to any perks (exemptions for some of Gods laws) which is rampant in the church, and lo and behold, a string of prayers were answered. The body of evident was overwhelming. When God puts thoughts into a persons mind, it has a unique feel. This is distinctly different from ones owns thoughts. It's answered prayer that ultimately keeps the churches going. Granted abusive ministers exploit this, but that's another issue."
The questions I'd like to ask both Anon6:55PM and Anon11:33PM are:
1) How can you be so sure of the origin of these "answers" to your "prayers"? Has anyone ever stepped forward, offered identification, and taken credit for these "answers"? If so, what form of identification was offered? How credible was this identification?
How do you know what the boundaries and capabilities are of human mental faculties to produce thoughts, inner speech, as well as feelings about that internal monolog? Do you think it is at least possible that you could make a mistake, that you're not infallible, when you're attributing an origin to thoughts and inner speech you experience?
How do you know that the human mind is capable of acting as a receiver of other-worldly messages? What do you assume is the carrier for these signals? The electromagnetic spectrum? Something else?
Reseach into voice-hearing indicates that 5%-10% of the population at some point in their lives will have an experience which they assume a voice in their head is not their own. Psychotherapists such as Molly Martin, who runs the Hearing Voices Network of Denver ask their patients regarding the inner speech they experience, what it is that convinces them that a particular "voice" they hear in their head is not the same as their own internal monologue? I would ask what the criteria is you're using that you believe allows you to reliably differentiate between your own internal monologue and the thoughts/speech of somebody else appearing within your mind?
2) Perhaps you also think these "answers" come in the form of coincidental occurrances. How can you be certain you're not falling victim to confirmation bias? Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses, while giving disproportionately less consideration to alternative possibilities
Derren Brown is an English magician who uses the same tricks that play upon the same faults in our cognition that cold readers of all kinds use to con their "customers" into believing they are capable of communicating with your dead loved ones, fortelling your future, reading your horoscope, etc. However, we are often just as good at performing this service for ourselves.
3) Were you really suspicious? Have you ever even considered that something else besides your presuppositional hypothesis might be what's going on here?
Let's just assume for a moment that you were, in fact, receiving other-worldly messages, and that you haven't just been simply misattributing your own inner monologue and falling victim to confirmation bias:
3a) How do you know that these messages are not from Allah, Apollo, Anun-Ra, Ahura Mazda, or some other beneficient deity who has answered your prayers, and has forgivingly decided to overlook the fact that you don't realize what god you're supposed to praying to?
3b) How do you know that these messages are not counterfeits from christianity's Satan," or Islam's Iblis, or Zoroastrianism's Ahriman, whose intent is to deceive you in any about any number of possible things?
3c) Are you familiar with the Contactee Movement? How do you know your prayers are not being clairvoyantly intercepted by space aliens, and then being answered by various means by the same extraterrestrials?
4) The null hypothesis is not "godidit." The null hypothesis is that all you've experienced is your own internal monologue and your own confirmation bias. In order to overcome the null hypothesis, you need something more than an assumption. And before you conclude that an alternative hypothesis is more likely, you really need to be able to differentiate between the relative probabilities many different alternative hypotheses. You can't just simply pretend that a christian hypothesis is the null, and then go around like an asshole telling other people they're idiots for not having speciously arrived at the same indefensible conclusion by unreliable means that you did.
So far, you guys are nothing more than hacks, arrogant ones at that, who claim to be psychic.
If the Noah story were true, and not just plagiarized myth from older myth, Noah, his family, and his entire zoo would have perished right alongside everything else.
Wooden boats 300 feet long, like the six-masted schooners from the late 19th century are already at the practical limits of the material.
Wyoming at 335 feet is generally considered to hold the record for the longest wooden ship ever built. It required iron structural reinforcement, and even so, leaked so badly due to twisting and buckling of the timbers that it required constant pumping just to remain afloat. But a wooden boat 450 feet long, built completely outside of any shipbuilding tradition, and with no metal reinforcement and no bilge pumps, simply could never have survived.
"...In the words of A. M. Robb, there was an 'upper limit, in the region of 300 feet, on the length of the wooden ship; beyond such a length the deformation due to the differing distributions of weight and buoyancy became excessive, with consequent difficulty in maintaining the hull watertight' (p. 355). Pollard and Robertson concur, emphasizing that 'a wooden ship had great stresses as a structure. The absolute limit of its length was 300 feet, and it was liable to `hogging' and `sagging'' (pp. 13-14). This is the major reason why the naval industry turned to iron and steel in the 1850s. The largest wooden ships ever built were the six-masted schooners, nine of which were launched between 1900 and 1909. These ships were so long that they required diagonal iron strapping for support; they "snaked," or visibly undulated, as they passed through the waves, they leaked so badly that they had to be pumped constantly, and they were only used on short coastal hauls because they were unsafe in deep water. John J. Rockwell, the designer of the first of this class, confessed that 'six masters were not practical. They were too long for wood construction' (Laing, pp. 393, 403-409). Yet the ark was over 100 feet longer than the longest six-master, the 329 foot U.S.S. Wyoming, and it had to endure the most severe conditions ever encountered while transporting the most critically important cargo ever hauled. Clearly, God had to imbue this amateurishly assembled gopherwood with some very special properties to fit it for the voyage. So it should be clear by now why 'intelligent people' somehow see a 'problem' in the building of the ark."
I keep posting this article, but no believers ever seem to have any interest in reading any of it. Of course, this is just one of dozens of problems, each one by itself sufficient because each one is completely insurmountable without any further assistance.
In historical terms, of course, it was the development of the field of geology that first caused belief in the biblical flood to be discarded as myth.
"I used to wonder what the lions and tigers ate on the ark."
Are you sure that there were both lions AND tigers on the ark? Scripture says "Gen 7:14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort."
Now, there are two 'kinds' of cat, big ones and little ones. Perhaps there were two of the 'big' ones that later mutated into lions, tigers, leopards (wild) and two of the little ones that later mutated into Balinese, Japanese bobtail, Manx etc.(domesticated) The same with all the other animals, including camels.
You silly people! Don't you know that the Nephilim helped Noah build the ark. These strong men of God could carry the huge timbers needed to build such a long boat. They would then have carried in the tons and tons of pitch needed to seal the timbers. These giants of men are the ones who helped Noah build the ark and did all the heavy work. These are also the same men who loaded the ark with even more tons of food for the animals that had to weigh additional hundreds of tons. Add to that the tons and tons of feces and waste that would have been produced. With everything sealed shut it must have really stunk! And, that boat had to have ben riding low in water with all of that combined weight.
Oh wait, according to the Church of God all the animals butts were sealed so they did not need to eat since they were hibernating. So that takes care of all the food and waste.
All of this talk about length, weight, wood and iron. Its so silly and useless. If God said it then it is true. Plain and simple. God kept it all afloat regardless of what we think. God stopped it from leaking and sinking. God put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep until it was time to wake up and send out the birds in search of land. it's all rather simple and easy to understand when you realize he can do anything he wants.
“…Every inherited trait, however small, is coded for by one or more genes, and each gene locus may have a substantial number of variants (alleles), which accounts for the great variety observed in a given population. Any specific individual, however, has at most only two alleles per locus—one from each parent.
As James C. King writes: 'There is good evidence for concluding that every message coded in the DNA exists in any sizeable population in numerous versions, forming a spectrum grading from grossly defective alleles—such as the one for albinism—at one end, through the slightly deviant, to the normal at the other end. And the normal is probably not a single version of the message but a collection of slightly different alleles.' (p. 55)
Hence, for a trait such as human pigmentation, 'we can visualize not merely a few dozen interacting loci but an array of perhaps a dozen or so alleles at each locus' (p. 60).
From this we can see that the original canine baramin in Eden would have needed a fantastic set of giant chromosomes with alleles for every trait that would someday be manifest in coyotes, wolves, foxes, jackals, dingos, fennecs, and the myriad of minute variations in hair color (twenty-four genes at nine loci), height, face shape, and so forth that are seen in the domestic dog (cf. Hutt). So, too, for the feline kind, within which creationists Byron Nelson (p. 157) and Alfred Rehwinkel (p. 70) both place lions, tigers, leopards, and ocelots as well as housecats. Similar giant chromosomes would be required for the bovine kind, equine kind, and so on.
In the centuries before the deluge, these strange progenitors must have rapidly diversified into their potential species, as the fossil record shows. The equine kind developed not only zebras, horses, onagers, asses, and quaggas but Eohippus, Mesohippus, Merychippus, and other now-extinct species that paleontologists have misinterpreted as evidence for evolution...
Then one day, many centuries later, the Lord told Noah to take two canines, two felines, two equines, two pinnipedians—one male and one female each—and put them aboard the ark. The trick is, which does our ancient zoologist choose? A male kit fox and a female Great Dane? A female lion and a male alley cat? An Eohippus and a Clydesdale? Which two individuals would possess the tremendous genetic complement that their ancestors in Eden had, to enable the many species to reappear after the flood? How could Noah tell? Creationist Dennis Wagner tells us that the original kinds degenerated through inbreeding so that their offspring would 'never again reach the hereditary variability of the parent.' Yet the unique couple aboard the ark needed the full genetic potential of the original kind, if not more, for a vast new array of climatic and geographic niches was opened up by the flood.
Speaking of a hypothetical group of six or eight animals stranded on an island, King says, 'Such a small number could not possibly reflect the actual allelic frequencies found in the large mainland population' (p. 107). What, then, of the single pair on the ark?"
Stephen, How does one describe the taste of chocolate or orange. Like wise, I cannot describe the "other-worldly messages" unique emotional feel. If you experienced it, you would understand. Your correlation isn't causation point, misses the fact that there is a body of evidence. It's not just one answered prayer. This defies random probability, plus the nature of the 'miracles' is too convenient. For instance, once I complained to God about a work boss who wanted to impress his personality on a project I has spent weeks on. The next day, the boss got into a vicious verbal fight over the photo copier with another person, then came to me saying I could keep my project in tact. This is way too big a coincidence. And this is just one example. Reality trumps ideology.
Actually, 1:37, the mass amount of sediment deposited by such a flood would be more likely to preserve remnants, rather than atomize them as you'd like to think, but regardless...
"And the Number One reason the Flood is mythology is: IT DIDN'T WORK!
We’re told that the purpose of the ghastly planet-killing exercise is that mankind was wicked. That’s the reason everything was cruelly destroyed—except for Noah, his righteous family, and their chosen menagerie. Okay, fine, but there’s one little detail—the whole business was a colossal futility! There is still wickedness in the world, which means the planetary slaughter was not only cruel beyond imagining, it was also stupid. But even a creationist would agree that such behavior is incompatible with the nature of God, so the only rational conclusion is that the flood is a childish myth."
But that's just it. Did "god" say it? No! People said it. And then those people said that god said it.
Before you placed your unwavering trust in this supposed "god," first you had to place your unwavering trust in other people. The people who raised you perhaps. The people who wrote books. The people who compiled them into an anthology. Herbert Armstrong, or perhaps some other churchman.
If it weren't for other people, you would never have heard of this "god."
Your unwavering trust in this supposed "god" is actually just an extension of that unwavering trust you still place in other people.
"God" really has nothing to do with it. Unless of course, you too think you're a prophet...
6.48 PM, I don't agree with your "God put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep." It's not the way God operates. Christ refused to turn rock into bread when tempted in the wilderness. Rock and bread are very different, this would not be honoring reality. But He did turn water into wine, since wine is mostly water. Another example, Christ multiplied the few fish and bread cakes to feed thousands. Technically, He didn't need the handful of bread and cakes, but He honored reality in doing this. The ministers should be teaching this, not me. They are paid enough. Bless me lord for my generosity. So no, the animals and Noah would not have been asleep. Why build the ark if you not going to use it in the real sense?
All of this talk about the bible. Its so silly and useless. If the bible authors said it then, within the context of the story, it is true. Plain and simple. The authors kept it all afloat regardless of what we think. The authors stopped it from leaking and sinking. The authors put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep until it was time to wake up and send out the birds in search of land. it's all rather simple and easy to understand when you realize that in story, you can do anything you want.
The apocalyptic ones draw great encouragement from such stories as Noah and the ark, and the children of Israel wandering around for 40 years before entering the promised land. Also the story of Gideon. This is because factors which were thought to be impossible finally did come into play, and in two of the cases there were long waits. Those are just the sorts of miracles and time frame that would be required for the HWA prophecy mold to finally kick in. So, we see how some relate, and even consider our objections as proof that they are the ones who are on the right track. They expect to be vindicated much to the rest of our chagrin.
I guess we'll see. But, it sure was nice that some of us who thought we'd only live to be about 27, with the last 3 years of that life being pretty torturous, actually got to have some fairly awesome lives. Beats the crap out of enduring ministerial abuse and being fleeced for decades, allowing oneself to be leveraged by prophetic fairy tales.
I don't know folks but I'm starting to think that the first thing that evolved was beyond a doubt, the middle finger. As a symbol to all those who would evolve from "maybe" a single cell that was formed beside some marsh that miraculously appeared on the planet that was formed when positive and negative ions collided and to quote that genius, "luckily there were more positive then negative". Well yes, I'm sure we're all happy there were more positive then negative, however, that principal certainly doesn't apply to the posts here. Humm, could that be the old symbol being applied again? Anon 6:48 said "God stopped it from leaking", well yes He did, but He did it by having Noah do this: Gen. 6:14 ... and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. "God put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep until it was time to wake up". I hope that sleep lasted only a short time otherwise all of this; "Gen 6:21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them", would have spoiled.
Just enjoying a little levity. Hope you all have a good day.
It's sad that the Bible portrays the Creator / Father as an incompetent parent who does not seem to know how to guide His children, leaves them on their own for hundreds of years and when they act up, He doesn't have a clue how to solve the problem, so He kills them off.
Moreover, Scripture also indicates that He left the care of His children in the hands of the Devil, a cruel psychopath nanny who saw to the torture and corruption of the children abandoned by Yahweh because He didn't have a clue about human psychology.
He saw to the drowning, burning and destruction of millions because it was just easier than taking responsibility as a dead-beat dad.
Ben Hobrink wrote a book called MODERN SCIENCE IN THE BIBLE: Amazing Scientific Truths Found in Ancient Texts. On page 2 he wrote (with some emphasis mine),
“The third instance, and what led to the writing of this book, is the account of the construction of Noah's ark (Genesis 6:14-16). The ark has been shown to be the best and most stable design of vessel. The dimensions and proportions in length, width, and height are the most ideal for a seagoing vessel not driven by a sail or engine. Large ships are still built in accordance with this design. Compared with Noah's ark, the vessels mentioned in other accounts of the Flood around the world are extremely primitive and unscientific. For example, in the Babylonian account of the Flood (the Gilgamesh Epic), the main character, Utanapishtim, survives the Flood in a cube-shaped boat. This happens to be the least stable design of vessel. While at sea, it will gradually start to roll over the waves. It's not difficult to distinguish which of the two accounts of the Flood is the more plausible and more scientifically well founded.”
Dennis is right. Most COG people don't have a thinking brain cell in their heads. They just know all that nonsense has to be true because some ancient idiot wrote it down. So glad I finally got it through my head what a tub of bull crap it all was, both Old and New Testaments.
For supporters of the Ark story, I'd like to ask you for a moment to consider not the absurdities inherent in the story, but the premise of the main protagonist story itself (not Noah, but Yahweh). That is, Yahweh deciding to use it as a method of punishment. Yahweh who could do precisely anything he wanted.
After creating all the animals, humans, etc. and having his humans go awry, the very best solution Yahweh devised was to flood the whole place. Death by drowning is one of the more terrifying ways to die, and even if the purpose was to rid the world of evil doers and start over, it was one of the more sadistic methods he could have chosen. He was already performing a miracle by the flood itself, so he could have easily chosen a different miraculous method. A deep sleep followed by instantaneous brain infarction, for example. Anything more humane, with less pain and terror.
In addition, the animals, who clearly had not participated in any putative "sin", would have felt the pain and suffering of drowning as well. (The same applies to human infants, at least.) I don't know how one can see this as anything other than gratuitous subjection to suffering: simply not necessary. There are much more humane ways of ending lives, both human and animal, but Yahweh purposely chose drowning. That means that he wanted the humans and animals not on the Ark to specifically suffer.
I won't ask you to change your mind or belief, but simply to keep these points in your heart and ruminate a bit on them. The biblical God selected a terrible painful way for everyone to die, instead of innumerable other more humane options. That alone of course doesn't mean he doesn't exist, but doesn't it change a little bit how you personally feel about him?
"Stephen, How does one describe the taste of chocolate or orange. Like wise, I cannot describe the "other-worldly messages" unique emotional feel. If you experienced it, you would understand. Your correlation isn't causation point, misses the fact that there is a body of evidence. It's not just one answered prayer. This defies random probability, plus the nature of the 'miracles' is too convenient. For instance, once I complained to God about a work boss who wanted to impress his personality on a project I has spent weeks on. The next day, the boss got into a vicious verbal fight over the photo copier with another person, then came to me saying I could keep my project in tact. This is way too big a coincidence. And this is just one example. Reality trumps ideology."
What I understand is that you're making no end of unjustifiable assumptions and using them to jump to unjustifiable and fallacious conclusions. And when I ask for some justification, you're caught flat-footed. I asked some very specific questions, and you haven't even attempted to answer so much as one of them. Which just goes to show how little you've thought any of this through.
Now, it's fine, if you privately want to jump to whatever unjustifiable and fallacious conclusions you want to based on feelings and whatever. But don't start berating anyone else for not making the same mistakes you feel compelled to make.
God is not a human. God's ways are not our ways. We don't know yet, until they are resurrected, how those people exactly died. Maybe the flood water travelled like a tusami and the end came extremely quickly. Maybe they died in ways we do not know or cannot fathem. We do know they were committing horrible sins, could have involved can abolishment, devil worship or abuse of babies or children. We do not know the specifics. But you cannot shake someone's faith. The ark existed and the flood did happen.
The story is not absurd if you turn the premise around. The story is rooted in real human experience and they were trying to find a cause for an effect. The real cause of all the curses (sickness, diseases, inequality, the ensuing greed) was the organisation into new societies living close together with their lifestock as farmers. This transition period also explains the "giants" (hunters are taller people than sickness stricken farmers and the loathing for the "mighty hunter" as a bad man as expressed in Genesis. And one could go on and on by positioning the book in the oral history of the transition period of mankind from hunters into farming societies and the according change in religious philosophy that had to find answers to new questions. (and of course trying to ward of the curses with new ritual and discipline)
I have posted lengthy postings on other threads that it was the new "farming societies" that were confronted with "curses" that hunter gatherer societies can just walk away from. (Like a local flood.) All of the 15 somewhat new "curses" applicable to farmers are explained in the book of Genesis by the introduction of a wrathful NEW deity.
To Micheal at 10:14 Hi Micheal, I would like to first address the reason God gave for the flood, that being in Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Gen 6:11 The earth also was corrupt (polluted) before God, and the earth was filled with violence. The word “violence” is from the Hebrew word khaw-mawce' and basically means cruel and/or unrighteous. Here is the purpose God gave for creating man: 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.
Even though God had His preachers, mankind refused to obey Him, thus violating the very purpose for which they were created. Everything on the planet was in some way corrupt/polluted. God provided Satan as a testing tool, as he is today. The fulfillment of Gen. 1:26 comes when mankind is in the image and likeness of God who obviously is spiritual. The saints set the example as followers of Christ when they too are given immortality at Christ’s return.
That being said, the flood was not the only major happening at that time. Some of the topography of the planet was also changed. For example, the rivers that had once flowed from Jerusalem disappeared and thus far, I haven’t been able to find the Garden of Eden. For that to happen, there had to be major earthquake activity, not to mention volcanic eruptions. Are you aware that there are more volcanoes under the oceans then there are above? They’re called “submarine volcanoes” and are believed to be responsible for 75% of the planets magma flow per year. With those seismic activities taking place, the safest place for the Ark would have been on the water.
After all those years of warning given by God, I’m sure He wanted to give them a lesson that they would remember when they’re resurrected. Just falling asleep and not waking up just wouldn’t cut it. In spit of what you might think, drowning is not a terrible way to go. And, that I know from experience. It’s only a matter of seconds until one loses consciousness. During my own experience, I felt the most calming and relaxing feeling one could ever imagine.
"but there’s one little detail—the whole business was a colossal futility!"
Was it? I put it to you that God does not want anyone in his kingdom whose bloodline is contaminated by genetic engineering, as those apart from Noah must have been. Remember, only Noah's bloodline was found to be perfect. The Holy Spirit was not yet generally available to mankind. I believe that those who were destroyed as a result of the flood will have their opportunity at the second resurrection.
also:- "There is still wickedness in the world,...."
Yes there is and will continue to be as long as Satan is permitted to live but we can now have the power to resist him.
"But that's just it. Did "god" say it? No! People said it. And then those people said that god said it."
That is true. And many of us believe the people who not only said it but also WROTE IT Surely you haven't forgotten this scripture:- "2Ti_3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
Unfortunately there are so many who abhor reproof and correction by someone they haven't even seen. Nor do they want to be "instructed in righteousness", God's way of life.
A) After all those years of warning given by God, I’m sure He wanted to give them a lesson that they would remember when they’re resurrected. Just falling asleep and not waking up just wouldn’t cut it.
B) In spit of what you might think, drowning is not a terrible way to go... I felt the most calming and relaxing feeling one could ever imagine.
I don't think you can have it both ways. If it's not a terrible way to go, calming and relaxing, then it wasn't much of a lesson, was it.
Fave Pack did try to explain creationism and got slaughtered by Aron Ra's video rebuttals to each of his videos. I sispect they'd all get taken to the woodshed if they publically tried to defend the Noah Myth
Ah, well, it's fun to make the case that all the "forensic" data we have supports for a day or two or three, despite the fact many prefer legends that are at odds with all the data.
I understand what's it's like to be caught in that cage of circular assumptions though, and how difficult it is to believe from within it, that so many of the people in history, in the world today, and in our own life, could be wrong. "No, no, no, there must be something to this." I thought that for a long time too.
As long as you only consider the carefully selected facts, and remain ignorant of the vast majority of the rest of the facts that paint a totally different picture, it can seem plausible. As long as you only consider one issue at a time, you can always come up with a way to shrug your shoulders and give those legends the benefit of the doubt.
But when when you zoom out and take a global view, considering many issues simultaneously, and when you start to see how many facts have been kept from you, and how these beliefs are holding you back from reaching your potential, how the result of believing is a net negative force in your life, how the effect of being religious is antithetical to the goals that are espoused for religion and for the gods, that's when you start to see how religion forms a cage for your mind, and are appalled for the first time at just how small that cage is, appalled that you never noticed it before, appalled at how you could have been so duped. But until that time, you'll fight tooth-and-nail to stay inside that claustrophobic little cage for your mind.
We won't force you to come out of that cage. But those of us who have the experiences of being both inside and outside of that cage, we know how appalled you'll be too of where you are now if you ever manage to come out and see it from outside where we are. But it's your choice.
The point is that the Old Testament doesn't necessarily give the most flattering view of God -- maybe because it's men's ideas about God and may not have any reality in fact.
We can respect God (or not), while recognizing that the Old Testament in particular makes God look like a vengeful childish being with a temper who just never really did much more than abandon humanity without instructions for millennia and then shows up to wreak havoc when people who didn't really know what He wanted didn't do what He wanted and BAM! Destruction, devastation.
And the Armstrongist God is that very God. Let's face it: Their God is the same way -- supposedly they are warning the world (they aren't) and they are false prophets who can have absolutely NO credibility, but expect masses of people will believe them so the leaders can be selfish with their inane projects, demanding money from their hapless followers, hoping for more, more, more, while never at all setting a good example, never giving anyone viable information about God and how to conduct their lives and live in the very sins and evils they are supposedly exposing to the world.
If there ever needed to be a flood, there should be a devastating one which drowns Roderick Meredith, Gerald Flurry, David Pack and all the others and finally have God Himself deliver on His caveat that false prophets be put to death.
If you are expecting something like that because you believe in the Flood of Noah, it's high time to lower your expectations.
On the other hand, there's a new God in town -- the one described in the New Testament, a far cry from the one in the Old... until you get to the book of Revelation.
10.39PM you talked past my post, completely ignoring what I said and hit me non stop with accusations of 'unjustifiable and fallacious conclusions,' and similar. What everyone believes ultimately is based on their five senses and experiences. Yet you ask me to ignore this, and get into some abstract ideals wrestling match. The five senses trumps concepts, since by definition concepts are based on the five senses. I'm not going to play by your rigged, self serving rules.
The problem is, while most people acknowledge that the Bible contains allegory and metaphor, as well as midrash, which is a Hebrew construct more or less in the same category, there is disagreement as to which stories fall into what category. Even the people who agree on which is to be taken literally, and what may simply be spiritual fable intended to teach a greater lesson or principle, debate the degree of truth and depth of the lesson, as well as whether or not the story constitutes law.
As an example, for HWA, the major takeaway from the story of Noah's ark seems to be that righteous white people shouldn't boogaloo down with non-whites, disrupting racial purity. But, this can't be the meaning, or Noah's sons wouldn't have been instrumental in preserving and "adulterating" the non-white races. Taking HWA's interpretation at face value would mean that Noah's status as being the only one whose generations were pure would be insured eternally, because even Shem's wife (as an outside) would have been racially contaminated. So it had to be less about racism amongst humans, and more about intermarriage with the Nephalim, or pehaps with Neanderthal or other previous species of man. I would imagine that in the hardness of his heart, HWA probably also held the darker races responsible for the evil and violence, as is evidenced by his theories regarding Nimrod. So, even if the historical details of the flood story were possible and verifiable, HWA's teaching on the topic would have been polluted by falsehoods. Why would Manasseh and Ephraim be half Egyptian (Nubian?) and how could Moses have been allowed to have a black wife? Would not these people have been just as worthy of death as those who perished in the flood?
Scientists are quick to acknowledge environmental conditions which existed in the past, based on old growth tree rings, polar ice layers, underwater caves, sedimentary rock, and various other factors. They would have no vested interest in denying a global flood, as bogus denial of any evidence present would certainly be exposed through peer review. Rewards are accorded in that community to those whose studies reveal verifiable and formerly unknown truths. Scientists are very adept at identifying the past presence of massive amounts of water in given areas through the items found in nature which function as reliable indicators.
The story of Noah could be a cautionary tale, demonstrating that God has the ability to pull the plug at any time. It could be semi-prophetic. Nobody has addressed the prismatic effect, the sunlight being diffused through a clear substance which separates sunlight into colors. Do we believe that this scientific principle of nature did not exist prior to the time of Noah? What does the Black Sea tell us? It is most certainly a unique body of water by any account. And, there are clues indicating that it is the site of a past civilization.
I believe that the most important aspect of the story of Noah isn't so much whether it is literal and historically correct, but rather the lessons found in the story. Those lessons, and their relative significance, are subject to individual interpretation. Assertively repeating the meanings which HWA assigned to the story, as if that were somehow "the truth"', is a limitation. There is much more depth, and even mystery to this topic, a fact made manifest by the many comments to this entry. Our exchanges perfectly illustrate the fallaciousness of holding to the "guided" or "approved" conclusion of a cult, to the exclusion of other valid evidence on the topic.
Granted, for many people drowning and the terror of knowing that they and those around them were going to drown, would have been a traumatic experience. But the Noah generation was a evil generation. Many posts here shrug this off or trivialize it. Their punishment was just. These people were not humane, they treated each other in a appalling manner. They got what they deserved. Good riddance. At any rate, there are many cases in the OT of armies of half a million being wiped out in days. These peoples death would have been painful as well. Like wise with the coming tribulation. These painful deaths are a warning for people to repent and avoid eternal death. This is Godly love. The nice guy approach simply does not work with hardened criminal societies.
It's interesting how Noahs generation drowning, parallels the 'weeping and gnashing of teeth' in Revelation. In both cases people know that they are going to die, and the death will be quick. The first is a warning of the second.
It is encouraging to learn that there are a few of us who have escaped that small mental cage of "religious belief and bible stories". My years in that cage were psychological torture, and persisted until I asked myself, "Could I possibly be mistaken?".
It is a very difficult question to ask, and has a host of repercussions, but the option to have your own thoughts and opinions is so worth it. The ability for freedom of thought is high on my list of priorities. Religion reduces that opportunity to almost zero.
As long as Christians continue to wait for Jesus to solve our problems, we cannot progress. Ridding ourselves of religious beliefs and other prejudices is the beginning of peace and cooperation.
We have more evolving to do. It is a very slow process, and difficult for the impatient.
I wonder why El didn't offer mankind a fsce to face chat with lunch to discuss the problems and work out a living and geniune solution? Was he shy? A poor public speaker? Did He muck up "and behold it was good" and just mad at himself taking it out on others? Maybe just a jealous God?
Well as the original posting picture rrminds us...it never happened everywhere
12.49 PM you fail to separate Christianity from Pharisaic morality. The two are very different. In the OT, God turned a king of Israel into a leper for trying to take on priestly duties. This was an endorsement of the separation of church and state, the purpose of which is to protect 'freedom of thought.' Christ showed the utmost respect for peoples intellectual independence, using exclusively persuasion. By the way, humans are religious creatures. If it's not one set of religious beliefs, then it's another. The main religion today is left wing socialism. It dominates the mainstream media and our society. It has amongst other things, created a economic mess with 40% young unemployment rate in many countries. Where is the 'peace and co operation' in this. Why criticise Christianity, but not secular religions?
Dennis says "No it's not... No connection. That's called proof texting." If people drowned, the concept of death would be very real to these people, and an incentive to avoid another 'real' eternal death. But Dennis says 'it's not' because Dennis sometimes reverts to his old minister mode of 'I'm the big cheese, and it's true cause i says so.' No Dennis, you are no longer a big cheese, but a commoner like the rest of us.
I know a Lutheran theologian at a local Lutheran sponsored college who says that taking the first eleven chapters of Genesis literally is heresy.
Some of the rest of scripture is best not taken literally as well.
Anyone willing to consider the geological evidence concerning the flood can read Flood Geology and the Grand Canyon. This is an article by Christian geologists. Yes, God can do anything as some say above, but the evidence does not support a one-year catastrophic flood. How you deal with that fact is up to you.
Anonymous said... Dennis says "No it's not... No connection. That's called proof texting." If people drowned, the concept of death would be very real to these people, and an incentive to avoid another 'real' eternal death. But Dennis says 'it's not' because Dennis sometimes reverts to his old minister mode of 'I'm the big cheese, and it's true cause i says so.' No Dennis, you are no longer a big cheese, but a commoner like the rest of us."
Merely pointing out that using one mythical story to reflect on another comment in a failed First Century prophecy is good theology. If someone dies in an Old Testament setting, say by fire and the NT mentions someone dying in the Lake of Fire, they are not theologically connected. It is just making connections up is all.
As far as reverting to my old minister mode of Cheesehood, you sound more like a child looking for a "na na na na na..." moment rather than a mature human being. Cheesehood was not one of my strengths nor the type who ever uttered the thought or thought the thought of being right because I say I am right. You obviously don't know me and we've never talked in person. Perhaps you are confusing confidence in my study, sources and information with "because I say so." It's more "because they say so" and I believe , for now, the information I have presented myself with on all things theological and in answer to questions I accumulated over 26 years of soaking in the scriptures and seeing the many contradictions and issues with its origins that would never come up in WCG much less ever be dreamed of.
The ministry of the churches of God are not well read or educated no matter what they think. I wasn't as a young man, though perhaps thought I was until I grew older and recognized just how much information, I wish I had had access to as a younger man, there is on all topics Bible, History, Science and Origins . I never would have gone down the path of WCG in the first place or the path of the other seminary I did not choose (yes, I thought AC was a seminary like any church would have).
At any rate, you must be reverting to something yourself judging by the personal attack....thingy.
C'mon, two more comments and it's an even 100! lol
Anon wrote: "But the Noah generation was a evil generation. Many posts here shrug this off or trivialize it. Their punishment was just. These people were not humane, they treated each other in a appalling manner. They got what they deserved. Good riddance."
Well, no matter how unbearably evil you think they were, you can't include infants and animals in your assessment, so it was still gratuitous suffering. Imagine that you are that omnipotent and yet all-loving Yahweh. Is that what you would do? Can you think of no better solution? (being just a little creative).
Incidentally, if it was "appalling evil", God allowed it to continue for a needlessly long long time while Noah painstakingly had to built an ark...? Really, Yahweh's actions just don't make sense for an all-powerful being. (But it does sound like something human storytellers would come up with)
"Proof texting is the method by which a person appeals to a biblical text to prove or justify a theological position without regard for the context of the passage they are citing." Dozens of times God has destroyed or severely punished nations to help them repent and qualify for eternal life. As far as I'm concerned, dismissing this as 'proof texting,' is nothing more than intellectually dishonest invalidation. If you read up about it, the invalidation thingy is the tool most used by Scientologists to keep their members in line.
No one of the " God said it, did it and It really happened" camp answered the continuous culture conundrum.
There will always be those who take the story as written literally and never any other way but don't care if others don't get that.
There will always be those who take the story as written literally and never any other way and believe those who don't will find out the hard way in the near future
There will always be those who can't take it literally due to too many problems with literal text and historical origins but it is a good metaphor, analogy and warning of things to come
There will always be those who can't take it literally due to too many problems with the literal text and historical origins and thus just another Bible myth unanchored in reality.
There is a rebuttal for every butt
No one ever says "I never thought of that", "I have always wondered about that myself", "I'll take a closer look at the material you suggested", "I think I am mistaken on it being literally true" (Few if any I know come to this conclusion and then go back to taking it literally true again once they have thought it through)
Personal faith and belief must be preserved at all costs and would not know what to think if the story was not literally true.
Personal faith and belief is not connected to whether Noah's flood and Ark are literally true
Some know exactly what God was thinking, doing, meaning when he drown the world
Some think God may have been over reacting in his thinking and doing when he drown the world in a fit of temper
Some think it was a "good riddance" moment and we should all be grateful God doesn't think like Jesus might have in a similar situation, well except for Revelation Jesus.
Some can come up with amazing and convoluted explanations of issues raised about the literal story that defy common sense but preserve good feelings and faith
Most can't stay what others believe and where their own minds and studies have taken them.
Talking and sharing ideas and thoughts about the Biblical text, stories, contradictions, faith issues, impossibilities and what one thinks God is doing, how, why and when is more stimulating than fasting, church government and the antics of the self appointed nearly arrested Elijah-Zerubbabel-Joshua-That Guy-Presiding Evangelist-Apostle-Twice Blessed-Prophets and Charlottetans.
10.07 PM We both know that God is a merciful God. For instance, He warned ancient Israel for generations before he sent in the conquering armies. Noahs generation was likewise given ample warning and opportunity for repentance. God is good and merciful.
Thank you very much for bringing some "scientific order" after the expression of all these "opinions".
As a matter of fact I just finished researching one of the (many) organisations WCG founded and funded even after the initiation phase.
Up to this day this still existing organisation has funded up to 300 scientific expeditions and missions in unchartered nature reserves. Many of the literally hundreds of sponsored studies by top researchers on plants and animals focus on the evolution of those species.
Since my contributions are generally categorized under the category of convoluted common sense defying comments I thought I might add this little bit of science to those that claim to know it all and are sure to know the mind of God and the ways of the world and WCG.
I'm sorry, I was just triggered by your adminition to continually ask questions and your systematic ordering of some possible answers.
Someone asked Dennis, "Why were you still in the WCG in 1998 when the Tkaches had already openly changed all the teachings of the church at the start of 1995?"
I believe this "someone" has his dates wrong. From what I remember, the WCG was still a full blown doomsday cult (espousing all of Armstrong's teachings) all through 1995 and beyond. Wasn't it around '98 when the shit hit the fan?
"You can sure tell the commenters rubbishing the ark building are highly likely to be from land locked, inward looking usa."
"landlocked"??? But what about the Atlantic and Pacific oceans? Do those oceans not count because of perceived "jew-libs" on the east coast and "hollywood libs" on the west coast?
"Ben Hobrink wrote a book called MODERN SCIENCE IN THE BIBLE: Amazing Scientific Truths Found in Ancient Texts."
The problem with Ben Hobrink is, that he's a hack. He's even laughed at by other Young Earth Creationists, and for good reason - sort of how Ron Wyatt was.
Ben Hobrink was schooled in food science. He's NOT schooled in anything that would make him even remotely an expert as to the story of Noah's Ark, or to the stability of ship designs. (Sorry, but just because he "wanted to study physics" does not make him a physicist.)
"We don't know yet, until they are resurrected, how those people exactly died. Maybe the flood water travelled[sic] like a tusami[sic] and the end came extremely quickly. Maybe they died in ways we do not know or cannot fathem[sic]."
Perhaps, many fathoms under the sea, all the babies were swept into a giant library bubble containing all of HWA's books and booklets, and God gave them all understanding to read them and drink in his Truth before drinking in water and drowning joyfully, and they will be in the first rez and will be given new planets to rule and new babies to joyfully drown. What a glorious plan!
Ralph, are you fully aware that what you wrote on July 13, 2016 at 1:44 AM is known as circular reasoning?
Noting that fact does not mean that I abhor what you propose. It's simply an observation. Also to denigrate those who disagree with your conclusions - as you do - is illogical, unjustified and elitist. Can you think of a church that inculcated such responses within it's members?
Dennis, A.R.'s video is excellent.. Thanks for sharing it! For the edification of readers here, I'll make it into a clickable link. Click here to see the video!
"This is fascinating reading all of these comments."
It sure is.
also:- "I appreciate both sides."
Surely most of us do. I'm also sure you would be most welcome to make your own contributions to the fray(?) If you do, please try and give yourself a name so that we can know to whom we are talking.
"For the edification of readers here, I'll make it into a clickable link."
It has often been said that one shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but I think we all have the right to make our own decisions. The link presents a figure dressed all in black, a symbol of death; we've all heard of the "black death". A figure with long flowing 'black' hair, contrary to 1Cor.11:14, a short goatee beard, now where have I seen that kind of symbol before? On the chest of this figure is seen the 'skull and crossbones' symbol, another portrayal of death, the very antithesis of what is offered by Jesus Christ, eternal life. Even the character's name Aron Ra is reminiscent of an ancient Egyptian god from which,I hope, we have escaped. Please, give us no more of this kind of AntiChrist!
What a shame that Aron needs to make his excellent case on debating and argumentation skills in a casing that is not appealing to those that could benefit from his lecture.
I find it plain stupid if someone makes an excellent case in a non appealing format for those who could benefit most.
Although perhaps I should know better since I am a proven expert and master in disguising excellent analysis in an extremely unattractive package. I have something to ponder for the weekend.
"I find it plain stupid if someone makes an excellent case in a non appealing format for those who could benefit most."
nck, obviously I have not listened to his presentation. Just how do you think I would benefit by doing so? Does he have any major points that you think I should consider?
As an aside, I delight in the consumption of a sushi hand roll and a number of sushi bars around this area have the Yin Yang symbol adorning their premises. I have sometimes wondered about this symbol and finally decided to Google it. Wonderful information found and a most acceptable philosophy. Helps to explain a lot of things.
Since I am very much a Yin en Yang guy I would not recommend the video to you Ralph. He eloquenty explains the difference between believing and knowing. I do not completely agree (of course) but my point is that I find it a shame that no Roman soldiers would play a game for his clothes let alone listen to what he has to say because of his poor appearance. I do care for the appearance of a messenger. I am a respecter of man so to say. To me one should be a greek unto the greek.
HMS Victory was reconstructed because it was basically nearly destroyed in battle with Admiral Nelson. It was also taken apart to protect it during the blitz bombing. Portsmouth docks were it was and still is was badly bombed in WW2.
126 comments:
Man, that's too deep! I am sure some COG headgaskets will blow.
Historically verifiable dates using items such as pottery and written records go back 5000, not 6000 years. The food explains the missing 1000 years. After having many dealings with psychos at work, good riddance to that evil pre flood generation. It's comforting to think that they drowned like rats. And a new fresh start for humanity. God is soooo good.
It's really very simple. There was no flood and no tremendous ark. Probably based on the breakup of the Bosporus that flooded a lot of area and forced people to flee.
It is impossible for a ship that size to hold the number of animals the ark would have been required to hold. A ship that size made entirely of wood would have broken apart in seas that are as rough as the normal ocean waves in our regular oceans. These are just a few of the many facts that made the Noah's ark story not possible to have accured.
on July 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM
Ed wrote:-
"t is impossible for a ship that size to hold the number of animals the ark would have been required to hold."
How is it so? Bearing in mind that cats are cats, be they little or big with flowing manes would there have to be a male and female lion, a male and female tiger, a male and female leopard etc? Or, could one pair of "cats" mutate, by 'intelligent design', into several different kinds of cat?
Even today man can breed different 'kinds' of dogs "as illustrated here" and they are still 'dogs'.
cheers
ralph.f
on July 11, 2016 at 2:57 PM
Ed also wrote:-
"A ship that size made entirely of wood would have broken apart in seas that are as rough as the normal ocean waves in our regular oceans."
I am not a nautical engineer so could you provide some 'scientific' reference(s) to support your statement?
cheers
ralph.f
Now we witness foolish posts. This site is loosing credibility rapidly.
Pre-flood people didn't make pottery? interesting.
You may as well give up on this posting with COG remnants and fundamentalist believers. No matter how much historical, scientific or geological evidence you provide, Noah and his flood story (taken from three previous cultures much older) is simply and literally true for them. It has to be true just like Adam and Eve just has to be true and we may as well throw in the Tower of Babel from which all language sprang , the Exodus and most of Israel's exaggerated history right on down to Solomon and David.
You can show, teach, explain, reason and prove all you want but to the closed minded, God said it, the Bible teaches it, But-you-sees of the Churches who never had a critical thought about the Bible in their lives, it is useless, fruitless and endless.
Ships more then 100 feet long need steel beam reinforcement to keep the structure stable so it doesn't break-up in rough seas. This is a known fact of ship building engineering.
You are right-on Dennis. The facts don't fit the story so the facts will be explained away.
You can't teach the Myth-taken anything new or threatening to their sacred and unshakable stories long ago proven to be less than literally true. You have to think outside the box of literalism and mere Bible reading, which both minister and member of the COGs are stuck in and , in my experience, very unwilling to step out of. I understand the difficulty in coming to see the Bible is much less historically true than it presents itself to be, but the information is out there for those willing to do their homework.
Religious prejudice and need holds the believer in place and in their seats letting others tell them how it all is and they seem more than pleased to have it be so.
I can't tell you how many ministers of many faiths have told me..."I know, I know...but if I teach that I will lose my job," on these and other much more important and assumed religious teachings both OT and New.
Seems "You can't handle the truth" applies to these types of topics and all the defensiveness and unlearned and badly thought out rebuttals it provokes prove it.
I think theories such as Hugh Ross' writings, placing the flood as a regional event, about 20,000 years ago, with the collapse of a land bridge at the mouth of the current Black Sea, due to a global warming cycle, to have some merit.
If the bulk of mankind was there, it could be considered then a "complete" event as was testified, according to their own experience.
The disproofs of the historicity of the flood story are legion, from pre-Jewish mythologies that offer countering flood stories of Atrahasis, Ziusudra, and Utnapishtim, (will the real Noah please stand up?), to the utter failure of "flood geology," to the utter absence of any "flood biology"—perhaps the most significant disproof of them all, to the utter absence of cataclysmic floods in the historical record, the subject of this post, when ancient empires, I suppose, survived by living underwater for about a year without noticing it.
Not to mention how it would have sowed every inch of land with salt, making the whole earth inhospitable to the plant life fundamental to the entire land-based ecosystem. Of course, the bible story forgot to mention Noah's other ark, the floating greenhouse, which saved all our post-diluvian plant diversity. Just to cite one example, how did Noah manage to save potatoes, indigenous to South America and unknown in the Old World until European explorers returned with them four centuries ago? And how did he manage to return them South America afterwards? Why didn't he keep any of them so the ancient Mesopotamians could have fries with their golden calf burgers?
If a person is going to judge the flood narratives of Atrahasis, Ziusudra, and Utnapishtim to not be reliable, they have no excuse to judge Johnny-come-lately Noah as being any moreso. That would be a textbook case of special pleading.
But of course, if the Noah story had any basis in reality, Noah, his family, and his entire zoo would have perished right alongside everything else. Wooden boats 300 feet long, like the six-masted schooners from the late 19th century are already at the practical limits of the material, required iron structural reinforcement, and even so, leaked so badly due to "hogging" and "sagging" of the timbers that they required constant pumping to remain afloat, which is why shipbuilders turned to metal instead. Wyoming at 335 feet is generally considered to hold the record for the longest wooden ship. But a wooden boat 450 feet long, built completely outside of any shipbuilding tradition, and with no metal reinforcement and no bilge pumps, simply could never have survived.
The flood story must be true. It's in the book!
Dennis, answered prayer refutes all your opinions. The holy spirit sometimes puts a certain scripture into people minds, in response to a prayer request. This confirms the bible as Gods inspired word, So yes, your arguments will prove fruitless with people like myself. Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers.
Take your own advice by doing this homework.
Anon told me: "Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers.
Take your own advice by doing this homework."
Ah...I did this homework from the time I was 14 in 1964 coming into WCG until leaving the ministry in 1998. How much homework am I supposed to do???? When do I see what I see and know what I know about how this reality test does not prove real?
OK folks, Mr Harold Camping figured this all out some time ago by cooking up a clever way to add years to the genealogies in the Bible so as to push Adam back to around 11,000 BC and Noah to about 7000 years back. It's all here...
http://www.bmius.org/wp-content/uploads/The-Biblical-Calender-of-History.pdf
Ronco
DennisCDiehl at 7:44 PM said...
“Ah...I did this homework from the time I was 14 in 1964 coming into WCG until leaving the ministry in 1998. How much homework am I supposed to do????”
Well, I suppose you should keep on doing your homework until you get it right. Are you sure you were really living by the laws of God? Or, did you somehow “just not get it” and therefore flunked some sort of great test?
How did you “leave the ministry” in 1998? Did you resign or were you terminated? Why were you still in the WCG in 1998 when the Tkaches had already openly changed all the teachings of the church at the start of 1995? Did you disagree with what HWA had taught? Did you agree with the new Tkach teachings? Or, did it not matter to you what the WCG officially taught as long as you got a paycheck? Do you think the church members' tithe money should be spent to hire and support “ministers” who do not believe in the Bible, so they can write and teach against it after reading other books by sinful mortals that they think are better?
"Dennis, answered prayer refutes all your opinions. The holy spirit sometimes puts a certain scripture into people minds, in response to a prayer request. This confirms the bible as Gods inspired word..."
That is the extent of the confirmation of the bible??? Your ability to bring a familiar scripture to mind? By standards this low, the scriptures of every religion pass the test of being confirmed as the inspired words of all those other deities.
"...So yes, your arguments will prove fruitless with people like myself..."
What an embarrassing admission. Shallow, thoughtless ignorance of just how ignorant you really are is the citadel where faith retrenches itself against the onslaught of evidence, facts, and even common sense.
"...Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers..."
Oh. Is that how scientists test reality, by praying for divine revelation? You have a funny definition of "reality." All the probabilities are on Dennis' side. To argue against that which is probable is to argue against reality.
"...Take your own advice by doing this homework."
How arrogant can you get?
Dennis said:
"Ah...I did this homework from the time I was 14 in 1964 coming into WCG until leaving the ministry in 1998. "
I'm going to guess your leaving the ministry didn't exactly coincide precisely with your reaching the point of non-belief.
Can I ask about how long you estimate it took for the latter?
I ask that, because for me it was approximately a 2-year period (from being a daily on-my-knees bible adherent to being able to say "this book is pure nonsense").
And many, many stories I read of people leaving "faith" usually point to a period of 2-3 years. Could be wrong but my guess is that it requires at least around a 2-year period for any total rewiring of the brain (of a level required to entirely change one's worldview) to occur.
If that is true, then it would imply that any adamant believer, even faced with rock-hard solid evidence against that belief, simply could not switch worldviews in that way unless and until such xxxx amount of time has elapsed. Too many neurons that have to be rewired...
Which would of course have implications that might be helpful in guiding others in their journey toward unbelief.
Yes, Dennis, you're supposed to throw all reason, deduction, and any hope of proving anything out the proverbial window, and accept the because-I-say-so of someone who says they heard it from the holy spirit. A convenient assertion, since it can't be proven or disproven.
Oh, and while you're at it, have you heard the good news of the gospel of trade? ;)
Where did the Flood water go when the Arc landed?
Where did the Flood of money go when Joe sold AC?
Ed said...
"Ships more then 100 feet long need steel beam reinforcement to keep the structure stable so it doesn't break-up in rough seas. This is a known fact of ship building engineering."
Not true Ed, not a know fact at all, and easy to show otherwise.
Take an actual example in the UK, the ship HMS Victory was completed in 1765. The gun deck was 186 feet long (the overall length was 227feet), and a width of 52 feet. She was made entirely of wood.
She fought in the battle of Trafalgar in 1805 (40 years after she was built). She continued afloat until at least 1903, and is still on show today, and is open daily for visitors, although now in dry dock.
So this wooden ship remained afloat for 140 years, after taking part in several battles. Rather more strenuous a life than something that was basically a raft, and didn't have to be piloted anywhere, it just had to stay afloat for a year.
9.02 PM all you give me is straw man arguments. When I came into the church, I kept wandering wether I was conned. I was suspicious. But I acted on what understanding I had, I didn't give myself the right to any perks (exemptions for some of Gods laws) which is rampant in the church, and lo and behold, a string of prayers were answered. The body of evident was overwhelming. When God puts thoughts into a persons mind, it has a unique feel. This is distinctly different from ones owns thoughts.
It's answered prayer that ultimately keeps the churches going. Granted abusive ministers exploit this, but that's another issue.
Connie, you said you believed, "placing the flood as a regional event, about 20,000 years ago, with the collapse of a land bridge at the mouth of the current Black Sea, due to a global warming cycle, to have some merit."
"Some" merit? "Likely"? What are the scientific peer reviewed analyses for what he's proposed happened? I'd like to know.
You don't mention it, but do you believe that even if it was a local event, that the Bible story of Noah building a giant boat and bringing 2 x 2 of all animals onto it is accurate?
Isn't it more likely that the Biblical flood story was usurped by the Hebrews from older and similar flood stories that the Hebrews would have known of, like the Sumerian's Epic of Ziusudra, or the Mesopotamian's Epic of Gilgamesh?
If you don't believe that's likely, I have one other question. It makes me cringe, though:
Do you think Satan is causing me to ask these questions to try to get you to question the veracity of the Bible's literalism?
If the flood was local, why didn't Noah just run like hell to higher ground rather than build a boat?
How did kangaroos and other Australian animals get to the ark? They would of had to swim the ocean and walk thousands of miles. Even if you think that there was a land bridge before the flood what about after the flood? There is no land bridge after the flood! How did they get back to Australia?
I read this somewhere maybe the number was wrong. However it was a size somewhat less then the size of the ark that required steel beam reinforcement.
8:39 PM sounds like a minister or church writer. Your former employer Dennis, is taking you to task.
Ready to be accused of anything you like, I will venture: scripture does not say that the only material used to build the Ark was 'Gopher wood'. Iron and or steel could also have been used in its construction. Scripture says nothing about Noah's abilities as a ship builder nor if, apart from his sons, he had help in building the ship. Like numerous other contributors to this blog I can exercise my imagination and picture sub-contractors being used for the project. Connie suggested that Noah got the necessary funds from trading derivatives on the stock market. I don't agree with that but he must have found the funds from somewhere, perhaps in a similar manner to Warren Buffet.
Nor does scripture tell us much at all about Noah apart from neither he nor his predecessors had been subject to genetic engineering as the rest of humanity may have been, remember:- "there is no new thing under the sun"?
Nor does scripture tell us what society was at all like before the flood. At the risk of being classed as 'off balance' I will say that I would not be surprised if someone discovered a pre-flood cell phone.
cheers
ralph.f
Anon at 8:39 PM, in a reply to Dennis,
. . . Are you sure you were really living by the laws of God? . . .
Do the laws of God include the laws of nature, or the laws of physics, or the laws of science of any kind. OR, do the laws of “God” exclude all scientific laws? BTW the term “God” means many things to many people. Is your “God” more important than all other “Gods” like those of the Baptist, Methodist, Jewish, Catholic, Hindu, Buddist, etc, etc, etc.? “But of course it is, because HWA said so,” is likely your answer. Dennis mentioned myths in one of his remarks. Just to be clear, myths are not lies. Myths, as told in the Bible, are stories that were told in any ancient culture to explain a practice, belief, or natural occurrence.
Engineers, chemists, biologists, scientists of all kind work with facts and the laws of nature. Shouldn’t all the laws of nature be the same as the laws of “God” if indeed all that exists were created by the source of all that exists? If any of those mentioned do not work within the laws of nature, their work is fruitless. Failure will be their result. It has been said of an engineer, “Get your engineering mind out of the Bible.”
I used to wonder what the lions and tigers ate on the ark.
Thankfully, Jesus gave me a new TV, and when I turned it on and tuned into the FOX network, it said lions and tigers on the ark ate the bodies of drowned sinners floating near the ark.
Question answered. (however strangely)
Miracle validated. (however tenuously)
Case closed!
Mind closed!
Cheers,
TruthyGuy
Michael, yes it is a process of several years to be sure. It is easy to spend a few of those thinking "it will get better" but it never did. Transitions of all sorts are messy. The mind leaves long before the body for many many reasons, especially in religion where one believes it matters what you do.
By personality I don't consider myself a mover and shaker or a dominant type. I kept to myself in the ministry because getting drawn in to the drama and personalities of other minister types was too stressful and discouraging. My last congregation in SC was the most difficult in terms of divisive and drama filled fueled by all that was going on with the Tkaches. I dutifully called Joe Sr to clear up rumors about changes rumored to be coming in traditional WCG practices and was told not to worry about it. Everything I was told was not going to change did change and the rumors were always correct.
In hind site I struggled with the classic causes of depression for which I got some help professionally. While getting help, my peers and the head of Ministerial services told me "we think you are just hiding here," referring to a week or so I spent as an inpatient learning the skills I lacked it seemed to cope etc. Long story. I was terminated at the point when the congregation reached a hundred , down from 450 in the day and when HQ types were shifting congregations over to being taken care of by local and unpaid elder types. It was a messy time and for me, one of complete confusion as to what to think much less do. One "good friend" elder to my face told the church when I was later transferred to another I was the worst thing that ever happened to the church. He was a lawman type and pushed members which I was not. Another smiled big to my face while running to my regional director type behind my back reporting on my not going with the program which at the time was my scorn for Promise Keeper mass meeting that we were all told we needed to go to and I said no. I don't do emotional religious crap in crowds too big to fathom getting down on my knees on command by some jerk who will come and go which he did.
See how a posting on Noah's Ark ends up with some deflecting and righteously demanding answers as to one's conversion, prayer life, behaviors, state of mind and the classic, "well did you take a paycheck when you disagreed with..."
I'm content to simply say I am me, doing the best I can and don't really have to give account to anyone but myself concerning my inner experience with the Wildworld Church of God.
PS In my last church transfer to SC I replaced Gerald Weston. When it was clear I was not that type of minister , scores came to me with their stories of hurt and relief for change. The deacons and elders were well trained to think like Gerald and were made privy by him of all the problems members had and such. They were used to being included on problem visits. When I did not take them visiting with me and talked personally and alone with folk about problems, they did not like that one bit it seemed. My SC and last church experience was the worst of my 14 congregation experiences over the years but was also during the worst of times .
Gerald asked me when I transferred in if I would like to go to lunch where he could tell me all about each person in the congregation and I said yes to lunch and no to discussing members. I wanted them to know they had a clean start , whatever that meant and that I knew nothing of anyone's past no cared. Not sure he liked that. It got me off to a good start with the congregation however.
We didn't talk about the truth or myth of Noah's Ark either though so maybe we should have cleared that up then.
Dennis, reread your 5.24PM post. You mention 'mere bible reading,' 'religious prejudices and need..' etc., then complain of people deflecting from Noahs Ark. it's you that kicked off the deflection.
"he could tell me all about each person in the congregation..'
That was and is another trait of these churches. They have a dirt/smut file on everyone. They pull it out and use it as a club when church teachings are questioned, or against anyone who resists the ministers 'right' to lord it over them.
My first minister deliberately put lies into my smut file, including that I didn't have the holy spirit, even though I had been baptised. I believe Herbie kicked this off with his publicly questioning the conversion of those who disagreed with him,
Dennis said:
"Transitions of all sorts are messy. The mind leaves long before the body for many many reasons, especially in religion where one believes it matters what you do. "
Hear you loud and clear. Different (but similar) in my case, where I had a job in Pasadena answering co-worker letters (many of which were extremely heartbreaking, people writing in for advice, help, healing). As I gradually began to lose faith in a non-existent god, my answers (things like, "we know from the Bible that we can trust God's promises to heal" and other such nonsense) came to sound ever more hollow and empty as I wrote them, but because it's a gradual process, there was no exact point at which I realized it was becoming hypocritical. Only in hindsight can you tell that. And besides, it's not just a paycheck, you have responsibilities too. People depending on you to carry out your job and obligations. And like you said, you're in the midst of a personal struggle all the while.
So for those who may be critical of such a journey, I would say they should be much more amazed that one in such a position has the guts and self-awareness (not to mention rationality) to ever leave at all.
To Minimalist
You wonder where the water went...? I know the idea, like there isn't enough water to have a global flood...So there couldn't have been one..?
Years ago it was calculated if all continents and all ocean bottoms were made level with each other, the excess water would be over 7,000 feet above our heads...there really is that much water on earth
The deflection comment was of grilling me on my praying, answered prayer refuting all arguments against a literal noah ,keeping God's law etc as the real homework to be done as well as demanding answers to personal questions on my inner experience coming to see WCG was a mistake, in hindsite, for me personally and how that realization played out in my life. And this from golk who won't give their name or current affiliations and what their reasons for those are.
The deflection comment was of the personal grilling me on my obeying, praying, answered prayer refuting all arguments against a literal noah ,keeping God's law etc as the real homework to be done as well as demanding answers to personal questions on my inner experience coming to see WCG was a mistake, in hindsite, for me personally and how that realization played out in my life. And this from folk who won't give their name or current affiliations and what their reasons for those are.
Rubbish, the flood happened and noahs ark existed. The are comments above that are riddiculous. Ships needing this needing that, the vikings never had steel bows in their ships. Where is a shipwright, or a sailor when you need one. You can sure tell the commenters rubbishing the ark building are highly likely to be from land locked, inward looking usa.
I'm 6.55 PM, but I did not post comment 9.39 PM. That's word-smith, a minister or similar. I would not ask/grill you questions on your inner experience.
Since you expressed your belief that God and the bible are fairly tales, I do not think it unreasonable to ask you or anyone else to reality check with obedience, bible study and prayer.
It's dangerous for me and others to give our real names. It's safe for atheists, but not for believers. That's Satan's world for you.
Just like 1 million Israelites wandering around in the desert for 40 years left not one scrap of debris, broken pottery, grave sites, broken wagon remnants, charcoal from fires that burned continually under the tabernacle braziers or any other casts off that people normally throw away? There is not one scrap of evidence that there were mass casualties and buried cities of a worldwide flood. Noah and his children do not go around the earth knocking down building remnants or burning the carcasses. Birds and fish would have eaten the bones clean, but the bones would still be there to be found and or buried later. If you believe in the flood you have to throw all logic out the door. Which pretty much what the COG has done with most of its theology and "reasoning."
I like these kinds of postings here! They do not discredit this site at all but confirm that it is a site that allows people from all positions and COG's to be able to share their opinions. There are no other site out there that allow this. Bob Thiel doesn't, he does not allow any comments at all. James Malm does only as long as you toe his absurd doctrinal lines, otherwise he makes a public spectacle out of humiliating you.
Keep up the good work!
When are we going to see the bible as one of the most important as not the most important relic of mankind. And see it for what it is. Reporting (grossly exagerating) on a local flood. Perhaps even from oral tradition thousands of years before the hebrews plagiarized it from the mesopotamians. A local flood, heavily impacting societies of the day living in what we now call the Black Sea after the Mediteranean broke through the Bosporus when the Ice melted on the Northern Atlantic.
The Bible wow I love it. But please corrobarate it with the known facts, not fairytales or the History Channel. Wow I just watched something on the History Channel, have to look that channel up what a load of crock on that channel.
nck
"9.02 PM all you give me is straw man arguments..."
Based on what he said and your response, I would guess that you don't actually know what a "straw man argument" is.
11.34 AM bones dissolve in sea water over the years, depending on the acidity of the sea water. Google the topic. Strong currents could have toppled or buried the buildings. Your are also assuming that rock was the building material of choice.
"Now we witness foolish posts. This site is loosing credibility rapidly."
You poor baby, having a favorite story questioned. Must be so hard to be you.
Noahs ark was an ark not a cunard transatlantic passenger ship. It wasn't criss crossing the globe. It just needed to float. Who said the seas were rough ? Steel reinforcement wasn't much help for the Titanic. The all wooden HMS Victory ship survived rough seas and war without having steel reinforcement in her. It still stands to this day.
Anonymous Asshole 6:55PM wrote:
"Dennis, answered prayer refutes all your opinions. The holy spirit sometimes puts a certain scripture into people minds, in response to a prayer request. This confirms the bible as Gods inspired word, So yes, your arguments will prove fruitless with people like myself. Perhaps you should reality test by praying, studying the bible, living by the ten commandments, and then seeing if God will answer your prayers. Take your own advice by doing this homework."
Anonymous 11:33PM wrote:
"9.02 PM all you give me is straw man arguments. When I came into the church, I kept wandering wether I was conned. I was suspicious. But I acted on what understanding I had, I didn't give myself the right to any perks (exemptions for some of Gods laws) which is rampant in the church, and lo and behold, a string of prayers were answered. The body of evident was overwhelming. When God puts thoughts into a persons mind, it has a unique feel. This is distinctly different from ones owns thoughts. It's answered prayer that ultimately keeps the churches going. Granted abusive ministers exploit this, but that's another issue."
The questions I'd like to ask both Anon6:55PM and Anon11:33PM are:
1) How can you be so sure of the origin of these "answers" to your "prayers"? Has anyone ever stepped forward, offered identification, and taken credit for these "answers"? If so, what form of identification was offered? How credible was this identification?
How do you know what the boundaries and capabilities are of human mental faculties to produce thoughts, inner speech, as well as feelings about that internal monolog? Do you think it is at least possible that you could make a mistake, that you're not infallible, when you're attributing an origin to thoughts and inner speech you experience?
How do you know that the human mind is capable of acting as a receiver of other-worldly messages? What do you assume is the carrier for these signals? The electromagnetic spectrum? Something else?
Reseach into voice-hearing indicates that 5%-10% of the population at some point in their lives will have an experience which they assume a voice in their head is not their own. Psychotherapists such as Molly Martin, who runs the Hearing Voices Network of Denver ask their patients regarding the inner speech they experience, what it is that convinces them that a particular "voice" they hear in their head is not the same as their own internal monologue? I would ask what the criteria is you're using that you believe allows you to reliably differentiate between your own internal monologue and the thoughts/speech of somebody else appearing within your mind?
2) Perhaps you also think these "answers" come in the form of coincidental occurrances. How can you be certain you're not falling victim to confirmation bias? Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses, while giving disproportionately less consideration to alternative possibilities
Derren Brown is an English magician who uses the same tricks that play upon the same faults in our cognition that cold readers of all kinds use to con their "customers" into believing they are capable of communicating with your dead loved ones, fortelling your future, reading your horoscope, etc. However, we are often just as good at performing this service for ourselves.
3) Were you really suspicious? Have you ever even considered that something else besides your presuppositional hypothesis might be what's going on here?
Let's just assume for a moment that you were, in fact, receiving other-worldly messages, and that you haven't just been simply misattributing your own inner monologue and falling victim to confirmation bias:
3a) How do you know that these messages are not from Allah, Apollo, Anun-Ra, Ahura Mazda, or some other beneficient deity who has answered your prayers, and has forgivingly decided to overlook the fact that you don't realize what god you're supposed to praying to?
3b) How do you know that these messages are not counterfeits from christianity's Satan," or Islam's Iblis, or Zoroastrianism's Ahriman, whose intent is to deceive you in any about any number of possible things?
3c) Are you familiar with the Contactee Movement? How do you know your prayers are not being clairvoyantly intercepted by space aliens, and then being answered by various means by the same extraterrestrials?
4) The null hypothesis is not "godidit." The null hypothesis is that all you've experienced is your own internal monologue and your own confirmation bias. In order to overcome the null hypothesis, you need something more than an assumption. And before you conclude that an alternative hypothesis is more likely, you really need to be able to differentiate between the relative probabilities many different alternative hypotheses. You can't just simply pretend that a christian hypothesis is the null, and then go around like an asshole telling other people they're idiots for not having speciously arrived at the same indefensible conclusion by unreliable means that you did.
So far, you guys are nothing more than hacks, arrogant ones at that, who claim to be psychic.
If the Noah story were true, and not just plagiarized myth from older myth, Noah, his family, and his entire zoo would have perished right alongside everything else.
Wooden boats 300 feet long, like the six-masted schooners from the late 19th century are already at the practical limits of the material.
Wyoming at 335 feet is generally considered to hold the record for the longest wooden ship ever built. It required iron structural reinforcement, and even so, leaked so badly due to twisting and buckling of the timbers that it required constant pumping just to remain afloat. But a wooden boat 450 feet long, built completely outside of any shipbuilding tradition, and with no metal reinforcement and no bilge pumps, simply could never have survived.
"...In the words of A. M. Robb, there was an 'upper limit, in the region of 300 feet, on the length of the wooden ship; beyond such a length the deformation due to the differing distributions of weight and buoyancy became excessive, with consequent difficulty in maintaining the hull watertight' (p. 355). Pollard and Robertson concur, emphasizing that 'a wooden ship had great stresses as a structure. The absolute limit of its length was 300 feet, and it was liable to `hogging' and `sagging'' (pp. 13-14). This is the major reason why the naval industry turned to iron and steel in the 1850s. The largest wooden ships ever built were the six-masted schooners, nine of which were launched between 1900 and 1909. These ships were so long that they required diagonal iron strapping for support; they "snaked," or visibly undulated, as they passed through the waves, they leaked so badly that they had to be pumped constantly, and they were only used on short coastal hauls because they were unsafe in deep water. John J. Rockwell, the designer of the first of this class, confessed that 'six masters were not practical. They were too long for wood construction' (Laing, pp. 393, 403-409). Yet the ark was over 100 feet longer than the longest six-master, the 329 foot U.S.S. Wyoming, and it had to endure the most severe conditions ever encountered while transporting the most critically important cargo ever hauled. Clearly, God had to imbue this amateurishly assembled gopherwood with some very special properties to fit it for the voyage. So it should be clear by now why 'intelligent people' somehow see a 'problem' in the building of the ark."
—The Impossible Voyage of Noah's Ark by R.A. Moore.
I keep posting this article, but no believers ever seem to have any interest in reading any of it. Of course, this is just one of dozens of problems, each one by itself sufficient because each one is completely insurmountable without any further assistance.
In historical terms, of course, it was the development of the field of geology that first caused belief in the biblical flood to be discarded as myth.
on July 12, 2016 at 5:41 AM
TruthyGuy wrote:-
"I used to wonder what the lions and tigers ate on the ark."
Are you sure that there were both lions AND tigers on the ark? Scripture says "Gen 7:14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort."
Now, there are two 'kinds' of cat, big ones and little ones. Perhaps there were two of the 'big' ones that later mutated into lions, tigers, leopards (wild) and two of the little ones that later mutated into Balinese, Japanese bobtail, Manx etc.(domesticated)
The same with all the other animals, including camels.
cheers
ralph.f
on July 12, 2016 at 11:06 AM
Anonymous wrote:-
"It's dangerous for me and others to give our real names. It's safe for atheists, but not for believers."
As Julius Sumner Miller would ask "Why is it so?"
cheers
ralph.f
You silly people! Don't you know that the Nephilim helped Noah build the ark. These strong men of God could carry the huge timbers needed to build such a long boat. They would then have carried in the tons and tons of pitch needed to seal the timbers. These giants of men are the ones who helped Noah build the ark and did all the heavy work. These are also the same men who loaded the ark with even more tons of food for the animals that had to weigh additional hundreds of tons. Add to that the tons and tons of feces and waste that would have been produced. With everything sealed shut it must have really stunk! And, that boat had to have ben riding low in water with all of that combined weight.
Oh wait, according to the Church of God all the animals butts were sealed so they did not need to eat since they were hibernating. So that takes care of all the food and waste.
All of this talk about length, weight, wood and iron. Its so silly and useless. If God said it then it is true. Plain and simple. God kept it all afloat regardless of what we think. God stopped it from leaking and sinking. God put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep until it was time to wake up and send out the birds in search of land. it's all rather simple and easy to understand when you realize he can do anything he wants.
Pay attention Ralph:
“…Every inherited trait, however small, is coded for by one or more genes, and each gene locus may have a substantial number of variants (alleles), which accounts for the great variety observed in a given population. Any specific individual, however, has at most only two alleles per locus—one from each parent.
As James C. King writes: 'There is good evidence for concluding that every message coded in the DNA exists in any sizeable population in numerous versions, forming a spectrum grading from grossly defective alleles—such as the one for albinism—at one end, through the slightly deviant, to the normal at the other end. And the normal is probably not a single version of the message but a collection of slightly different alleles.' (p. 55)
Hence, for a trait such as human pigmentation, 'we can visualize not merely a few dozen interacting loci but an array of perhaps a dozen or so alleles at each locus' (p. 60).
From this we can see that the original canine baramin in Eden would have needed a fantastic set of giant chromosomes with alleles for every trait that would someday be manifest in coyotes, wolves, foxes, jackals, dingos, fennecs, and the myriad of minute variations in hair color (twenty-four genes at nine loci), height, face shape, and so forth that are seen in the domestic dog (cf. Hutt). So, too, for the feline kind, within which creationists Byron Nelson (p. 157) and Alfred Rehwinkel (p. 70) both place lions, tigers, leopards, and ocelots as well as housecats. Similar giant chromosomes would be required for the bovine kind, equine kind, and so on.
In the centuries before the deluge, these strange progenitors must have rapidly diversified into their potential species, as the fossil record shows. The equine kind developed not only zebras, horses, onagers, asses, and quaggas but Eohippus, Mesohippus, Merychippus, and other now-extinct species that paleontologists have misinterpreted as evidence for evolution...
Then one day, many centuries later, the Lord told Noah to take two canines, two felines, two equines, two pinnipedians—one male and one female each—and put them aboard the ark. The trick is, which does our ancient zoologist choose? A male kit fox and a female Great Dane? A female lion and a male alley cat? An Eohippus and a Clydesdale? Which two individuals would possess the tremendous genetic complement that their ancestors in Eden had, to enable the many species to reappear after the flood? How could Noah tell? Creationist Dennis Wagner tells us that the original kinds degenerated through inbreeding so that their offspring would 'never again reach the hereditary variability of the parent.' Yet the unique couple aboard the ark needed the full genetic potential of the original kind, if not more, for a vast new array of climatic and geographic niches was opened up by the flood.
Speaking of a hypothetical group of six or eight animals stranded on an island, King says, 'Such a small number could not possibly reflect the actual allelic frequencies found in the large mainland population' (p. 107). What, then, of the single pair on the ark?"
—The Impossible Voyage of Noah's Ark by R.A. Moore.
Stephen, How does one describe the taste of chocolate or orange. Like wise, I cannot describe the "other-worldly messages" unique emotional feel. If you experienced it, you would understand. Your correlation isn't causation point, misses the fact that there is a body of evidence. It's not just one answered prayer. This defies random probability, plus the nature of the 'miracles' is too convenient. For instance, once I complained to God about a work boss who wanted to impress his personality on a project I has spent weeks on. The next day, the boss got into a vicious verbal fight over the photo copier with another person, then came to me saying I could keep my project in tact. This is way too big a coincidence. And this is just one example.
Reality trumps ideology.
Actually, 1:37, the mass amount of sediment deposited by such a flood would be more likely to preserve remnants, rather than atomize them as you'd like to think, but regardless...
"God kept it all afloat regardless of what we think."
Why bother building an enclosed container at all, then?
"God stopped it from leaking and sinking."
Why cover it with pitch then?
"God put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep until it was time to wake up and send out the birds in search of land."
I don't recall THAT detail in the biblical story at all.
"It's all rather simple and easy to understand when you realize he can do anything he wants."
No, I would say it's only simple and easy to understand when you have to invent excuses to hold onto the literal reading of a fable...
From The Sensuous Curmudgeon blog:
Top Ten Reasons Noah’s Flood is Mythology
"And the Number One reason the Flood is mythology is: IT DIDN'T WORK!
We’re told that the purpose of the ghastly planet-killing exercise is that mankind was wicked. That’s the reason everything was cruelly destroyed—except for Noah, his righteous family, and their chosen menagerie. Okay, fine, but there’s one little detail—the whole business was a colossal futility! There is still wickedness in the world, which means the planetary slaughter was not only cruel beyond imagining, it was also stupid. But even a creationist would agree that such behavior is incompatible with the nature of God, so the only rational conclusion is that the flood is a childish myth."
Considering Victory had to be reconstructed at least three times, I'm not sure that's the best analogy....
Anon6:48PM wrote:
"If God said it then it is true.
But that's just it. Did "god" say it? No! People said it. And then those people said that god said it.
Before you placed your unwavering trust in this supposed "god," first you had to place your unwavering trust in other people. The people who raised you perhaps. The people who wrote books. The people who compiled them into an anthology. Herbert Armstrong, or perhaps some other churchman.
If it weren't for other people, you would never have heard of this "god."
Your unwavering trust in this supposed "god" is actually just an extension of that unwavering trust you still place in other people.
"God" really has nothing to do with it. Unless of course, you too think you're a prophet...
6.48 PM, I don't agree with your "God put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep." It's not the way God operates. Christ refused to turn rock into bread when tempted in the wilderness. Rock and bread are very different, this would not be honoring reality. But He did turn water into wine, since wine is mostly water. Another example, Christ multiplied the few fish and bread cakes to feed thousands. Technically, He didn't need the handful of bread and cakes, but He honored reality in doing this.
The ministers should be teaching this, not me. They are paid enough. Bless me lord for my generosity. So no, the animals and Noah would not have been asleep. Why build the ark if you not going to use it in the real sense?
All of this talk about the bible. Its so silly and useless. If the bible authors said it then, within the context of the story, it is true. Plain and simple. The authors kept it all afloat regardless of what we think. The authors stopped it from leaking and sinking. The authors put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep until it was time to wake up and send out the birds in search of land. it's all rather simple and easy to understand when you realize that in story, you can do anything you want.
The apocalyptic ones draw great encouragement from such stories as Noah and the ark, and the children of Israel wandering around for 40 years before entering the promised land. Also the story of Gideon. This is because factors which were thought to be impossible finally did come into play, and in two of the cases there were long waits. Those are just the sorts of miracles and time frame that would be required for the HWA prophecy mold to finally kick in. So, we see how some relate, and even consider our objections as proof that they are the ones who are on the right track. They expect to be vindicated much to the rest of our chagrin.
I guess we'll see. But, it sure was nice that some of us who thought we'd only live to be about 27, with the last 3 years of that life
being pretty torturous, actually got to have some fairly awesome lives. Beats the crap out of enduring ministerial abuse and being fleeced for decades, allowing oneself to be leveraged by prophetic fairy tales.
BB
I don't know folks but I'm starting to think that the first thing that evolved was beyond a doubt, the middle finger. As a symbol to all those who would evolve from "maybe" a single cell that was formed beside some marsh that miraculously appeared on the planet that was formed when positive and negative ions collided and to quote that genius, "luckily there were more positive then negative". Well yes, I'm sure we're all happy there were more positive then negative, however, that principal certainly doesn't apply to the posts here. Humm, could that be the old symbol being applied again?
Anon 6:48 said "God stopped it from leaking", well yes He did, but He did it by having Noah do this: Gen. 6:14 ... and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.
"God put the animals and Noah's family into a deep sleep until it was time to wake up". I hope that sleep lasted only a short time otherwise all of this; "Gen 6:21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them", would have spoiled.
Just enjoying a little levity.
Hope you all have a good day.
Regards, itstimecog
It's sad that the Bible portrays the Creator / Father as an incompetent parent who does not seem to know how to guide His children, leaves them on their own for hundreds of years and when they act up, He doesn't have a clue how to solve the problem, so He kills them off.
Moreover, Scripture also indicates that He left the care of His children in the hands of the Devil, a cruel psychopath nanny who saw to the torture and corruption of the children abandoned by Yahweh because He didn't have a clue about human psychology.
He saw to the drowning, burning and destruction of millions because it was just easier than taking responsibility as a dead-beat dad.
Or so the Bible would have us believe.
Ben Hobrink wrote a book called MODERN SCIENCE IN THE BIBLE: Amazing Scientific Truths Found in Ancient Texts. On page 2 he wrote (with some emphasis mine),
“The third instance, and what led to the writing of this book, is the account of the construction of Noah's ark (Genesis 6:14-16). The ark has been shown to be the best and most stable design of vessel. The dimensions and proportions in length, width, and height are the most ideal for a seagoing vessel not driven by a sail or engine. Large ships are still built in accordance with this design. Compared with Noah's ark, the vessels mentioned in other accounts of the Flood around the world are extremely primitive and unscientific. For example, in the Babylonian account of the Flood (the Gilgamesh Epic), the main character, Utanapishtim, survives the Flood in a cube-shaped boat. This happens to be the least stable design of vessel. While at sea, it will gradually start to roll over the waves. It's not difficult to distinguish which of the two accounts of the Flood is the more plausible and more scientifically well founded.”
Dennis is right. Most COG people don't have a thinking brain cell in their heads. They just know all that nonsense has to be true because some ancient idiot wrote it down. So glad I finally got it through my head what a tub of bull crap it all was, both Old and New Testaments.
8.03 PM calling God a dead beat parent is living dangerously
For supporters of the Ark story, I'd like to ask you for a moment to consider not the absurdities inherent in the story, but the premise of the main protagonist story itself (not Noah, but Yahweh). That is, Yahweh deciding to use it as a method of punishment. Yahweh who could do precisely anything he wanted.
After creating all the animals, humans, etc. and having his humans go awry, the very best solution Yahweh devised was to flood the whole place. Death by drowning is one of the more terrifying ways to die, and even if the purpose was to rid the world of evil doers and start over, it was one of the more sadistic methods he could have chosen. He was already performing a miracle by the flood itself, so he could have easily chosen a different miraculous method. A deep sleep followed by instantaneous brain infarction, for example. Anything more humane, with less pain and terror.
In addition, the animals, who clearly had not participated in any putative "sin", would have felt the pain and suffering of drowning as well. (The same applies to human infants, at least.) I don't know how one can see this as anything other than gratuitous subjection to suffering: simply not necessary. There are much more humane ways of ending lives, both human and animal, but Yahweh purposely chose drowning. That means that he wanted the humans and animals not on the Ark to specifically suffer.
I won't ask you to change your mind or belief, but simply to keep these points in your heart and ruminate a bit on them. The biblical God selected a terrible painful way for everyone to die, instead of innumerable other more humane options. That alone of course doesn't mean he doesn't exist, but doesn't it change a little bit how you personally feel about him?
Anon7:00PM wrote:
"Stephen, How does one describe the taste of chocolate or orange. Like wise, I cannot describe the "other-worldly messages" unique emotional feel. If you experienced it, you would understand. Your correlation isn't causation point, misses the fact that there is a body of evidence. It's not just one answered prayer. This defies random probability, plus the nature of the 'miracles' is too convenient. For instance, once I complained to God about a work boss who wanted to impress his personality on a project I has spent weeks on. The next day, the boss got into a vicious verbal fight over the photo copier with another person, then came to me saying I could keep my project in tact. This is way too big a coincidence. And this is just one example. Reality trumps ideology."
What I understand is that you're making no end of unjustifiable assumptions and using them to jump to unjustifiable and fallacious conclusions. And when I ask for some justification, you're caught flat-footed. I asked some very specific questions, and you haven't even attempted to answer so much as one of them. Which just goes to show how little you've thought any of this through.
Now, it's fine, if you privately want to jump to whatever unjustifiable and fallacious conclusions you want to based on feelings and whatever. But don't start berating anyone else for not making the same mistakes you feel compelled to make.
God is not a human. God's ways are not our ways. We don't know yet, until they are resurrected, how those people exactly died. Maybe the flood water travelled like a tusami and the end came extremely quickly. Maybe they died in ways we do not know or cannot fathem. We do know they were committing horrible sins, could have involved can abolishment, devil worship or abuse of babies or children. We do not know the specifics. But you cannot shake someone's faith. The ark existed and the flood did happen.
Michael,
The story is not absurd if you turn the premise around.
The story is rooted in real human experience and they were trying to find a cause for an effect. The real cause of all the curses (sickness, diseases, inequality, the ensuing greed) was the organisation into new societies living close together with their lifestock as farmers. This transition period also explains the "giants" (hunters are taller people than sickness stricken farmers and the loathing for the "mighty hunter" as a bad man as expressed in Genesis. And one could go on and on by positioning the book in the oral history of the transition period of mankind from hunters into farming societies and the according change in religious philosophy that had to find answers to new questions. (and of course trying to ward of the curses with new ritual and discipline)
I have posted lengthy postings on other threads that it was the new "farming societies" that were confronted with "curses" that hunter gatherer societies can just walk away from. (Like a local flood.) All of the 15 somewhat new "curses" applicable to farmers are explained in the book of Genesis by the introduction of a wrathful NEW deity.
nck
To Micheal at 10:14
Hi Micheal,
I would like to first address the reason God gave for the flood, that being in Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Gen 6:11 The earth also was corrupt (polluted) before God, and the earth was filled with violence. The word “violence” is from the Hebrew word khaw-mawce' and basically means cruel and/or unrighteous.
Here is the purpose God gave for creating man: 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.
Even though God had His preachers, mankind refused to obey Him, thus violating the very purpose for which they were created. Everything on the planet was in some way corrupt/polluted.
God provided Satan as a testing tool, as he is today. The fulfillment of Gen. 1:26 comes when mankind is in the image and likeness of God who obviously is spiritual. The saints set the example as followers of Christ when they too are given immortality at Christ’s return.
That being said, the flood was not the only major happening at that time. Some of the topography of the planet was also changed. For example, the rivers that had once flowed from Jerusalem disappeared and thus far, I haven’t been able to find the Garden of Eden.
For that to happen, there had to be major earthquake activity, not to mention volcanic eruptions.
Are you aware that there are more volcanoes under the oceans then there are above?
They’re called “submarine volcanoes” and are believed to be responsible for 75% of the planets magma flow per year.
With those seismic activities taking place, the safest place for the Ark would have been on the water.
After all those years of warning given by God, I’m sure He wanted to give them a lesson that they would remember when they’re resurrected. Just falling asleep and not waking up just wouldn’t cut it.
In spit of what you might think, drowning is not a terrible way to go. And, that I know from experience.
It’s only a matter of seconds until one loses consciousness.
During my own experience, I felt the most calming and relaxing feeling one could ever imagine.
Regards, istimecog
on July 12, 2016 at 7:05 PM
Stephen wrote:-
"but there’s one little detail—the whole business was a colossal futility!"
Was it? I put it to you that God does not want anyone in his kingdom whose bloodline is contaminated by genetic engineering, as those apart from Noah must have been. Remember, only Noah's bloodline was found to be perfect. The Holy Spirit was not yet generally available to mankind. I believe that those who were destroyed as a result of the flood will have their opportunity at the second resurrection.
also:-
"There is still wickedness in the world,...."
Yes there is and will continue to be as long as Satan is permitted to live but we can now have the power to resist him.
cheers
ralph.f
on July 12, 2016 at 7:14 PM
Stephen wrote:-
"But that's just it. Did "god" say it? No! People said it. And then those people said that god said it."
That is true. And many of us believe the people who not only said it but also WROTE IT Surely you haven't forgotten this scripture:- "2Ti_3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
Unfortunately there are so many who abhor reproof and correction by someone they haven't even seen. Nor do they want to be "instructed in righteousness", God's way of life.
cheers
ralph.f
This is fascinating reading all of these comments. I appreciate both sides. One little graphic sure stirred up a hornets nest!
itstimecog wrote:
Two contradictory propositions:
A) After all those years of warning given by God, I’m sure He wanted to give them a lesson that they would remember when they’re resurrected. Just falling asleep and not waking up just wouldn’t cut it.
B) In spit of what you might think, drowning is not a terrible way to go... I felt the most calming and relaxing feeling one could ever imagine.
I don't think you can have it both ways. If it's not a terrible way to go, calming and relaxing, then it wasn't much of a lesson, was it.
It's a palm to forehead posting for sure lol
Fave Pack did try to explain creationism and got slaughtered by Aron Ra's video rebuttals to each of his videos. I sispect they'd all get taken to the woodshed if they publically tried to defend the Noah Myth
Palm to forehead is right.
Ah, well, it's fun to make the case that all the "forensic" data we have supports for a day or two or three, despite the fact many prefer legends that are at odds with all the data.
I understand what's it's like to be caught in that cage of circular assumptions though, and how difficult it is to believe from within it, that so many of the people in history, in the world today, and in our own life, could be wrong. "No, no, no, there must be something to this." I thought that for a long time too.
As long as you only consider the carefully selected facts, and remain ignorant of the vast majority of the rest of the facts that paint a totally different picture, it can seem plausible. As long as you only consider one issue at a time, you can always come up with a way to shrug your shoulders and give those legends the benefit of the doubt.
But when when you zoom out and take a global view, considering many issues simultaneously, and when you start to see how many facts have been kept from you, and how these beliefs are holding you back from reaching your potential, how the result of believing is a net negative force in your life, how the effect of being religious is antithetical to the goals that are espoused for religion and for the gods, that's when you start to see how religion forms a cage for your mind, and are appalled for the first time at just how small that cage is, appalled that you never noticed it before, appalled at how you could have been so duped. But until that time, you'll fight tooth-and-nail to stay inside that claustrophobic little cage for your mind.
We won't force you to come out of that cage. But those of us who have the experiences of being both inside and outside of that cage, we know how appalled you'll be too of where you are now if you ever manage to come out and see it from outside where we are. But it's your choice.
What, no one has cited Woolley's digs?
The point is that the Old Testament doesn't necessarily give the most flattering view of God -- maybe because it's men's ideas about God and may not have any reality in fact.
We can respect God (or not), while recognizing that the Old Testament in particular makes God look like a vengeful childish being with a temper who just never really did much more than abandon humanity without instructions for millennia and then shows up to wreak havoc when people who didn't really know what He wanted didn't do what He wanted and BAM! Destruction, devastation.
And the Armstrongist God is that very God. Let's face it: Their God is the same way -- supposedly they are warning the world (they aren't) and they are false prophets who can have absolutely NO credibility, but expect masses of people will believe them so the leaders can be selfish with their inane projects, demanding money from their hapless followers, hoping for more, more, more, while never at all setting a good example, never giving anyone viable information about God and how to conduct their lives and live in the very sins and evils they are supposedly exposing to the world.
If there ever needed to be a flood, there should be a devastating one which drowns Roderick Meredith, Gerald Flurry, David Pack and all the others and finally have God Himself deliver on His caveat that false prophets be put to death.
If you are expecting something like that because you believe in the Flood of Noah, it's high time to lower your expectations.
On the other hand, there's a new God in town -- the one described in the New Testament, a far cry from the one in the Old... until you get to the book of Revelation.
10.39PM you talked past my post, completely ignoring what I said and hit me non stop with accusations of 'unjustifiable and fallacious conclusions,' and similar. What everyone believes ultimately is based on their five senses and experiences. Yet you ask me to ignore this, and get into some abstract ideals wrestling match. The five senses trumps concepts, since by definition concepts are based on the five senses.
I'm not going to play by your rigged, self serving rules.
The problem is, while most people acknowledge that the Bible contains allegory and metaphor, as well as midrash, which is a Hebrew construct more or less in the same category, there is disagreement as to which stories fall into what category. Even the people who agree on which is to be taken literally, and what may simply be spiritual fable intended to teach a greater lesson or principle, debate the degree of truth and depth of the lesson, as well as whether or not the story constitutes law.
As an example, for HWA, the major takeaway from the story of Noah's ark seems to be that righteous white people shouldn't boogaloo down with non-whites, disrupting racial purity. But, this can't be the meaning, or Noah's sons wouldn't have been instrumental in preserving and "adulterating" the non-white races. Taking HWA's interpretation at face value would mean that Noah's status as being the only one whose generations were pure would be insured eternally, because even Shem's wife (as an outside) would have been racially contaminated. So it had to be less about racism amongst humans, and more about intermarriage with the Nephalim, or pehaps with Neanderthal or other previous species of man. I would imagine that in the hardness of his heart, HWA probably also held the darker races responsible for the evil and violence, as is evidenced by his theories regarding Nimrod. So, even if the historical details of the flood story were possible and verifiable, HWA's teaching on the topic would have been polluted by falsehoods. Why would Manasseh and Ephraim be half Egyptian (Nubian?) and how could Moses have been allowed to have a black wife? Would not these people have been just as worthy of death as those who perished in the flood?
Scientists are quick to acknowledge environmental conditions which existed in the past, based on old growth tree rings, polar ice layers, underwater caves, sedimentary rock, and various other factors. They would have no vested interest in denying a global flood, as bogus denial of any evidence present would certainly be exposed through peer review. Rewards are accorded in that community to those whose studies reveal verifiable and formerly unknown truths. Scientists are very adept at identifying the past presence of massive amounts of water in given areas through the items found in nature which function as reliable indicators.
The story of Noah could be a cautionary tale, demonstrating that God has the ability to pull the plug at any time. It could be semi-prophetic. Nobody has addressed the prismatic effect, the sunlight being diffused through a clear substance which separates sunlight into colors. Do we believe that this scientific principle of nature did not exist prior to the time of Noah? What does the Black Sea tell us? It is most certainly a unique body of water by any account. And, there are clues indicating that it is the site of a past civilization.
I believe that the most important aspect of the story of Noah isn't so much whether it is literal and historically correct, but rather the lessons found in the story. Those lessons, and their relative significance, are subject to individual interpretation. Assertively repeating the meanings which HWA assigned to the story, as if that were somehow "the truth"', is a limitation. There is much more depth, and even mystery to this topic, a fact made manifest by the many comments to this entry. Our exchanges perfectly illustrate the fallaciousness of holding to the "guided" or "approved" conclusion of a cult, to the exclusion of other valid evidence on the topic.
BB
Granted, for many people drowning and the terror of knowing that they and those around them were going to drown, would have been a traumatic experience. But the Noah generation was a evil generation. Many posts here shrug this off or trivialize it. Their punishment was just. These people were not humane, they treated each other in a appalling manner. They got what they deserved. Good riddance. At any rate, there are many cases in the OT of armies of half a million being wiped out in days. These peoples death would have been painful as well. Like wise with the coming tribulation. These painful deaths are a warning for people to repent and avoid eternal death. This is Godly love. The nice guy approach simply does not work with hardened criminal societies.
It's interesting how Noahs generation drowning, parallels the 'weeping and gnashing of teeth' in Revelation. In both cases people know that they are going to die, and the death will be quick. The first is a warning of the second.
Dennis, Michael and Stephen,
It is encouraging to learn that there are a few of us who have escaped that small mental cage of "religious belief and bible stories". My years in that cage were psychological torture, and persisted until I asked myself, "Could I possibly be mistaken?".
It is a very difficult question to ask, and has a host of repercussions, but the option to have your own thoughts and opinions is so worth it. The ability for freedom of thought is high on my list of priorities. Religion reduces that opportunity to almost zero.
As long as Christians continue to wait for Jesus to solve our problems, we cannot progress. Ridding ourselves of religious beliefs and other prejudices is the beginning of peace and cooperation.
We have more evolving to do. It is a very slow process, and difficult for the impatient.
Well said, Gerald.
Anon 12:37
No it's not... No connection. That's called proof texting
I wonder why El didn't offer mankind a fsce to face chat with lunch to discuss the problems and work out a living and geniune solution? Was he shy? A poor public speaker? Did He muck up "and behold it was good" and just mad at himself taking it out on others? Maybe just a jealous God?
Well as the original posting picture rrminds us...it never happened everywhere
12.49 PM you fail to separate Christianity from Pharisaic morality. The two are very different. In the OT, God turned a king of Israel into a leper for trying to take on priestly duties. This was an endorsement of the separation of church and state, the purpose of which is to protect 'freedom of thought.' Christ showed the utmost respect for peoples intellectual independence, using exclusively persuasion.
By the way, humans are religious creatures. If it's not one set of religious beliefs, then it's another. The main religion today is left wing socialism. It dominates the mainstream media and our society. It has amongst other things, created a economic mess with 40% young unemployment rate in many countries. Where is the 'peace and co operation' in this. Why criticise Christianity, but not secular religions?
Dennis says "No it's not... No connection. That's called proof texting." If people drowned, the concept of death would be very real to these people, and an incentive to avoid another 'real' eternal death. But Dennis says 'it's not' because Dennis sometimes reverts to his old minister mode of 'I'm the big cheese, and it's true cause i says so.'
No Dennis, you are no longer a big cheese, but a commoner like the rest of us.
I know a Lutheran theologian at a local Lutheran sponsored college who says that taking the first eleven chapters of Genesis literally is heresy.
Some of the rest of scripture is best not taken literally as well.
Anyone willing to consider the geological evidence concerning the flood can read Flood Geology and the Grand Canyon. This is an article by Christian geologists. Yes, God can do anything as some say above, but the evidence does not support a one-year catastrophic flood. How you deal with that fact is up to you.
Anonymous said...
Dennis says "No it's not... No connection. That's called proof texting." If people drowned, the concept of death would be very real to these people, and an incentive to avoid another 'real' eternal death. But Dennis says 'it's not' because Dennis sometimes reverts to his old minister mode of 'I'm the big cheese, and it's true cause i says so.'
No Dennis, you are no longer a big cheese, but a commoner like the rest of us."
Merely pointing out that using one mythical story to reflect on another comment in a failed First Century prophecy is good theology. If someone dies in an Old Testament setting, say by fire and the NT mentions someone dying in the Lake of Fire, they are not theologically connected. It is just making connections up is all.
As far as reverting to my old minister mode of Cheesehood, you sound more like a child looking for a "na na na na na..." moment rather than a mature human being. Cheesehood was not one of my strengths nor the type who ever uttered the thought or thought the thought of being right because I say I am right. You obviously don't know me and we've never talked in person. Perhaps you are confusing confidence in my study, sources and information with "because I say so." It's more "because they say so" and I believe , for now, the information I have presented myself with on all things theological and in answer to questions I accumulated over 26 years of soaking in the scriptures and seeing the many contradictions and issues with its origins that would never come up in WCG much less ever be dreamed of.
The ministry of the churches of God are not well read or educated no matter what they think. I wasn't as a young man, though perhaps thought I was until I grew older and recognized just how much information, I wish I had had access to as a younger man, there is on all topics Bible, History, Science and Origins . I never would have gone down the path of WCG in the first place or the path of the other seminary I did not choose (yes, I thought AC was a seminary like any church would have).
At any rate, you must be reverting to something yourself judging by the personal attack....thingy.
C'mon, two more comments and it's an even 100! lol
I mean ONE more...oh, oh...oops...there it is! 100!!!!
Anon wrote:
"But the Noah generation was a evil generation. Many posts here shrug this off or trivialize it. Their punishment was just. These people were not humane, they treated each other in a appalling manner. They got what they deserved. Good riddance."
Well, no matter how unbearably evil you think they were, you can't include infants and animals in your assessment, so it was still gratuitous suffering.
Imagine that you are that omnipotent and yet all-loving Yahweh.
Is that what you would do? Can you think of no better solution? (being just a little creative).
Incidentally, if it was "appalling evil", God allowed it to continue for a needlessly long long time while Noah painstakingly had to built an ark...?
Really, Yahweh's actions just don't make sense for an all-powerful being.
(But it does sound like something human storytellers would come up with)
Dennis, according to Theopedia.com:
"Proof texting is the method by which a person appeals to a biblical text to prove or justify a theological position without regard for the context of the passage they are citing."
Dozens of times God has destroyed or severely punished nations to help them repent and qualify for eternal life. As far as I'm concerned, dismissing this as 'proof texting,' is nothing more than intellectually dishonest invalidation. If you read up about it, the invalidation thingy is the tool most used by Scientologists to keep their members in line.
Observations gleaned from this post:
No one of the " God said it, did it and It really happened" camp answered the continuous culture conundrum.
There will always be those who take the story as written literally and never any other way but don't care if others don't get that.
There will always be those who take the story as written literally and never any other way and believe those who don't will find out the hard way in the near future
There will always be those who can't take it literally due to too many problems with literal text and historical origins but it is a good metaphor, analogy and warning of things to come
There will always be those who can't take it literally due to too many problems with the literal text and historical origins and thus just another Bible myth unanchored in reality.
There is a rebuttal for every butt
No one ever says "I never thought of that", "I have always wondered about that myself", "I'll take a closer look at the material you suggested", "I think I am mistaken on it being literally true" (Few if any I know come to this conclusion and then go back to taking it literally true again once they have thought it through)
Personal faith and belief must be preserved at all costs and would not know what to think if the story was not literally true.
Personal faith and belief is not connected to whether Noah's flood and Ark are literally true
Some know exactly what God was thinking, doing, meaning when he drown the world
Some think God may have been over reacting in his thinking and doing when he drown the world in a fit of temper
Some think it was a "good riddance" moment and we should all be grateful God doesn't think like Jesus might have in a similar situation, well except for Revelation Jesus.
Some can come up with amazing and convoluted explanations of issues raised about the literal story that defy common sense but preserve good feelings and faith
Most can't stay what others believe and where their own minds and studies have taken them.
Talking and sharing ideas and thoughts about the Biblical text, stories, contradictions, faith issues, impossibilities and what one thinks God is doing, how, why and when is more stimulating than fasting, church government and the antics of the self appointed nearly arrested Elijah-Zerubbabel-Joshua-That Guy-Presiding Evangelist-Apostle-Twice Blessed-Prophets and Charlottetans.
And probably a whole lot more...
:)
Great discussion!
10.07 PM We both know that God is a merciful God. For instance, He warned ancient Israel for generations before he sent in the conquering armies. Noahs generation was likewise given ample warning and opportunity for repentance. God is good and merciful.
Dennis,
Thank you very much for bringing some "scientific order" after the expression of all these "opinions".
As a matter of fact I just finished researching one of the (many) organisations WCG founded and funded even after the initiation phase.
Up to this day this still existing organisation has funded up to 300 scientific expeditions and missions in unchartered nature reserves. Many of the literally hundreds of sponsored studies by top researchers on plants and animals focus on the evolution of those species.
Since my contributions are generally categorized under the category of convoluted common sense defying comments I thought I might add this little bit of science to those that claim to know it all and are sure to know the mind of God and the ways of the world and WCG.
I'm sorry, I was just triggered by your adminition to continually ask questions and your systematic ordering of some possible answers.
nck
Someone asked Dennis, "Why were you still in the WCG in 1998 when the Tkaches had already openly changed all the teachings of the church at the start of 1995?"
I believe this "someone" has his dates wrong. From what I remember, the WCG was still a full blown doomsday cult (espousing all of Armstrong's teachings) all through 1995 and beyond.
Wasn't it around '98 when the shit hit the fan?
"You can sure tell the commenters rubbishing the ark building are highly likely to be from land locked, inward looking usa."
"landlocked"???
But what about the Atlantic and Pacific oceans?
Do those oceans not count because of perceived "jew-libs" on the east coast and "hollywood libs" on the west coast?
"It's dangerous for me and others to give our real names. It's safe for atheists, but not for believers."
My reply:
Except for those who get hacked to pieces with machetes because they're atheists or agnostics.
I recall 1995 ish being when i was told "no" to rumored changes and 98 when it was "yes"
"Ben Hobrink wrote a book called MODERN SCIENCE IN THE BIBLE: Amazing Scientific Truths Found in Ancient Texts."
The problem with Ben Hobrink is, that he's a hack.
He's even laughed at by other Young Earth Creationists, and for good reason - sort of how Ron Wyatt was.
Ben Hobrink was schooled in food science. He's NOT schooled in anything that would make him even remotely an expert as to the story of Noah's Ark, or to the stability of ship designs.
(Sorry, but just because he "wanted to study physics" does not make him a physicist.)
8.03 PM calling God a dead beat parent is living dangerously
Why?
Do da Daddy God got a hankerin' for a good spankerin'?
"We don't know yet, until they are resurrected, how those people exactly died. Maybe the flood water travelled[sic] like a tusami[sic] and the end came extremely quickly. Maybe they died in ways we do not know or cannot fathem[sic]."
Perhaps, many fathoms under the sea, all the babies were swept into a giant library bubble containing all of HWA's books and booklets, and God gave them all understanding to read them and drink in his Truth before drinking in water and drowning joyfully, and they will be in the first rez and will be given new planets to rule and new babies to joyfully drown. What a glorious plan!
Gurgle gurgle, LOL!
Ralph claims, "Remember, only Noah's bloodline was found to be perfect."
Were YHVH's ways the precursor to Hitler's ways?
Ralph, are you fully aware that what you wrote on July 13, 2016 at 1:44 AM is known as circular reasoning?
Noting that fact does not mean that I abhor what you propose. It's simply an observation. Also to denigrate those who disagree with your conclusions - as you do - is illogical, unjustified and elitist.
Can you think of a church that inculcated such responses within it's members?
5 million year old Grand Canyon geology has nothing to do with Noah's flood. Excellent GC formation video lectures online.
"Believin' what you know ain't so"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlEY25jSiBM
on July 14, 2016 at 10:29 AM
Anonymous wrote:-
"....are you fully aware that what you wrote on July 13, 2016 at 1:44 AM is known as circular reasoning?"
I don't understand your point. In what way is it circular reasoning?
also:-
"Also to denigrate those who disagree with your conclusions - as you do -...."
Did I denigrate Stephen by agreeing with him?
also:-
"Can you think of a church that inculcated such responses within it's members?"
No. I believe my response to be original, and prompted by faith in scripture.
cheers
ralph.f
Dennis, A.R.'s video is excellent..
Thanks for sharing it!
For the edification of readers here, I'll make it into a clickable link.
Click here to see the video!
on July 13, 2016 at 6:47 AM
Anonymous wrote:-
"This is fascinating reading all of these comments."
It sure is.
also:-
"I appreciate both sides."
Surely most of us do. I'm also sure you would be most welcome to make your own contributions to the fray(?)
If you do, please try and give yourself a name so that we can know to whom we are talking.
cheers
ralph.f
I appreciate both sides.
on July 14, 2016 at 9:16 PM
Anonymous wrote:-
"For the edification of readers here, I'll make it into a clickable link."
It has often been said that one shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but I think we all have the right to make our own decisions.
The link presents a figure dressed all in black, a symbol of death; we've all heard of the "black death". A figure with long flowing 'black' hair, contrary to 1Cor.11:14, a short goatee beard, now where have I seen that kind of symbol before? On the chest of this figure is seen the 'skull and crossbones' symbol, another portrayal of death, the very antithesis of what is offered by Jesus Christ, eternal life.
Even the character's name Aron Ra is reminiscent of an ancient Egyptian god from which,I hope, we have escaped.
Please, give us no more of this kind of AntiChrist!
cheers
ralph.f
ps. Make of this what you will.
I agree with Ralph,
What a shame that Aron needs to make his excellent case on debating and argumentation skills in a casing that is not appealing to those that could benefit from his lecture.
That is my professional judgement.
nck
Actually,
I find it plain stupid if someone makes an excellent case in a non appealing format for those who could benefit most.
Although perhaps I should know better since I am a proven expert and master in disguising excellent analysis in an extremely unattractive package. I have something to ponder for the weekend.
nck
on July 15, 2016 at 6:40 AM
nck wrote:-
"I find it plain stupid if someone makes an excellent case in a non appealing format for those who could benefit most."
nck, obviously I have not listened to his presentation. Just how do you think I would benefit by doing so?
Does he have any major points that you think I should consider?
As an aside, I delight in the consumption of a sushi hand roll and a number of sushi bars around this area have the Yin Yang symbol adorning their premises. I have sometimes wondered about this symbol and finally decided to Google it. Wonderful information found and a most acceptable philosophy. Helps to explain a lot of things.
cheers
ralph.f
Since I am very much a Yin en Yang guy I would not recommend the video to you Ralph.
He eloquenty explains the difference between believing and knowing.
I do not completely agree (of course) but my point is that I find it a shame that no Roman soldiers would play a game for his clothes let alone listen to what he has to say because of his poor appearance. I do care for the appearance of a messenger. I am a respecter of man so to say. To me one should be a greek unto the greek.
nck
HMS Victory was reconstructed because it was basically nearly destroyed in battle with Admiral Nelson. It was also taken apart to protect it during the blitz bombing. Portsmouth docks were it was and still is was badly bombed in WW2.
Many thanks nck, for your response of July 15, 2016 at 12:52 PM
cheers
ralh.f
Post a Comment