Psst. Peter, in case you missed my response, its above your second post.

Actually, I expected deflection tactics. So now you'll concede the flood wasn't worlwide? Where do you get the info of "ALL" the animals from now? This should prove interesting as I've never verified that avenue of translation.




So when confronted with your error, you deny any wrongdoing yet further "qualify" your uneducated fallacies with "Fundamentalist".
Nice try, but you're busted. You can take this lesson for the future and pre-qualify all statements with whatever you like.





I guess I should have used a smiley as it seems "lol" isn't in whatever book you get your faith from. From now on when addressing one of your posts, I'll point out what is a joke. <this is serious




Well, glad to say I see some intelligence there.





Quite aware of the joke and I perpetuated it with the "we" and " "Atheist" " usage. Funny how this Golden Child gets chastised for it you don't though. I was just pointing out the hypocrisy, wasn't really directed to you. Next time I'll label it as comic relief.






Well I'm not like most Christians you're ever spoken with then. I'm very uneducated where the Bible is concerned yet I know more than I should.





What a cop-out! "They" aren't the ones here posting, you are. So by relaying your "message", you are speaking for yourself. Unless of course you wish to deny that and admit you're being instructed by Christians behind the scenes. Do you hear "voices" from my fellow believers?

?????

requirement:
something essential to the existence or occurrence of something else


when the doctor says my symptoms could be the result of lack of sleep or lack of water

does it mean I HAVE to have had not enough sleep in order for my symptoms to occur?,,,,no

COULD BE THE RESULT< is different from < MUST BE THE RESULT

yup, the key words from your "contradiction" being "can both be"...

And worse make laws that make it impossible for some people to have the same rights as the Christians do unless they live like the Christians do whether they are Christian or not.

At least they aren't burning on the stake these days or worse but they are still insidiously climbing up the craw when they feel someone "needs to be saved" from themselves.

one of the more interesting viewpoints in these threads is the one that insists certain 'moral' or 'laws' are exclusively the result of religion,,,,


perhaps we should all be permitted to walk around naked, its our bodies, we dont hurt anyone, and we dont need someone else protecting us from ourself,,,,,,


perhaps we should all be left to do whatever it is that makes us happy, limit those 'laws' to 'obvious' harms like,,,murder, violence, robbery,


,,yeah, I think we should have only three laws on the books. Dont do physical harm to others, dont take what isnt yours, and dont take human life (unless its still in the womb, when its not really a significant life anyhow)


,,,,,,,,Im sure some people would still insist THESE morals even stem from religious folks trying to force us all to live by their morals,,,,but then again, maybe people would be too blissfully happy about doing what they felt like to really care?

I think people know right from wrong. It is a shame that we even have to have "laws."

I got a ticket for not wearing my seat belt.

The officer signed the bottom of the ticket under a declaration that said he stopped me because he had reason to believe that I had ..."committed an offense against the peace and dignity of the people of the State of Colorado."

I say: What? Huh?

What a load of crap. I don't think the people of the State of Colorado even know (or give a damn) when I drive with no seat belt.

Then he lectured me, and interrogated me about where I was going, as if it were any of his business.

There wouldn't have been any need for an ark to save the animal kingdom if the flood were merely local. So, yes, the Bible does require that the flood be world-wide for all intents and purposes.

The story of Noah and the flood absurdly unrealistic. Let's face it, the story of Noah and the flood is reason enough to dismiss these ancient fables.

No need to even look at all the other absurdities.

The story fails even in terms of principle. The Christians hold that all sin is equal and that no man is without sin, that would include Noah and his family. They also hold that their God doesn't play favorites (which is absurd already since the Jews are supposed to be God's "choosen" people). But in the case of Noah and his family exceptions would have had to have been made too since God was supposedly drowning out all "sinners".

These stories have shoot themselves in the foot so many times that they have no feet left to stand on. They fall flat on their face in the mud. They have no more credibility the Greek mythologies of Gods, and never did.

Jeannie talks about when the bible will be 'discredited'. As far as I'm concerned there was never a time in all of history where it had any merit to begin with.

I agree Abra, the Bible has already been discredited. I guess we are just waiting for a time when people will realize it.

Abra handled this rather nicely, but I'll add that the intention of the flood was to wipe out all of mankind and start over ... was that supposed to be accomplished with a localized flood? And where? And the Bible doesn't state "God told Noah, 'Collect all the animals you can see from your house here. I'm gonna flood a few square miles. These people are whack.'"



Fundamentalist: One who believes the Bible is complete and whole truth of the world and its history.

I've "qualified" this by stating beliefs and a particular (and literal) interpretation of the Bible made by a LARGE group of Christians. This does not disqualify my statements as error nor "bust me" for stating them as the "beliefs and a particular (and literal) interpretation of the Bible made by a LARGE group of Christians." If the Bible is to be taken literally as complete truth, these are the ideals of those who follow hold it as such. I'm not going to take the time to write out a hundred pages defining the particular beliefs of every group of Christians, that would be a little silly, don't you think?



My apologies. I did not associate the "lol" in that context.



That part I understood as perpetuation of the joke. This was directed toward others. I should have specified.





If you are not a fundamentalist (the particular group I've been talking about), then I guess you would have no reason have beef with my arguments? And since you're uneducated where the Bible is concerned, how could you possibly accuse me of misrepresenting material you, yourself, are unfamiliar with? Hypocrisy, anybody?



Basically, you're saying I'm misrepresenting Christianity as a whole when I'm not even talking about Christianity as a whole. I'm presenting the views of the Bible in its literal interpretation which is believed by a large group of people as its been explained to me by those people.

I do hear their voices (and see their print) all the time, because these people are EVERYWHERE ... and a some of them post here. So is it wrong of me to state and argue against those beliefs? No, not at all.

If you are not one of these people, what's your beef?

BTW, as per your questions, Peter:

Genesis 6:17 -- And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Everything that is in the earth = ENTIRE world flood.

Genesis 6:19 -- And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

every living thing = all animals.

That's Peter_Pan for you. He does this all the time.

I too argue against strict verbatim literal acceptance and interpretation of the biblical scriptures as the "infallible word of God".

Peter_Pan then steps in and starts arguing for vague abstract interpretations, etc.

If all Christians were like Peter_Pan then Christianity would have no teeth. Strict literal interpretations would not be acceptable, nor held out to others as being the "Word of God".

Peter_Pan evidently supports our view that a strict fundamentalist's view of the Bible as the literal infallible verbatim word, commandments, and descriptions of a God is simply untenable.

Donthatoneguy - 1
Peter_Pan - 0

Yep, it cannot be denied the biblical scriptures demand a world-wide flood.

Peter_Pan has stated earlier:


Peter_Pan is arguing for scriptures that he himself clearly hasn't even read and has no clue what claims they make.

Looks like you're the one, Peter, who didn't know that the Bible does indeed state that the flood was indeed world-wide and that all living animals were to be collected onto the ark.

I guess that many people who claim to be "Christians" would not even support the Biblical scriptures at all if they actually knew what those scriptures actually say.

So I guess Peter's in a state of shock now to discover the truth of his own religious doctrine.

and after the waters were lowered Noah looked to his wife,his sons and their wives and said "alrighty then we better start screwing we got to start populating again,you 2 can make oriental babies,you 2 can make black babies,you 2 can make middle eastern babies and my wife and i will work on north,central and south american babies along with the whites.I have know idea how we'll get them over there to the Americas cause the ark is stuck on this mountain but i'm sure god has a plan."

Well I have always been under the impression that the Bible indicated that the entire world had been flooded and most Christians will argue that it was.

That is why when some other Christian argues the point, I get a bit confused. Maybe because the Bible did not use the term "World wide" but instead used the term "the entire earth." And who knows what the original text really said. It may have been translated a bit differently.

But when you are told the story of a man who was instructed to collect two of every animal so that they would live... wow what a monumental task that would have been.... if it were true.

The best guys on wild kingdom couldn't do that.

Then the pictures we were shown when I was a child were pictures of animals boarding the boat two by two willingly of their own will like magic.

Sure... right... I believe that.

So even if there was a guy who built a boat and loaded it with some of his farm animals and family, hey that might have some truth... it is a myth told in many different cultures all over the world - for some reason. So the story is a myth retold over the ages.

How did it get so blown out of proportion and why do educated modern people still pretend to believe it? It is not logical at all.

I thought this was interesting;


quote:

"The very thing that is now called the Christian religion was already in existence in Ancient Egypt, long before the adoption of the New Testament. The British Egyptologist, Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, wrote in his book, The Gods of the Egyptians [1969],

The new religion (Christianity) which was preached there by St. Mark and his immediate followers, in all essentials so closely resembled that which was the outcome of the worship of Osiris, Isis, and Horus.
The similarities, noted by Budge and everyone who has compared the Egyptian Ausar/Auset/Heru (Osiris/Isis/Horus) allegory to the Gospel story, are striking. Both accounts are practically the same, e.g. the supernatural conception, the divine birth, the struggles against the enemy in the wilderness, and the resurrection from the dead to eternal life. The main difference between the “two versions”, is that the Gospel tale is considered historical and the Ausar/Auset/Heru (Osiris/Isis/Horus) cycle is an allegory."

http://www.egypt-tehuti.org/articles/holy-families.html



Ancient Egyptian Roots of Christianity

This book reveals the Ancient Egyptian Roots of Christianity, both historically and spiritually. This book consists of three parts to coincide with the terms of trinity. The first part demonstrates that the major biblical ancestors of the biblical Jesus are all Ancient Egyptian prominent characters. The second part demonstrates that the accounts of the “historical Jesus” are based entirely on the life and death of the Egyptian Pharaoh, Twt/Tut-Ankh-Amen. The third part demonstrates that the “Jesus of Faith” and the Christian tenets are all Egyptian in origin—such as the essence of the teachings/message, the creation of the universe and man (according to the Book of Genesis), as well as the religious holidays.

http://www.egypt-tehuti.org/gadalla-books.html#aerx

1. In Genesis 1:1-26, God created plants on the third day and fish and birds on the fifth day. On the sixth day, He created animals and man.

2. In Genesis 2:7-25, God created man first. Then He created plants. Then, for man to have company, God created animals and birds. And finally, God created woman.


hell you can't even get past the first 2 genesis without there being a lie and a very conflicting story,funny thing is pastors have tried to neglect answering why this is written this way,all they say is genesis2 is a more detailed discription,REALLY but the days are still mismatched,so which one is correct?

but you religious people will still "stand by your man"

i can't believe the authors of the fictional bible didn't even catch that typo.

I believe it is vitally important for the future of the world that the truth be discovered about the fake religions of Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

People need to start questioning the roots of these Abrahamic religions.

That idea shocks most people who have been indoctrinated into their religion all their life because they are taught never to question "G0D" and they are gripped with the fear of doing so.

They are taught to turn away knowledge and information. They are afraid to even look at it. They have been taught that to lust for another man's wife is THE SAME as adultery, so they even fear their own thoughts.

Even their thoughts are not free.

They are told over and over to "have faith" and "don't question" blah blah blah.

They FEAR THE TRUTH.

Then they parrot the worn out cliche' "The truth will set you free" thinking (mistakenly) that their religion is the truth.

But your religion will not set you free. It will condemn you for your thoughts, it will condemn you for seeking knowledge.

Even the story of Adam and Eve condemns them from eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.


************************

Egyptians may well have been Africans.

http://www.blackpowercartel.com/video/1636/TA-SETIAN-ARABS-ANCIENT-EGYPT-IS-NOT-YOURS