lol - I may steal and use that one day Kurt
Noah's Ark and the flood
by confusedandalone 28 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Jeffro
kurtbethel:
1. The mass of the beanstalk would have to come from nutrients drawn from the ground. How could such a massive beanstalk grow in one place without depleting nutrients from the soil and making a crater, or otherwise altering the topography where it grew.
Duh. They're magic beans.
2. How is it that in the duration of one night a giant took residence at the top of the beanstalk? When you consider the logistics of hauling building materials aloft, crews of construction workers, and support material such as food and water, how was this possible in such a small span of time without being noticed by anyone?
Giants always lived in the firmament to begin with. (Obviously this took place before the 'Great Flood'.) The beanstalk just provided a way of getting there.
3. Isn't it likely that the beanstalk story was merely a dream, or even that the beans were toxic and had hallucinogenic properties that caused Jack to imagine the events after acquiring the beans?
Maybe the writer of the 'Noah's Ark' story had been eating the same 'magic' beans.
4. Could it be that Jack's beans actually were mutated and the beanstalk grew unusually large? Perhaps a large bird of prey nested in it and that the current version of the story was the result of later people who embellished the original account?
Nah, let's go with 'God did a magic thing'.
-
kurtbethel
lol - I may steal and use that one day Kurt
Just glad to be able to make things worth stealing.
Nah, let's go with 'God did a magic thing'.
Sure, but don't try telling that to JWs, as magic makes Jehovah sad.
-
adamah
Kurt Bethel said:
I have been thinking about Jack and his beanstalk.
Heh, you left out a word I see, "Jack and his MAGIC beanstalk". Once we're in the land of magic, all the rules of rationality are suspended and unfortunately some are trapped in that mode and cannot get back.
Director Jean Cocteau prefaced his cinematic masterpiece, La Belle et le Bête (Beauty and the Beast), with these words:
Children believe what we tell them. They have complete faith in us. They believe that a rose plucked from a garden can bring drama to a family. They believe that the hands of a human beast will smoke when he kills a victim, and that this beast will be shamed when confronted by a young girl. They believe in a thousand other simple things. I ask of you a little of this childlike simplicity, and to bring us luck let me speak four truly magic words, childhood's Open Sesame: "Once upon a time..."
The Book of Job itself TELLS the reader that the story is a parable, opening with the Hebraic equivalent of "once upon a time". In Hebrew, Job 1:1 reads, "a man there was". Note the word order, "object, subject, verb": that's a change from the typical Hebrew syntax of, "verb, subject, object".
THAT'S the clue that is literally lost in the translation, as that word order is significant since it's used to indicate the following account is a parable/myth/fable (as seen in 2nd Sam 12:1, or 2 Kings 14:9). Hence we have Xians who believe Job was an actual historical person, when the Hebrew account is telling readers the EXACT opposite.
Nevertheless, JWs believe that Job will be resurrected in the New System (hence the recent Drama kerfuffle over whether Job holding his resurrected wife's hands)! Unfortunately, the delusions of men are NOT a thing of the ancient past....
FadeToBlack said-
@adamah: but what about from a historical perspective? If the WTS published an article stating that after much research it appears the American Civil War actually ended in 1925, would the average JW still be able to go out and defend the idea with a straight face? How would you like to offer that mag? I ask, because my wife seems to agree that there could not possibly have been a global flood in 2370BC. But she still goes to meetings. She was very suprised to find that date published in the WT. I had to show it to her. Thankfully, I kept all the recent issues (last 20 years) regarding the flood in my personal file. I was always hoping they would see some new light on the topic.
Sure, but I still say it's fighting an uphill battle to argue from the angle of science, since it's outside the 'comfort zone' of most JWs who are uneducated about science, and they're taught to mistrust the foolish words and concepts of educated men. Although not JWs, THIS is the kind of nonsense believers are being fed, which automatically puts them into "I'm not listening" mode:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpKtZcIIS0Q
You're battling a series of lies, so I'd stay away from miraculous claims: it's difficult, since anyone who still believes in God is going to believe in miracles, so it's an automatic excuse to wiggle free.
I prefer to approach on THEIR territory, coming from inside the Bible then moving out, pointing out the fundamental unfairness of God, the inconsistencies in God's claimed traits, etc. It requires believers to study the motives of God that they claim to believe, and not to accept what OTHER potential flawed mortals currently believe. I find the resistance to scientific evidence is inversely proportion to their trust in God, since "God Dun It!" is much easier to grasp than the actual answers that science offers.
Besides, it's not about logic and rationality with most people, but primarily the emotional needs that are fulfilled by believing. That fact is often missed, and its HUGE...
(I still think if you need more than the first 11 chapters of Genesis to convince someone that the Bible is the work of men, then they're not willing to see it).
Different strokes for different folks, though, since there's no "one size fits all" answer.
Adam
-
FirstLastName
I do not remember how I found this video (it might have been on this site), but it made me laugh about the flood story:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I225Vcs3X0g&feature=player_embedded
-
-
goodsoul
The other one stupid thing about flood is- what actually materialized demons and nephilim were doing during years of arks construction?
when animals were entering ark?
and when flood started?
they just were staring to all of that?
why demons did not kick out Noah and his family and all these animals from the ark and did not escape from flood instead of Noahs family?
probably demons are more stupid than humans.
-
St George of England
According to the WTS the materialised angels returned to being spirit creatures.
Their offspring, the Nephelim all died.
I could cry with shame that I used to beleive this.
George
-
adamah
Yeah, but the Genesis Flood account itself clearly states that nephilim were present, both before and AFTER the Flood. SO either they were REALLY strong swimmers (treading water for a year), OR God forgot to patch whatever security vulnerability it was that allowed fallen angels to hack into the password-protected door of the firmament, letting them exploit the irresistable "daughters of men".
Some human narcissism on display there, with the account likely written by an older man who looked at all the nubile young flesh on Jewess hotties, and writing that angels would similarly see them as incredibly irresistable, too, worth relinquishing Heaven for.
Funny really: people who spend their lives trying to GET into Heaven, when it may not be all it's cracked up to be, since so many angels are willing to defect! The grass IS always greener, right?
I wrote an article about how the concept of fallen angels and nephilim may explain the mob-mentality of the Sodomites, depicted in the story of Lot:
Adam
EDIT: funny, as the ad on the bottom of the page gives the site:
Amongst the 'evidence' is PROOF of the Biblical account of Sodom and Gomorrah:
He ALSO finds evidence on the SURFACE:
Apparently 'supportive evidence' for the veracity of the account in Genesis is any ol' black dirt you can locate and point to....
Adam
