Do you want the real truth or not?

by Jason 175 Replies latest jw friends

  • ladonna
    ladonna

    Noah's Ark

    © 1996 Frank Steiger; permission granted for retransmission.

    Creation position

    The flood was created by God to "cleanse" the world of mankind, which (in God's judgement), had become wicked and therefore a source of disappointment to God. All men, women, children, and babies (except for Noah and his family) were killed by drowning.

    A large wooden ship was constructed by Noah, or at least under his direction. The ship was approximately 450 feet long and had stalls and pens sufficient to accommodate every species of bird and land animal now existing. (Some creationists believe that the ark sequestered every species of land animal that ever existed.) Prior to the flood one male and one female of every species was motivated to travel, and did travel, from all over the world to the ark. Although there are thousands of species of present-day birds and land animals, this is the result of diversification; the total number of species at the time of Noah was probably much smaller.

    Although there were only eight persons on board to feed and clean up after all the animals, the work load was considerably reduced by the fact that the animals were kept in the dark and therefore entered into a state of hibernation.

    The earth's human population and all present-day species of birds and land animals are all descendants of the Noah's ark survivors.

    There have been numerous aerial sightings and eyewitness accounts of persons who have actually seen the ark close up on the slopes Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.

    Evolution position

    Constructing a wooden ship the size of the ark in times of antiquity would require an enormous expenditure of labor and materials. Where did Noah, by all accounts an ordinary man, obtain the resources?

    Wooden ships do not withstand violent wind and wave forces very well, and this is particularly true for large wooden ships. The longest modern wooden ships are about 300 feet long, and require steel reinforcing to prevent breaking up.

    The contention that a wooden ship 450 feet long could withstand the catastrophic forces postulated in the creationist scenario has to be met with considerable skepticism.

    There are over a hundred thousand separate and distinct species of present day birds and land animals. It would be physically impossible for eight persons (Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives) to provide for the care and feeding of all the flies, termites, worms, snails, fleas, bats, frogs, spiders, bark beetles, intestinal parasites, etc, etc.

    Then of course we have several hundred species of larger animals that require 50 to 100 pounds of fodder per day: hippos, rhinos, buffalo, elephants, horses, cattle, giraffes, elk. moose, etc, etc. (Not to mention the enormous grazing dinosaurs that some creationists believe were sequestered in the ark.)

    Many, if not most, plants and/or their seeds will not survive a year under water. Did Noah transplant trees from all over the world into tubs to store in the ark, and if so, how did he manage to acquire them?

    Don't forget the meat eating animals. How did Noah acquire the tons of meat required for the diet of all those lions, tigers, hyenas, wolves, etc? (Not to mention Tyranosaurus Rex, Allosaurus, and all the rest!) In order for predatory animals like lions, wolves, etc. to survive, they must be outnumbered by their prey by at least a hundred to one. If each grazing animal and each predatory animal were represented by a single pair, then either all the grazing animals would be immediately eaten, or the predatory animals would starve to death, or both. The only other alternative would be for Noah and his descendants to have enough fresh meat stored to feed generations of lions, tigers, wolves, hyenas, foxes, eagles, hawks, etc. This scenario is totally preposterous!

    Many animals require special diets. Koalas eat only eucalyptus leaves. Aphids require fresh plants. How would Noah know about these dietary requirements, and how would he obtain food meeting these requirements?

    The logistics of stocking the food and feeding the animals is clearly a complete impossibility for eight persons! Just shoveling out the manure would a total impossibility; tons of food per day necessarily creates tons of manure per day!

    Unless all those animals happened to be living in the immediate neighborhood (very unlikely, considering the different habitats of rain forest tree frogs, desert geckos, and polar bears), most of them would have to travel over large distances to get to the ark, a physical impossibility. Besides, what could possibly motivate all those frogs, lizards, snakes, salamanders, dragon flies, spiders, ants, etc to leave their natural habitats and attempt to travel thousands of miles to the ark? How could they possibly make the journey? How would they know how to get there?

    The Bible states in Gen 7:4 that the ark was loaded in 7 days. The nine million species of animals extant would would have to board at a rate of 30 animals per second!

    The creationist claim that diversification has resulted in present-day species being far more numerous than the number of species in the ark contradicts their claim that evolution of species could not, and did not, ever take place.

    Keeping in mind that hibernation is not merely sleep, but rather a state of suspended animation, just keeping an animal in the dark will not cause it to hibernate. Most animals do not hibernate under any conditions, least of all in a ship violently tossed about under catastrophic storm conditions.

    How did all the present-day parasites and diseases survive the flood without decimating the host population?

    In spite of all the reported sightings of the ark on Mount Ararat, there hasn't been a single set of clear photographs showing the exact location and appearance of the ark. The alleged sightings have never been verified by any reputable organization, such as the National Geographic Society.

    Lets face it......the methane gas alone would have blown up the ark!!

    Ana

  • uncle_onion
    uncle_onion

    Jason

    I have been away for a few days and so have not kept up to date with this thread. I was reading through it this morning and something caught my eye. You wrote:

    St. George apparently fought a dragon.
    And a bit of history from england AD 1405: "Close to the town of bures, near Sudbury, there has lately appeared, to the great hurt of the countryside, a dragon, vast in body, with a crested head, teeth like a saw, and a tail extending to an enormous length." (a reference can be found in After the Flood by Bill Cooper, p.133)

    This caught my eye as I live about 10 miles from Bures. Are you really saying that Dinosaurs existed in Bures about 800 years ago? I think that you are getting a bit confused here. Let me explain.

    I live in the village where a man called Matthew Hopkins lived in the 16th century. Hopkins nickname in the History books is “The witch finder General”. He is accredited with hunting down and putting to death over 170 witches. In fact on the village green there are 7 trees where 7 witches were burned at the stake. You can go to Colchester castle and stand in the room where the witches “confessed”. Hopkins said that every witch had a Devils spot, that if a needle were put on it, the witch would not feel the pain. This was a “sure-fire” way of “proving” some one was a witch.

    Well what is my point here? Well you cannot believe everything you read in medieval history. There are no such things as witches but AT THE TIME people believed that there were. There are no such things as dragons but AT THE TIME people believed that there were. I live in the UK and George and the Dragon is considered a myth.

    We have cave pictures of humans chasing Mammoths and so therefore can assume that mammoths and humans coexisted. Have you any proof of cave pictures that show humans and Dinosaurs coexisting?

    Regarding your points about Neanderthals. We know from DNA that Neanderthals were not our ancestors. But can you explain this to me please? If Adam was the first man and lived about 6000 years ago, how come that Neanderthal bone have been dated to a lot older than that. Please do not use the argument that C14 dating is flawed as that is old hat.

    UO

  • RedhorseWoman
    RedhorseWoman
    No, my dear, this is not correct. I said I knew the truth. I was telling the truth when I said this. But obviously when I said it you totally blew it out of proportion as if I had said "I know everything." By the truth i mean the truth about God. You forget I am not a borg following a mass collection because mommy and daddy taught me to. I came to Christ myself. I prayed to God to show me truth before I even believed He existed. He opened my eyes.

    So, Jason, your "cult" mindset is not a cult mindset because you are not a JW, right? Well, Jason, I pray to God, also, and He has obviously not put a bag over my head so I would refuse to think. Does that mean (according to your cult orientation) that I am therefore following Satan?

    On the contrary to your statement I think you believe that anything contrary to what you think is a lie. When someone shows me that I am wrong I admit it and change my mind.

    Gee, Jason, I haven't seen this attitude in you at all. Rather, what I have seen is a little boy sitting in the corner covering his ears, closing his eyes very tightly and repeating over and over, "I believe this, therefore, it is true....I believe this, therefore, it is true".

    You want to overstate everything to prove a point with a completely biased and ignorant attitude toward something that you don't believe.

    Overstate? Hooboy, buddy, you don't WANT to see an "overstatement" on this stuff. I have told you repeatedly that I have been "understating" what I KNOW....not what I "believe". It is a FACT that herbivores "need" to consume a MINIMUM of 2 percent of body weight in order to live. You don't need to research each and every individual animal to determine its food requirements. The 2 percent calculation holds true in most cases.

    For a horse, that would be about 20 pounds of food a day. For an Elephant, it would be about 150 pounds of food a day. For a Brachiosaur (using your "teenage" theory, making the animal around 30 tons rather than 60 for an adult), it would be about 1,200 pounds of food a day. Of course, being a young, growing animal, it might consume more.

    Let's just do a quick calculation for these three, which I assume you will consider feasible. Two equines, two Elephants, and two teenage Brachiosaurs. For these six animals we will need 2,740 pounds of food a day. An average 15 cubic foot bale of hay weighs between 40 and 50 pounds. Let's use heavy bales, okay? Dividing 2,740 by 50 equals 54.8 bales of hay per day, which equals 822 cubic feet. We then need to calculate this out for the length of the journey, plus slack time (which, again, I'll underestimate) so that plants can begin to regrow on a toxic, dead planet. Multiplying this 822 cubic feet times 500 days comes to 411,000 cubic feet of hay....for six animals....not counting bedding, water, or living area.

    And your estimate is 16,000 animals. I remember Woodmorappe's book, which I used to consider a very good resource for "proving" my beliefs. To be perfectly honest, Jason, I NEVER remember his mentioning dinosaurs, Mammoths, Mastodons, Aurochs, Eohippus, et al, in the mix he considered. These additions are YOUR "truth", and as irrational as the whole theory sounds in and of itself, your additions put it WAY over the top.

    But these overstated comments would never apply to your beliefs. Not even evolution. I have provided plenty of evidence against evolution. But it is ignored.

    Personally, Jason, I haven't focused on evolution. I'm not supporting evolution. I'm discussing the irrationality of the Ark theory. I'm not disputing any evidence either for or against evolution, since that is not the focus of this discussion.

    Simply because you seem to be too afraid to put your beliefs to the test.

    What "belief" of mine should I put to the test? What are you assuming I believe--since I've never stated my beliefs?

    About the calculations. I will do them myself. But unlike you when I calculate something I get all the facts beforehand. Take other things into consideration. Once I have gathered all of the facts I need (since I clearly need to learn about the majority of animals, how much they eat, etc, etc).

    Get a good book on animal husbandry, Jason. And definitely when you calculate, don't underestimate everything the way I have been doing.

    I am not like you. I believed in evolution very strongly.

    Okay, so what is your point here? Should I believe in evolution strongly, or what?

    I never asked for a pat on the back either. I simply noted that you critisize where you can but when you come to an answer you can't refute the subject isn't mentioned again.

    Exactly what answer about the Ark have you presented that hasn't been mentioned again? You have brought up extraneous arguments that go off on other tracks, which I and others have chosen not to pursue....red herrings, shall we say? We've been sticking to the original subject you initiated, and now you're pissed because we don't want to go off track?

    You say you used to believe the same thing as me (pretty much). You weren't even close. I wasn't brain washed in a huge cult.

    Odd thing about brainwashing and mind control is that the victim very rarely realizes that he is being victimized.

    You have challenged me to do the calculations so I will. But I know it will take time. There are tons of things that must be taken into consideration when calculating an event such as this. But I think you are afraid of my challenge. I challenge you to do the same. Last time I said this all I got back was a "Why should I?" I think this is fear to find out that it is feasible. And I don't mean, "well, my horse could eat this much hay in one day if it was really hungry so let's times this by 16,000 and then..." Why can't you even be honest with yourselves?

    Could you please tell me where you came up with this bogus "quote" of mine. I have never said that my horse could eat a certain amount of hay if he was really hungry. Read what I wrote. I've said that horses and other herbivores REQUIRE a certain amount of food to stay alive. I've said that Noah needed to keep these animals in good condition in order to have viable breeding stock after the water subsided. The loss of even ONE animal would mean extinction--not just for a species--but for a WHOLE KIND of animals. One equine dead equals no equines of ANY species. One canine dead and you have wiped out ALL canine species. Sounds to me as if Noah needed a HELL of a lot more supplies than the minimum and that these supplies needed to be fresh and of good quality.

    And I haven't convinced myself that you are trying to promote your beliefs. I just pointed out that whether you tell me what you believe or not it is altogether obvious by what you say. And you believe that what you believe is true. Otherwise you wouldn't believe it.

    Once again, Jason, you have no idea of what I believe. I've been presenting facts that I have gleaned from my own research and experience. I have never told you what I "believe".

    About hay:"horses will refuse to eat it unless there is absolutely nothing else available." Interesting. It may have been a last resort near the end of the trip.

    This is certainly true. However, YOUR original contention was that Noah had been stockpiling foodstuffs over a hundred-year period. My point was that it's tough enough trying to deal with hay that is only a few months old. Try feeding 50-year-old hay to an animal for a year....observe what happens.

    "I also know that hay distributors don't maintain stocks from year to year--it loses nutritional value after one season." How long is one season?

    Once again, Jason, for at least the fourth time..... Grass and legumes, such as Alfalfa, grow in the Spring and Summer. They are cut and baled in the Spring and Summer. By the next Spring (which is a year or less--btw, do you believe the calendar is valid?) the hay is pretty much useless.

    "Questions and facts prove nothing if you refuse to consider them."
    Another interesting comment. Sounds like something I said. And I have considered your words but they don't stand up to scrutiny.

    Exactly what "scrutiny" are you referring to? Pretty much what I have read is that you simply dismiss everything because it doesn't fit your pre-selected paradigm. Could you please show me that an herbivore does NOT require fresh forage. Could you please show me evidence that an herbivore can stand in urine and manure-soaked straw for weeks at a time without adverse effects. Could you please show me evidence that an ill-fed, dirty, herbivore standing in a tiny stall for a year on a rocking boat could even walk off the boat unassisted.

    "Believe me, Jason, I was once in your position. I KNEW everything because I had the "truth" from the Bible, and no amount of factual evidence to the contrary could prove otherwise."

    There is no factual evidence on the contrary. It is the other way around. The evidence FOR the Bible is what is overwhelming. Not the evidence against it.

    What is your "factual evidence"? What is your experience in this area? Have you raised or maintained any sort of large animals yourself? Do you have a degree in veterinary science? Have you ever had to store several hundred bales of hay? Have you lugged animal feed around for 16 hours a day? Do you have your own hay and grain fields which you regularly maintain and harvest so that you are an expert on the amount of land necessary to grow 80,000 tons of food? If so, please present your evidence.

    Who is naive? You simply overwhelm yourself by making it impossible in your own mind.

    How so, Jason? Is reality such an unusual concept for you? Do you feel that if you really, truly believe it to be so, you could drive your present car for 3,000 miles on one gallon of gas?

    Why won't you at least read Woodmorappe's book to see what he has to say?

    Who said I won't? I've read excerpts from his book previously, and as I stated, before I knew some facts about animal husbandry, it sounded logical to me. Now that I know more, his theory makes less sense. Then, too, your additions of the dinosaurs just really blew the top off the whole thing!

    If it is bogus it won't make a difference. And he does provide alternatives for food immediately following the flood.

    Now THIS is one thing I would really like to see. I've been thinking about that very thing. Plants and trees that are submerged in brackish water for over a year are dead.....and the soil is salty. Noah would have had to carry seeds and plants on the Ark also in order to revegetate the Earth.

    This one should be pretty easy for you to check out. Take a plant and stick it in a bucket of salinated water. Let us know the results in a week or two.

    Seaweed might be a possibly viable solution--if they could get it. Seaweed would need to be processed, however, to remove excess salt or it would be unfit for animal consumption. Also, I don't know how well it would grow in brackish water. Even if it were available in sufficient quantities, however, it's still a heck of a lot of manual work for eight people.

    This in itself is a false statement. my attempt to explain are not desparate in the least. So show me the "physical laws." And I never change evidence to fit anything. Facts are facts.

    Well, Jason, I think all of us have shown you physical laws that you simply refuse to contemplate. Nutritional needs of animals. Space limitations for the supplies required. Human frailty and the sheer physical requirements set forth for a 500-year-old man, who not only had to build the Ark, and fully supply it, but who also had to maintain the day-to-day requirements of a family during this 100-year period....AND, preach to all the world....ALL the world, mind you--not just the known world--so that any righteous people would be able to join his family. That just opens up a whole other can of worms right there.

    If you think I am full of it why don't we discuss some beliefs you have that are contrary to mine.

    So far, Jason, the major bone of contention has been the Ark theory.
    What else do you presume I believe?

  • AGuest
    AGuest

    (Slashing my way through all of the 'rhetoric')... uh, may you all have peace!

    Jason, dear, may you have peace!

    May I speak to you the word that I have heard from my Father, through Christ in regards to you? Thank you.

    The word to you, Jason, is if you 'know' the 'truth', that means you 'know' the Son of God, yes? 'Know' meaning to KNOW personally, and not just 'take in knowledge of'... yes?

    John 17:3

    And if you HAVE the 'truth', that means you 'have' the Son of God, which means he resides IN you, and through HIM, God resides in you as well, yes?

    Romans 8:9

    And if they RESIDE in you, that means their SPIRIT resides in you, has made it's 'abode' with you and thus, you are 'in union' with them, yes?

    John 17:21
    John 15:4-7
    John 6:56

    And if you are 'in union' with him, and thus in union with God, that means his spirit and GOD's spirit resides in you and is at work IN you, yes?

    John 14:23

    And the 'fruits' of that spirit are... LOVE, joy, PEACE, faith, KINDNESS, MILDNESS, goodness, LONG-SUFFERING... and SELF-CONTROL... which 'fruits' my Lord ALWAYS displayed, yes?

    Galatians 5:22-24

    How is it then, that you 'grieve' that spirit (if you in fact possess it)... by returning, what is in your mind 'evil'... for evil'? If YOU indeed are the one who has 'truth' (and indeed, while you can know OF him, as many here do, you can't KNOW him unless you HAVE him, unless he resides IN you, yes?), how is it that you expect these that you feel DON'T have the Truth to treat YOU... better than you are treating them?

    Is it not you, then... rather than these... who is OBLIGATED to go on 'walking' as that One 'walked'?

    1 John 1:6

    I, myself, SJ, have spoken it to you, Jason, just as I have heard from my Lord, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH, Son of the Holy One of Israel, JAH OF ARMIES.

    Please, daer one... 'enlighten' me. For I have not seen the 'christ' exhibited in you and what I HAVE seen, I must say I would not have 'found him to so.' I'm just wondering. Because 'contentions'... are a 'work' of the flesh and NOT of the spirit, dear one. So, what gives?

    I bid you peace,

    A slave of Christ,

    SJ

  • riz
    riz

    Country Joe,

    I just wanted to say that on page 7, your post was one of the best posts that I've ever had the pleasure of reading on this board. That was gold. Thank you.

    This thread is so engrossing. Thanks to everyone for participating.

    riz

  • Country Joe
    Country Joe

    Hi Riz,
    Many Thanks for the kind words.
    Seeing as this is my number 3 post, it was quite a compliment.

    As I suspect EVERYONE wants the "real truth", the title of this thread certainly held a certain amount of intrigue.
    Like WOW Man!!!Bout Time!!!Whup it on me!
    And like a little kid in eager anticipation of his most hoped for Christmas present, we all open it up only to find..... yet another pair of socks.
    Was Jason the Gateway Pentium 5000 with 1000Jigabite HD and 30 inch Flexscan Super High Res Color Monitor packaged with a free with every purchase Red Ryder Deluxe Limited Edition Aniversary Special Genuine BB-Gun Bearer?
    Nah! Just Jason bearing socks.
    Not to say that socks are not usefull.
    Hell! I love socks.
    But I have a few pair already. And unfortunately, all them socks, like many of Jasons "truths" will wear out in time or will find that Wormhole to Sock Heaven that seems to come with every dryer and at least one half of every pair seems to find.

    I figure TRUTH ought to be like a bonifide Physical Law. Like Gravity say. You just know that if you throw your keys up in the air that they will come streight back down again and NOT sideways and make for the next county.
    Or maybe even like Murphy's Law. You just know that if you throw your keys in the air and there is a house or a tree or a high fence nearby, your keys will make for those objects and you will be once more making excuses to the boss why you are late for work.

    Thanks again,
    Joe-still holding out for a Pentium 5000 with Red Ryder BB Gun, but I can always use another pair of socks.

  • Jason
    Jason

    UO,

    Actually there are such thing as witches. There are a few "witch" religions around the world who believe in spells and witchcraft. I know two people who are into this sort of thing. Whether you believe they can cast spells or not they believe they can. These are witches.

  • Jason
    Jason

    AGuest,

    You seem to think I am a JW. I am not. I do have the Holy Spirit in me. But I am not Jesus Christ. I make mistakes. Lately I have not been walking in the Spirit as I usually do and that is probably the reason that the character of Christ doesn't shine through very well at all. Because you helped point this out to me and helped me realize that I am acting no different than anyone else I won't be posting much about anything until I have gotten right with God. Thanks.

  • larc
    larc

    Jason,

    Once you get right with God, why don't you see if he will teach you some basic multiplication and division.

  • larc
    larc

    Country Joe,

    I enjoyed your post. In it you brought something up I hadn't thought of, the cutting and hewing of timber to make the Ark. I'm curious. They didn't have steel back in those days, so with iron axes, saws, and planes, how long would it take them to cut down a single, large tree and cut into thick planks to make compenants for the Ark. What is the typical volume of wood that a large tree would yield? If you can give me some approximations I will work out some calculations for the Ark and 16,000 cages that would be needed.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit