Its easier to understand if you think about it as being these peoples' religion. Religious folks (even intelligent ones) will accept all kinds of absurdities (just look at the stories in the Old Testament) and rationalize them to their satisfaction. Right now we even have people posting on this forum that think the earth and all life here is only 6000 years old or some such and that it was all done in 6 days. There's no use arguing with these people I've found.
Its easier to understand if you think about it as being these peoples' religion. Religious folks (even intelligent ones) will accept all kinds of absurdities (just look at the stories in the Old Testament) and rationalize them to their satisfaction. Right now we even have people posting on this forum that think the earth and all life here is only 6000 years old or some such and that it was all done in 6 days. There's no use arguing with these people I've found.
sudo
Arguing with them, at worst, would seem no worse than debating those true believers who have rejected the “dogma” of mainstream nutritional science to rally around the Atkins Diet.
Its easier to understand if you think about it as being these peoples' religion. Religious folks (even intelligent ones) will accept all kinds of absurdities (just look at the stories in the Old Testament) and rationalize them to their satisfaction. Right now we even have people posting on this forum that think the earth and all life here is only 6000 years old or some such and that it was all done in 6 days. There's no use arguing with these people I've found.
sudo
You really can't compare the Old Testament with this Flat Earth Society. Concrete proof has been available to all that the earth is round. The only answer they have is that the proof was faked, with no proof of the fakery. In contrast, there is nothing in the Old Testament that can be so disproved. Neither creation nor evolution can be proved or disproved scientifically, as we can't observe what happened then, nor recreate what happened in a lab. It is a matter of interpreting the data. And there are even things in the OT that used to be considered implausible that archaeology and other sciences has since confirmed. There is no comparison.
Re:"You really can't compare the Old Testament with this Flat Earth Society."
Oh but I just did and I think its a pretty good comparison. You really think Noah floated on a boat a few thousand years ago and landed on some mountain in the middle East with every animal in the world? Are you serious? How did the animals then get dispersed to all the continents? Did the kangaroos just swim to Australia? Be serious Mark... its nonsense. If I'm offending your religious sensibilities I'm sorry (this isn't the Doctrinal forum) but you see my point.. Flat Earth Society? Its just another religion.
sudo
P.S. Cynic.. my whole point with the Atkins diet is proving what works scientifically. And more and more that is pointing to low carbs, IMO. However.. I accept WHOLEHEARTEDLY what is proven empirically. Naw.. I ain't accepting nothing "on faith" If the evidence says eat more possum then its gonna' be on my menu!!
Re:"You really can't compare the Old Testament with this Flat Earth Society."
Oh but I just did and I think its a pretty good comparison. You really think Noah floated on a boat a few thousand years ago and landed on some mountain in the middle East with every animal in the world? Are you serious? How did the animals then get dispersed to all the continents? Did the kangaroos just swim to Australia? Be serious Mark... its nonsense. If I'm offending your religious sensibilities I'm sorry (this isn't the Doctrinal forum) but you see my point.. Flat Earth Society? Its just another religion.
You don't point out anything that disproves the flood story. You only question and mock it because you start from the position of not believing in it.
To answer your points:
It doesn't say every animal in the world, just every kind.
The animals could have gotten to the other continents in many of the same ways which non-believers in the flood suggest - it doesn't disprove the flood.
You're not offending my religious sensibilities so much as making an inaccurate comparison. Concrete proof that establishes that the earth is round has been presented, yet the Flat Earth Society simply claims the proof was faked, and explains everything away with conspiracy theories. While I know there are a few who make similar claims trying to prove the Bible, serious scholars do not.
Think of this: If there was no flood, how did all those sea-animal fossils end up in the middle of continents, hundreds of miles from the sea? And also, how would one explain the fact that so many ancient cultures had legends of a worldwide flood with an individual being saved in an ark-like craft? Wouldn't that suggest that something like that happened? Studies have been done on the feasibility of the flood and the ark, and nothing that disproves it has been presented. All you're going on is that you don't believe it for whatever reason.
And the other reason it is an inaccurate comparison is simply the number of people who accept it. Not that that proves whether it's true or not, but a large portion of our society believes in the Old Testament, while very few would accept the flat earth idea.
I'm sorry if I offended you. I didn't mean to mock your beliefs. The Old Testament is no more unbelievable than Scientology claims that aliens from outer space reside in us and need to be audited. My whole point was that Flat Earth Society folks have their reasons for believing what they do, too, no matter how ludicrous it seems to the rest of us. Its their religion and you get folks riled when you ridicule what they hold dear.
That doesn't mean I'd allow it to be taught in public schools, though.
I'm not offended, I just wanted to set the record straight. A lot of people lump the Old Testament in with things like the Flat Earth Society or Scientology's beliefs about space aliens. But there is actually quite a bit of scientific validation for the Old Testament that many people don't even realize, and so don't have an answer when such comparisons are made. The fact is, I've found that it's not necessary to "check your brain at the door" in order to believe in the Bible, contrary to what often happened in the so-called "research" of TWI.
Re:"A lot of people lump the Old Testament in with things like the Flat Earth Society or Scientology's beliefs about space aliens. But there is actually quite a bit of scientific validation for the Old Testament that many people don't even realize"
I suppose you are talking about the Creationist scientists maybe? Check out the Creationist museum I saw a poll that said that 60% of Americans believed that God created the world in six 24 hour days.
But there is actually quite a bit of scientific validation for the Old Testament that many people don't even realize, and so don't have an answer when such comparisons are made. The fact is, I've found that it's not necessary to "check your brain at the door" in order to believe in the Bible, contrary to what often happened in the so-called "research" of TWI.
I would respectfully submit that such "validation" is only persuasive to those already firmly within the ranks of the "believer" contingent. To those of a slightly more skeptical bent, the "evidence" is pretty lame, and, like Monsieur Sudo, I don't find a lot of difference between religions and superstitions.
Religions - generally - have been around a long time and have garnered a certain degree of acceptability by simply being familiar. That, and having a belief in them constantly reinforced by family, friends and society in general gives them (religions) a credibility they'd be unable to foster were they required to stand on their own feet...
I used to frequently hear the verse about "casting our sin as far as the East is from the West" being taught as *proof* that God was the author of The Word. The logic behind this was that if you look at a picture of a flat Earth, the East eventually meets the West. However, if you look at it on a globe, you see that they never meet. And, since people did not know the World was "round", but God did, it proved he was the author. It makes some sense by today's standards but who really knows what that phrase meant 1,000s of years ago?
Recommended Posts
Lifted Up
Ha, I guess that space station isn't really orbitins; must be hanging like a pendulum and swinging back and forth...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sudo
Its easier to understand if you think about it as being these peoples' religion. Religious folks (even intelligent ones) will accept all kinds of absurdities (just look at the stories in the Old Testament) and rationalize them to their satisfaction. Right now we even have people posting on this forum that think the earth and all life here is only 6000 years old or some such and that it was all done in 6 days. There's no use arguing with these people I've found.
sudo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
Arguing with them, at worst, would seem no worse than debating those true believers who have rejected the “dogma” of mainstream nutritional science to rally around the Atkins Diet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
You really can't compare the Old Testament with this Flat Earth Society. Concrete proof has been available to all that the earth is round. The only answer they have is that the proof was faked, with no proof of the fakery. In contrast, there is nothing in the Old Testament that can be so disproved. Neither creation nor evolution can be proved or disproved scientifically, as we can't observe what happened then, nor recreate what happened in a lab. It is a matter of interpreting the data. And there are even things in the OT that used to be considered implausible that archaeology and other sciences has since confirmed. There is no comparison.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sudo
Mark,
Re:"You really can't compare the Old Testament with this Flat Earth Society."
Oh but I just did and I think its a pretty good comparison. You really think Noah floated on a boat a few thousand years ago and landed on some mountain in the middle East with every animal in the world? Are you serious? How did the animals then get dispersed to all the continents? Did the kangaroos just swim to Australia? Be serious Mark... its nonsense. If I'm offending your religious sensibilities I'm sorry (this isn't the Doctrinal forum) but you see my point.. Flat Earth Society? Its just another religion.
sudo
P.S. Cynic.. my whole point with the Atkins diet is proving what works scientifically. And more and more that is pointing to low carbs, IMO. However.. I accept WHOLEHEARTEDLY what is proven empirically. Naw.. I ain't accepting nothing "on faith" If the evidence says eat more possum then its gonna' be on my menu!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
You don't point out anything that disproves the flood story. You only question and mock it because you start from the position of not believing in it.
To answer your points:
It doesn't say every animal in the world, just every kind.
The animals could have gotten to the other continents in many of the same ways which non-believers in the flood suggest - it doesn't disprove the flood.
You're not offending my religious sensibilities so much as making an inaccurate comparison. Concrete proof that establishes that the earth is round has been presented, yet the Flat Earth Society simply claims the proof was faked, and explains everything away with conspiracy theories. While I know there are a few who make similar claims trying to prove the Bible, serious scholars do not.
Think of this: If there was no flood, how did all those sea-animal fossils end up in the middle of continents, hundreds of miles from the sea? And also, how would one explain the fact that so many ancient cultures had legends of a worldwide flood with an individual being saved in an ark-like craft? Wouldn't that suggest that something like that happened? Studies have been done on the feasibility of the flood and the ark, and nothing that disproves it has been presented. All you're going on is that you don't believe it for whatever reason.
And the other reason it is an inaccurate comparison is simply the number of people who accept it. Not that that proves whether it's true or not, but a large portion of our society believes in the Old Testament, while very few would accept the flat earth idea.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sudo
Mark,
I'm sorry if I offended you. I didn't mean to mock your beliefs. The Old Testament is no more unbelievable than Scientology claims that aliens from outer space reside in us and need to be audited. My whole point was that Flat Earth Society folks have their reasons for believing what they do, too, no matter how ludicrous it seems to the rest of us. Its their religion and you get folks riled when you ridicule what they hold dear.
That doesn't mean I'd allow it to be taught in public schools, though.
sudo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
Sudo,
I'm not offended, I just wanted to set the record straight. A lot of people lump the Old Testament in with things like the Flat Earth Society or Scientology's beliefs about space aliens. But there is actually quite a bit of scientific validation for the Old Testament that many people don't even realize, and so don't have an answer when such comparisons are made. The fact is, I've found that it's not necessary to "check your brain at the door" in order to believe in the Bible, contrary to what often happened in the so-called "research" of TWI.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sudo
Mark,
Re:"A lot of people lump the Old Testament in with things like the Flat Earth Society or Scientology's beliefs about space aliens. But there is actually quite a bit of scientific validation for the Old Testament that many people don't even realize"
I suppose you are talking about the Creationist scientists maybe? Check out the Creationist museum I saw a poll that said that 60% of Americans believed that God created the world in six 24 hour days.
sudo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
I would respectfully submit that such "validation" is only persuasive to those already firmly within the ranks of the "believer" contingent. To those of a slightly more skeptical bent, the "evidence" is pretty lame, and, like Monsieur Sudo, I don't find a lot of difference between religions and superstitions.
Religions - generally - have been around a long time and have garnered a certain degree of acceptability by simply being familiar. That, and having a belief in them constantly reinforced by family, friends and society in general gives them (religions) a credibility they'd be unable to foster were they required to stand on their own feet...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I used to frequently hear the verse about "casting our sin as far as the East is from the West" being taught as *proof* that God was the author of The Word. The logic behind this was that if you look at a picture of a flat Earth, the East eventually meets the West. However, if you look at it on a globe, you see that they never meet. And, since people did not know the World was "round", but God did, it proved he was the author. It makes some sense by today's standards but who really knows what that phrase meant 1,000s of years ago?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Brushstroke, I thought you were a smart and intelligent guy. Whatever are you doing hanging out with Flat Earthers?
Or are you making some statement about TWI beliefs?
Very funny though. The Kennedy conspiracy theorists have nothing on these guys.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
so it was
"A: "Circumference: 78225 miles, Diameter: 24,900 miles"
This is where I almost fell out of my chair, yet the earth is flat? Its OK to have crazy beliefs but at least they can TRY to be consistent.
Sorry to muck up the old testament debate, very good points on all sides there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.