Remember me
▼ Content

"... take care of it." -Genesis 2:15.



Page 2 of 8<1234>>>
25-06-2022 04:38
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote: You douche bag's have some gall!

Your bile failed to de-liver.

.


I wasn't talking about the liver.


25-06-2022 04:42
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
Into the Night wrote:You DO need to be aware, however, that it's a package deal.

Good. We agree that it is a package.

Into the Night wrote:You cannot just select individual scripture out of Genesis and take it out of context; which is what you have been doing.

I have a minor problem with your mention of "context." I have done nothing other than take everything as written. Context doesn't enter the picture for what I have mentioned thus far. If you question that the Bible reads as I have stated, please cite the text that I have misquoted.

I use the King James Version. Whereas the KJV is written in outdated English, I believe that I am a competent authority to translate into modern/contemporary English. I'm happy to discuss the meaning of any part you wish.

As a side note, do you accept 15 cubits to be roughly 27.5 feet, give or take?

2nd side note: God's official window size: one cubit. God wouldn't have it any other way. Genesis 6:16
25-06-2022 13:21
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:You are clueless as usual.

You are delusional, as usual.

Swan wrote: While it is true that Genesis is part of a book,

Nope. Genesis is a book, specifically the book of Genesis.

If you're feeling stupid right now, don't worry, it's totally appropriate.

Swan wrote: it finds nothing necessary to express.

Yes, the book of Genesis has a definite need to express the contents therein.

Swan wrote: See kid only the book's author could do that,

Exactly. The book of Genesis is the word and expression of its author, and needs to express what it needs to express.

Swan wrote:as books do not write themselves.

When the day arrives that your English comprehension surpasses the third-grade level, you will understand that "write" and "express" are not the same word.

But you go on babbling as usual.


Books do not have feelings or feel the need to express themselves as they are inanimate, authors on the other hand have these qualities

Who wrote genesis?

Answer, no one knows, and rational people do not care.


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
25-06-2022 19:01
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote: You douche bag's have some gall!

Your bile failed to de-liver.
I wasn't talking about the liver.

Try rereading what I wrote just a little slower than you are being.
25-06-2022 20:37
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:You DO need to be aware, however, that it's a package deal.

Good. We agree that it is a package.

Actually, you haven't, since you are cherry picking scripture and ignoring other scripture.
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:You cannot just select individual scripture out of Genesis and take it out of context; which is what you have been doing.

I have a minor problem with your mention of "context." I have done nothing other than take everything as written.

No, you haven't. You are cherry picking scripture and ignoring other scripture. Many fundamentalists also tend to do this, as well as just about any Christian religion (especially Catholics). Don't feel bad because I'm singling you out, but it IS what you are doing.
IBdaMann wrote:
Context doesn't enter the picture for what I have mentioned thus far.

YES IT DOES.
IBdaMann wrote:
If you question that the Bible reads as I have stated, please cite the text that I have misquoted.

I never said you misquoted anything. Pay attention. You are leaving versus out intentionally creating a contextomy fallacy via cherry picking. You continue to ignore the verses describing the mountains were covered.
IBdaMann wrote:
I use the King James Version.

Works for me. It is also what I use. Of course, it IS a translation and like any translation it has it's inaccuracies (mostly due to idioms that don't translate), but I consider it the closest translation.
IBdaMann wrote:
Whereas the KJV is written in outdated English, I believe that I am a competent authority to translate into modern/contemporary English. I'm happy to discuss the meaning of any part you wish.

No need. I understand the so-called 'outdated' English.
IBdaMann wrote:
As a side note, do you accept 15 cubits to be roughly 27.5 feet, give or take?

A cubit is the length from the elbow to the tip of the middle finger. People are different size. In various kingdoms and societies, the king's arm was used. Thus, the cubit varies in size depending on the king at the time. In other words, it was an imperial unit...just an old one.

Whether Noah used his own arm (most convenient), or a 'standard' cubit of the day is unknown.

This unit of measurement was common throughout Egypt and Israel, as well as a few other places. It was simply the local unit of measurement at the time. Some builders still use it for rough measurements.

The cubit used by Noah could easily have been anywhere from about 18 inches to 21 inches, giving a height of the vessel of anything from 540ft to 630ft I would assume this height is from keel to the roof (or possibly the topdeck, which also functioned as a roof).

The Ark wasn't built in a day or even in a year. It likely took some 70 years or longer to build the Ark. This interval is supported by genealogical information given in the same book at the time. The actual time is unknown.

I can easily such a vessel have a draft of some 300 ft (approx 15 cubits) when loaded.

IBdaMann wrote:
2nd side note: God's official window size: one cubit. God wouldn't have it any other way. Genesis 6:16

You forget AGAIN that the Bible is about events in and around Egypt, Rome, and Israel, where the cubit was commonly used.

There is NOTHING that states God made ANY measurement system 'official'.


Now concerning the mountains:

It is unknown where the Ark was launched. It really doesn't matter. We can assume, however, that it beached somewhere near what is now Israel (since this originally was a Hebrew text). This means the mountains that were covered in THAT area can be considered as covered by water.

Mt/ Hermon (a rather beautiful mountain snow capped much of the time) is 2814m or 7165ft ASL. This is about eleven times the height of the Ark itself.

Mt Bental (an extinct volcano) is 1165m or 3822ft ASL, or about six times the height of the Ark itself.

ASL is, of course, the level of the sea currently, considerably lower than it was during the Flood, as described in the Bible.

An interesting point comes up here:

Where did all that water come from, and where did it all go? There is only a fixed amount of mass that can become water on Earth. I assume hydrogen didn't combine with all the oxygen to produce it, since that would kill the inhabitants of the Ark itself. Even if something like THAT were to occur, how did it separate out again? That's a LOT of electrolysis!

The land based ice at the poles don't have enough ice to raise water that far, even if they somehow completely melted. Ice in the sea of course doesn't raise the water level at all if it were to somehow all melt. Not even the worst doomsday prediction from the Church of Global Warming creates a flood that covers the mountains, not even those in Israel.

If the Flood were to be taken as fact, how did it happen? The Bible doesn't describe it. No surprise, since it covered a pretty small area of events. It is an interesting question.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 25-06-2022 20:39
25-06-2022 23:06
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


25-06-2022 23:13
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote: You douche bag's have some gall!

Your bile failed to de-liver.
I wasn't talking about the liver.

Try rereading what I wrote just a little slower than you are being.


You don't seem to be picking up on my reference to vinegar and gall.


26-06-2022 01:11
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
Into the Night wrote: You continue to ignore the verses describing the mountains were covered.

There's a reason for that, and you touched upon it ...

Into the Night wrote:Of course, it IS a translation and like any translation it has it's inaccuracies (mostly due to idioms that don't translate), but I consider it the closest translation.

This is exactly the reason we should disregard mention of mountains. One unfortunate problem with translating amongst European languages (and even proto-European) is that the word for "plantlife" and "brush" and "countryside" also has, as a possible translation, the word for "mountain". It doesn't take a genius to read the Hebrew account of Genesis and realize the regrettable mistake of translating "phase/time period" as "day", even though the word "day" is technically a correct translation in other contexts. Similarly, it is fairly obvious (I say "fairly" because I really don't expect people to delve into multiple languages) that what was originally intended was that there was a lot of rain, flooding occurred, the ark was lifted off the ground and all the plants and trees were submerged. Take the mountains and the mistranslation out of it and it makes perfect sense. The 15 cubits fits right in. Someone in an ark would not be drowned.

Here are pictures of monte ...







but here are two more pictures of monte ...





As a sidenote, the brand Del Monte means "of the countryside plantlife" not "of the mountain." Later in Genesis there is reference to Jacob and his brethren laboring all night "in the mount", i.e. in the fields. The Bible has fallen victim to poor translations between "fields," "rocks," "mountains," "countryside" "pastures," "slopes", and many others that were interchanged when they should not have been. If you keep that in mind as you read the account of the great flood, it all makes perfect sense.

Note that when Jesus delivered the sermon on the mount, it was a mound on which he was standing, or a rock, not a mountain. He was standing on a mound so as to be somewhat elevated over the audience. Unfortunately it was translated as "mount" as you would refer to Mount Rushmore, and not as "mound", e.g. mound on the ground.

Into the Night wrote:Actually, you haven't, since you are cherry picking scripture and ignoring other scripture.

At the same time, you don't get to discount any Bible verse simply on the grounds that the entire rest of the Bible was not included as well.

There is no such thing as "cherry picking" when quoting the Bible. It's a package deal and you have to take all of it. I happen to take a humanistic interpretation because I know how people like to embellish when recounting stories and how stories change/evolve each time they are recounted, and how they change every time they are translated, and how they change every time they are edited (just note how the supposedly same story varies between different versions of the Bible). This is why I select one version (KJV) and use that. The English might be a little archaic but the gist of the story remains intact for the most part. As always, there are various translation pitfalls but those are more readily discerned in KJV than in more modern re-edits.


Into the Night wrote: In various kingdoms and societies, the king's arm was used. Thus, the cubit varies in size depending on the king at the time. In other words, it was an imperial unit...just an old one.

According to the Bible, one cubit is the size of a window.

Yes, yes, ... outside of the Bible, historically, yes a cubit was measured by elbow to fingertip. However, we must apply context, and the context is the Bible, and God doesn't use any other unit.

How long is it from God's elbow to God's fingertip?

Do you have any theories as to why God used cubits exclusively?

Can you think of a reason why God would make his official window measurement "one cubit"? Jussasking. You have to admit, it's no coincidence that God didn't give Noah any leeway on the size of the stupid window. God did not say "Noah, hey, it's your window, make it whatever size you want, just don't go crazy with it." He said "Noah, make the window exactly one cubit ... or I'll have the union all over your ass so fast you won't even have enough time to tell Shem to get the shotgun, ... I mean a sling and some stones."

From my point of view, cubits are God's unit of measure. He doesn't use any other.

Into the Night wrote:Whether Noah used his own arm (most convenient), or a 'standard' cubit of the day is unknown.

... or maybe he used God's cubit. If it's good enough for God then it might very well have been good enough for Noah.

Into the Night wrote:This unit of measurement was common throughout Egypt and Israel, as well as a few other places. It was simply the local unit of measurement at the time. Some builders still use it for rough measurements.

Outside of any Biblical context, and within an historical context, absolutely.

Into the Night wrote:The cubit used by Noah could easily have been anywhere from about 18 inches to 21 inches,

I'm going with Noah's cubit being one window in length.

Into the Night wrote:giving a height of the vessel of anything from 540ft to 630ft

That would be the length. The height would be about 55 ft, give or take.

Into the Night wrote:The Ark wasn't built in a day or even in a year. It likely took some 70 years or longer to build the Ark.

GasGuzzler said the same thing.

How did you calculate this figure? Juskyurious. Are you adding on a few extra decades because Noah tried to move large beams with levers?

Into the Night wrote:This interval is supported by genealogical information given in the same book at the time. The actual time is unknown.

I'm sure it is, but I'd be interested in knowing what information was used to make the estimate. Genesis doesn't even touch the subject. In Genesis 6, God tells Noah to build an ark, and he just does. Then in Genesis 7, God tells Noah to gather up all the animals ... in seven days ... and Noah just does.

Genesis 7 could be used as support for Genesis 6 taking a far shorter time period under the premise that God helped Noah ... because God helps those who help themselves. I think a strong case could be made that God helped Noah gather up all the animals to fill the ark in only seven days.

I wouldn't rule out God being helpful, jussayn.

Other Christians claim that the flood was 120 years in the coming, having been announced more than a century in advance, when Noah was about 480 years old, indicating Noah had been working on it that long. Others say Noah didn't "get right on it" but instead relaxed for a few decades before rolling up his sleeves. Yet others believe that God helped him get it done in a few months.

Something you might one day consider to expand your horizons, and to look at the great flood account from a differing historical perspective, is to read the Muslim account of Noah and the flood. In Islam, Noah is a nabi (prophet) and the account of Noah, which includes the flood, is much longer and more detailed. It's like Islam bought the movie rights to the Genesis short story. It has a little bit of Daedalus and Icarus in there, with Noah's "oldest son" not believing the prophecy, did not board the ark, but when the rain began, ran to the top of a hill ... and perished.

You had asked "from where did the water come." In Islam, Allah caused water to gush upward from huge cracks in the earth ... and when everyone was dead, he reopened the cracks to let the water disappear back into the earth.

The story of Noah in Islam is a major drama whereby Noah tries to save humanity by pleading with mankind to abandon idolatry ... but they all mock him. Then Noah begins building the ark at the appointed time, and humanity makes long pilgrimages just to find Noah and to mock him for building a ship on a hill far from any lake or ocean. Then Noah's wife, it turns out, never believed his story and she laughed at Noah, and mocked him as he was climbing aboard the ark ... and then the door was shut and she died.

Mainstream Islam holds that there were about eighty people on the ark along with all the animals.

Into the Night wrote:You forget AGAIN that the Bible is about events in and around Egypt, Rome, and Israel, where the cubit was commonly used.

You forget that this is not specified in the Bible. This is speculation. Genesis does not specify the geographic location.

One major reason for this is that the account of the great flood came to Egypt, Rome and Israel from parts further east in Asia ... but that is a non-Biblical context. If we simply go by Genesis, we simply don't know where it occurred.

Into the Night wrote:There is NOTHING that states God made ANY measurement system 'official'.

Yes there is: The book of Genesis. All you need is for God to mandate it, and mandate it He did. That more than made it official. It made it regulatory.

When Noah finished his window to one cubit, he wasn't being creative, he was being obedient.

.
26-06-2022 13:46
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote: You continue to ignore the verses describing the mountains were covered.

There's a reason for that, and you touched upon it ...

Into the Night wrote:Of course, it IS a translation and like any translation it has it's inaccuracies (mostly due to idioms that don't translate), but I consider it the closest translation.

This is exactly the reason we should disregard mention of mountains. One unfortunate problem with translating amongst European languages (and even proto-European) is that the word for "plantlife" and "brush" and "countryside" also has, as a possible translation, the word for "mountain". It doesn't take a genius to read the Hebrew account of Genesis and realize the regrettable mistake of translating "phase/time period" as "day", even though the word "day" is technically a correct translation in other contexts. Similarly, it is fairly obvious (I say "fairly" because I really don't expect people to delve into multiple languages) that what was originally intended was that there was a lot of rain, flooding occurred, the ark was lifted off the ground and all the plants and trees were submerged. Take the mountains and the mistranslation out of it and it makes perfect sense. The 15 cubits fits right in. Someone in an ark would not be drowned.

Here are pictures of monte ...







but here are two more pictures of monte ...





As a sidenote, the brand Del Monte means "of the countryside plantlife" not "of the mountain." Later in Genesis there is reference to Jacob and his brethren laboring all night "in the mount", i.e. in the fields. The Bible has fallen victim to poor translations between "fields," "rocks," "mountains," "countryside" "pastures," "slopes", and many others that were interchanged when they should not have been. If you keep that in mind as you read the account of the great flood, it all makes perfect sense.

Note that when Jesus delivered the sermon on the mount, it was a mound on which he was standing, or a rock, not a mountain. He was standing on a mound so as to be somewhat elevated over the audience. Unfortunately it was translated as "mount" as you would refer to Mount Rushmore, and not as "mound", e.g. mound on the ground.

Into the Night wrote:Actually, you haven't, since you are cherry picking scripture and ignoring other scripture.

At the same time, you don't get to discount any Bible verse simply on the grounds that the entire rest of the Bible was not included as well.

There is no such thing as "cherry picking" when quoting the Bible. It's a package deal and you have to take all of it. I happen to take a humanistic interpretation because I know how people like to embellish when recounting stories and how stories change/evolve each time they are recounted, and how they change every time they are translated, and how they change every time they are edited (just note how the supposedly same story varies between different versions of the Bible). This is why I select one version (KJV) and use that. The English might be a little archaic but the gist of the story remains intact for the most part. As always, there are various translation pitfalls but those are more readily discerned in KJV than in more modern re-edits.


Into the Night wrote: In various kingdoms and societies, the king's arm was used. Thus, the cubit varies in size depending on the king at the time. In other words, it was an imperial unit...just an old one.

According to the Bible, one cubit is the size of a window.

Yes, yes, ... outside of the Bible, historically, yes a cubit was measured by elbow to fingertip. However, we must apply context, and the context is the Bible, and God doesn't use any other unit.

How long is it from God's elbow to God's fingertip?

Do you have any theories as to why God used cubits exclusively?

Can you think of a reason why God would make his official window measurement "one cubit"? Jussasking. You have to admit, it's no coincidence that God didn't give Noah any leeway on the size of the stupid window. God did not say "Noah, hey, it's your window, make it whatever size you want, just don't go crazy with it." He said "Noah, make the window exactly one cubit ... or I'll have the union all over your ass so fast you won't even have enough time to tell Shem to get the shotgun, ... I mean a sling and some stones."

From my point of view, cubits are God's unit of measure. He doesn't use any other.

Into the Night wrote:Whether Noah used his own arm (most convenient), or a 'standard' cubit of the day is unknown.

... or maybe he used God's cubit. If it's good enough for God then it might very well have been good enough for Noah.

Into the Night wrote:This unit of measurement was common throughout Egypt and Israel, as well as a few other places. It was simply the local unit of measurement at the time. Some builders still use it for rough measurements.

Outside of any Biblical context, and within an historical context, absolutely.

Into the Night wrote:The cubit used by Noah could easily have been anywhere from about 18 inches to 21 inches,

I'm going with Noah's cubit being one window in length.

Into the Night wrote:giving a height of the vessel of anything from 540ft to 630ft

That would be the length. The height would be about 55 ft, give or take.

Into the Night wrote:The Ark wasn't built in a day or even in a year. It likely took some 70 years or longer to build the Ark.

GasGuzzler said the same thing.

How did you calculate this figure? Juskyurious. Are you adding on a few extra decades because Noah tried to move large beams with levers?

Into the Night wrote:This interval is supported by genealogical information given in the same book at the time. The actual time is unknown.

I'm sure it is, but I'd be interested in knowing what information was used to make the estimate. Genesis doesn't even touch the subject. In Genesis 6, God tells Noah to build an ark, and he just does. Then in Genesis 7, God tells Noah to gather up all the animals ... in seven days ... and Noah just does.

Genesis 7 could be used as support for Genesis 6 taking a far shorter time period under the premise that God helped Noah ... because God helps those who help themselves. I think a strong case could be made that God helped Noah gather up all the animals to fill the ark in only seven days.

I wouldn't rule out God being helpful, jussayn.

Other Christians claim that the flood was 120 years in the coming, having been announced more than a century in advance, when Noah was about 480 years old, indicating Noah had been working on it that long. Others say Noah didn't "get right on it" but instead relaxed for a few decades before rolling up his sleeves. Yet others believe that God helped him get it done in a few months.

Something you might one day consider to expand your horizons, and to look at the great flood account from a differing historical perspective, is to read the Muslim account of Noah and the flood. In Islam, Noah is a nabi (prophet) and the account of Noah, which includes the flood, is much longer and more detailed. It's like Islam bought the movie rights to the Genesis short story. It has a little bit of Daedalus and Icarus in there, with Noah's "oldest son" not believing the prophecy, did not board the ark, but when the rain began, ran to the top of a hill ... and perished.

You had asked "from where did the water come." In Islam, Allah caused water to gush upward from huge cracks in the earth ... and when everyone was dead, he reopened the cracks to let the water disappear back into the earth.

The story of Noah in Islam is a major drama whereby Noah tries to save humanity by pleading with mankind to abandon idolatry ... but they all mock him. Then Noah begins building the ark at the appointed time, and humanity makes long pilgrimages just to find Noah and to mock him for building a ship on a hill far from any lake or ocean. Then Noah's wife, it turns out, never believed his story and she laughed at Noah, and mocked him as he was climbing aboard the ark ... and then the door was shut and she died.

Mainstream Islam holds that there were about eighty people on the ark along with all the animals.

Into the Night wrote:You forget AGAIN that the Bible is about events in and around Egypt, Rome, and Israel, where the cubit was commonly used.

You forget that this is not specified in the Bible. This is speculation. Genesis does not specify the geographic location.

One major reason for this is that the account of the great flood came to Egypt, Rome and Israel from parts further east in Asia ... but that is a non-Biblical context. If we simply go by Genesis, we simply don't know where it occurred.

Into the Night wrote:There is NOTHING that states God made ANY measurement system 'official'.

Yes there is: The book of Genesis. All you need is for God to mandate it, and mandate it He did. That more than made it official. It made it regulatory.

When Noah finished his window to one cubit, he wasn't being creative, he was being obedient.

.


What language was Genesis translated from, and what kind of writing implements were used by Adam and Eve and what school were they taught to use them at?

Sorry girls I can not participate in this PhD psychological wet dream

But you go right ahead explaining everything you know to no one


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
Edited on 26-06-2022 13:47
26-06-2022 20:42
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-06-2022 20:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote: You continue to ignore the verses describing the mountains were covered.

There's a reason for that, and you touched upon it ...

Into the Night wrote:Of course, it IS a translation and like any translation it has it's inaccuracies (mostly due to idioms that don't translate), but I consider it the closest translation.

This is exactly the reason we should disregard mention of mountains. One unfortunate problem with translating amongst European languages (and even proto-European) is that the word for "plantlife" and "brush" and "countryside" also has, as a possible translation, the word for "mountain". It doesn't take a genius to read the Hebrew account of Genesis and realize the regrettable mistake of translating "phase/time period" as "day", even though the word "day" is technically a correct translation in other contexts. Similarly, it is fairly obvious (I say "fairly" because I really don't expect people to delve into multiple languages) that what was originally intended was that there was a lot of rain, flooding occurred, the ark was lifted off the ground and all the plants and trees were submerged. Take the mountains and the mistranslation out of it and it makes perfect sense. The 15 cubits fits right in. Someone in an ark would not be drowned.

So you have decided to ignore any verse mentioning 'mountain' and cherry pick the one that says 15 cubits.
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:Actually, you haven't, since you are cherry picking scripture and ignoring other scripture.

At the same time, you don't get to discount any Bible verse simply on the grounds that the entire rest of the Bible was not included as well.

There is no such thing as "cherry picking" when quoting the Bible. It's a package deal and you have to take all of it.


You are now locked in paradox. Which is it, dude?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-06-2022 20:52
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote: You continue to ignore the verses describing the mountains were covered.

There's a reason for that, and you touched upon it ...

Into the Night wrote:Of course, it IS a translation and like any translation it has it's inaccuracies (mostly due to idioms that don't translate), but I consider it the closest translation.

This is exactly the reason we should disregard mention of mountains. One unfortunate problem with translating amongst European languages (and even proto-European) is that the word for "plantlife" and "brush" and "countryside" also has, as a possible translation, the word for "mountain". It doesn't take a genius to read the Hebrew account of Genesis and realize the regrettable mistake of translating "phase/time period" as "day", even though the word "day" is technically a correct translation in other contexts. Similarly, it is fairly obvious (I say "fairly" because I really don't expect people to delve into multiple languages) that what was originally intended was that there was a lot of rain, flooding occurred, the ark was lifted off the ground and all the plants and trees were submerged. Take the mountains and the mistranslation out of it and it makes perfect sense. The 15 cubits fits right in. Someone in an ark would not be drowned.

Here are pictures of monte ...







but here are two more pictures of monte ...





As a sidenote, the brand Del Monte means "of the countryside plantlife" not "of the mountain." Later in Genesis there is reference to Jacob and his brethren laboring all night "in the mount", i.e. in the fields. The Bible has fallen victim to poor translations between "fields," "rocks," "mountains," "countryside" "pastures," "slopes", and many others that were interchanged when they should not have been. If you keep that in mind as you read the account of the great flood, it all makes perfect sense.

Note that when Jesus delivered the sermon on the mount, it was a mound on which he was standing, or a rock, not a mountain. He was standing on a mound so as to be somewhat elevated over the audience. Unfortunately it was translated as "mount" as you would refer to Mount Rushmore, and not as "mound", e.g. mound on the ground.

Into the Night wrote:Actually, you haven't, since you are cherry picking scripture and ignoring other scripture.

At the same time, you don't get to discount any Bible verse simply on the grounds that the entire rest of the Bible was not included as well.

There is no such thing as "cherry picking" when quoting the Bible. It's a package deal and you have to take all of it. I happen to take a humanistic interpretation because I know how people like to embellish when recounting stories and how stories change/evolve each time they are recounted, and how they change every time they are translated, and how they change every time they are edited (just note how the supposedly same story varies between different versions of the Bible). This is why I select one version (KJV) and use that. The English might be a little archaic but the gist of the story remains intact for the most part. As always, there are various translation pitfalls but those are more readily discerned in KJV than in more modern re-edits.


Into the Night wrote: In various kingdoms and societies, the king's arm was used. Thus, the cubit varies in size depending on the king at the time. In other words, it was an imperial unit...just an old one.

According to the Bible, one cubit is the size of a window.

Yes, yes, ... outside of the Bible, historically, yes a cubit was measured by elbow to fingertip. However, we must apply context, and the context is the Bible, and God doesn't use any other unit.

How long is it from God's elbow to God's fingertip?

Do you have any theories as to why God used cubits exclusively?

Can you think of a reason why God would make his official window measurement "one cubit"? Jussasking. You have to admit, it's no coincidence that God didn't give Noah any leeway on the size of the stupid window. God did not say "Noah, hey, it's your window, make it whatever size you want, just don't go crazy with it." He said "Noah, make the window exactly one cubit ... or I'll have the union all over your ass so fast you won't even have enough time to tell Shem to get the shotgun, ... I mean a sling and some stones."

From my point of view, cubits are God's unit of measure. He doesn't use any other.

Into the Night wrote:Whether Noah used his own arm (most convenient), or a 'standard' cubit of the day is unknown.

... or maybe he used God's cubit. If it's good enough for God then it might very well have been good enough for Noah.

Into the Night wrote:This unit of measurement was common throughout Egypt and Israel, as well as a few other places. It was simply the local unit of measurement at the time. Some builders still use it for rough measurements.

Outside of any Biblical context, and within an historical context, absolutely.

Into the Night wrote:The cubit used by Noah could easily have been anywhere from about 18 inches to 21 inches,

I'm going with Noah's cubit being one window in length.

Into the Night wrote:giving a height of the vessel of anything from 540ft to 630ft

That would be the length. The height would be about 55 ft, give or take.

Into the Night wrote:The Ark wasn't built in a day or even in a year. It likely took some 70 years or longer to build the Ark.

GasGuzzler said the same thing.

How did you calculate this figure? Juskyurious. Are you adding on a few extra decades because Noah tried to move large beams with levers?

Into the Night wrote:This interval is supported by genealogical information given in the same book at the time. The actual time is unknown.

I'm sure it is, but I'd be interested in knowing what information was used to make the estimate. Genesis doesn't even touch the subject. In Genesis 6, God tells Noah to build an ark, and he just does. Then in Genesis 7, God tells Noah to gather up all the animals ... in seven days ... and Noah just does.

Genesis 7 could be used as support for Genesis 6 taking a far shorter time period under the premise that God helped Noah ... because God helps those who help themselves. I think a strong case could be made that God helped Noah gather up all the animals to fill the ark in only seven days.

I wouldn't rule out God being helpful, jussayn.

Other Christians claim that the flood was 120 years in the coming, having been announced more than a century in advance, when Noah was about 480 years old, indicating Noah had been working on it that long. Others say Noah didn't "get right on it" but instead relaxed for a few decades before rolling up his sleeves. Yet others believe that God helped him get it done in a few months.

Something you might one day consider to expand your horizons, and to look at the great flood account from a differing historical perspective, is to read the Muslim account of Noah and the flood. In Islam, Noah is a nabi (prophet) and the account of Noah, which includes the flood, is much longer and more detailed. It's like Islam bought the movie rights to the Genesis short story. It has a little bit of Daedalus and Icarus in there, with Noah's "oldest son" not believing the prophecy, did not board the ark, but when the rain began, ran to the top of a hill ... and perished.

You had asked "from where did the water come." In Islam, Allah caused water to gush upward from huge cracks in the earth ... and when everyone was dead, he reopened the cracks to let the water disappear back into the earth.

The story of Noah in Islam is a major drama whereby Noah tries to save humanity by pleading with mankind to abandon idolatry ... but they all mock him. Then Noah begins building the ark at the appointed time, and humanity makes long pilgrimages just to find Noah and to mock him for building a ship on a hill far from any lake or ocean. Then Noah's wife, it turns out, never believed his story and she laughed at Noah, and mocked him as he was climbing aboard the ark ... and then the door was shut and she died.

Mainstream Islam holds that there were about eighty people on the ark along with all the animals.

Into the Night wrote:You forget AGAIN that the Bible is about events in and around Egypt, Rome, and Israel, where the cubit was commonly used.

You forget that this is not specified in the Bible. This is speculation. Genesis does not specify the geographic location.

One major reason for this is that the account of the great flood came to Egypt, Rome and Israel from parts further east in Asia ... but that is a non-Biblical context. If we simply go by Genesis, we simply don't know where it occurred.

Into the Night wrote:There is NOTHING that states God made ANY measurement system 'official'.

Yes there is: The book of Genesis. All you need is for God to mandate it, and mandate it He did. That more than made it official. It made it regulatory.

When Noah finished his window to one cubit, he wasn't being creative, he was being obedient.

.


What language was Genesis translated from, and what kind of writing implements were used by Adam and Eve and what school were they taught to use them at?

Sorry girls I can not participate in this PhD psychological wet dream

But you go right ahead explaining everything you know to no one

Who said Adam and Eve wrote Genesis?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-06-2022 20:57
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?


26-06-2022 22:22
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
Into the Night wrote:So you have decided to ignore any verse mentioning 'mountain'

Nope. I use intelligence and common sense to properly interpret all occurrences of the word "mount" and "mountain" because, as you point out, and then promptly forget, the Bible suffers from those translation problems.

I fully explained why. You are plugging your ears.

So you have decided to ignore the clear-cut distance of 15 cubits in order to change it on the order of magnitude to force-fit a different verse that is clearly misinterpreted..

You are locked in a paradox.

15 cubits is 15 cubits. You don't get to deny it with the excuse that I am somehow "cherry-picking." Either show that the waters did not prevail 15 cubits or accept that the use of the word "mountains" is just one of many mistranslations. I gave you several examples off the cuff.
26-06-2022 23:17
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
Into the Night wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote: You continue to ignore the verses describing the mountains were covered.

There's a reason for that, and you touched upon it ...

Into the Night wrote:Of course, it IS a translation and like any translation it has it's inaccuracies (mostly due to idioms that don't translate), but I consider it the closest translation.

This is exactly the reason we should disregard mention of mountains. One unfortunate problem with translating amongst European languages (and even proto-European) is that the word for "plantlife" and "brush" and "countryside" also has, as a possible translation, the word for "mountain". It doesn't take a genius to read the Hebrew account of Genesis and realize the regrettable mistake of translating "phase/time period" as "day", even though the word "day" is technically a correct translation in other contexts. Similarly, it is fairly obvious (I say "fairly" because I really don't expect people to delve into multiple languages) that what was originally intended was that there was a lot of rain, flooding occurred, the ark was lifted off the ground and all the plants and trees were submerged. Take the mountains and the mistranslation out of it and it makes perfect sense. The 15 cubits fits right in. Someone in an ark would not be drowned.

Here are pictures of monte ...







but here are two more pictures of monte ...





As a sidenote, the brand Del Monte means "of the countryside plantlife" not "of the mountain." Later in Genesis there is reference to Jacob and his brethren laboring all night "in the mount", i.e. in the fields. The Bible has fallen victim to poor translations between "fields," "rocks," "mountains," "countryside" "pastures," "slopes", and many others that were interchanged when they should not have been. If you keep that in mind as you read the account of the great flood, it all makes perfect sense.

Note that when Jesus delivered the sermon on the mount, it was a mound on which he was standing, or a rock, not a mountain. He was standing on a mound so as to be somewhat elevated over the audience. Unfortunately it was translated as "mount" as you would refer to Mount Rushmore, and not as "mound", e.g. mound on the ground.

Into the Night wrote:Actually, you haven't, since you are cherry picking scripture and ignoring other scripture.

At the same time, you don't get to discount any Bible verse simply on the grounds that the entire rest of the Bible was not included as well.

There is no such thing as "cherry picking" when quoting the Bible. It's a package deal and you have to take all of it. I happen to take a humanistic interpretation because I know how people like to embellish when recounting stories and how stories change/evolve each time they are recounted, and how they change every time they are translated, and how they change every time they are edited (just note how the supposedly same story varies between different versions of the Bible). This is why I select one version (KJV) and use that. The English might be a little archaic but the gist of the story remains intact for the most part. As always, there are various translation pitfalls but those are more readily discerned in KJV than in more modern re-edits.


Into the Night wrote: In various kingdoms and societies, the king's arm was used. Thus, the cubit varies in size depending on the king at the time. In other words, it was an imperial unit...just an old one.

According to the Bible, one cubit is the size of a window.

Yes, yes, ... outside of the Bible, historically, yes a cubit was measured by elbow to fingertip. However, we must apply context, and the context is the Bible, and God doesn't use any other unit.

How long is it from God's elbow to God's fingertip?

Do you have any theories as to why God used cubits exclusively?

Can you think of a reason why God would make his official window measurement "one cubit"? Jussasking. You have to admit, it's no coincidence that God didn't give Noah any leeway on the size of the stupid window. God did not say "Noah, hey, it's your window, make it whatever size you want, just don't go crazy with it." He said "Noah, make the window exactly one cubit ... or I'll have the union all over your ass so fast you won't even have enough time to tell Shem to get the shotgun, ... I mean a sling and some stones."

From my point of view, cubits are God's unit of measure. He doesn't use any other.

Into the Night wrote:Whether Noah used his own arm (most convenient), or a 'standard' cubit of the day is unknown.

... or maybe he used God's cubit. If it's good enough for God then it might very well have been good enough for Noah.

Into the Night wrote:This unit of measurement was common throughout Egypt and Israel, as well as a few other places. It was simply the local unit of measurement at the time. Some builders still use it for rough measurements.

Outside of any Biblical context, and within an historical context, absolutely.

Into the Night wrote:The cubit used by Noah could easily have been anywhere from about 18 inches to 21 inches,

I'm going with Noah's cubit being one window in length.

Into the Night wrote:giving a height of the vessel of anything from 540ft to 630ft

That would be the length. The height would be about 55 ft, give or take.

Into the Night wrote:The Ark wasn't built in a day or even in a year. It likely took some 70 years or longer to build the Ark.

GasGuzzler said the same thing.

How did you calculate this figure? Juskyurious. Are you adding on a few extra decades because Noah tried to move large beams with levers?

Into the Night wrote:This interval is supported by genealogical information given in the same book at the time. The actual time is unknown.

I'm sure it is, but I'd be interested in knowing what information was used to make the estimate. Genesis doesn't even touch the subject. In Genesis 6, God tells Noah to build an ark, and he just does. Then in Genesis 7, God tells Noah to gather up all the animals ... in seven days ... and Noah just does.

Genesis 7 could be used as support for Genesis 6 taking a far shorter time period under the premise that God helped Noah ... because God helps those who help themselves. I think a strong case could be made that God helped Noah gather up all the animals to fill the ark in only seven days.

I wouldn't rule out God being helpful, jussayn.

Other Christians claim that the flood was 120 years in the coming, having been announced more than a century in advance, when Noah was about 480 years old, indicating Noah had been working on it that long. Others say Noah didn't "get right on it" but instead relaxed for a few decades before rolling up his sleeves. Yet others believe that God helped him get it done in a few months.

Something you might one day consider to expand your horizons, and to look at the great flood account from a differing historical perspective, is to read the Muslim account of Noah and the flood. In Islam, Noah is a nabi (prophet) and the account of Noah, which includes the flood, is much longer and more detailed. It's like Islam bought the movie rights to the Genesis short story. It has a little bit of Daedalus and Icarus in there, with Noah's "oldest son" not believing the prophecy, did not board the ark, but when the rain began, ran to the top of a hill ... and perished.

You had asked "from where did the water come." In Islam, Allah caused water to gush upward from huge cracks in the earth ... and when everyone was dead, he reopened the cracks to let the water disappear back into the earth.

The story of Noah in Islam is a major drama whereby Noah tries to save humanity by pleading with mankind to abandon idolatry ... but they all mock him. Then Noah begins building the ark at the appointed time, and humanity makes long pilgrimages just to find Noah and to mock him for building a ship on a hill far from any lake or ocean. Then Noah's wife, it turns out, never believed his story and she laughed at Noah, and mocked him as he was climbing aboard the ark ... and then the door was shut and she died.

Mainstream Islam holds that there were about eighty people on the ark along with all the animals.

Into the Night wrote:You forget AGAIN that the Bible is about events in and around Egypt, Rome, and Israel, where the cubit was commonly used.

You forget that this is not specified in the Bible. This is speculation. Genesis does not specify the geographic location.

One major reason for this is that the account of the great flood came to Egypt, Rome and Israel from parts further east in Asia ... but that is a non-Biblical context. If we simply go by Genesis, we simply don't know where it occurred.

Into the Night wrote:There is NOTHING that states God made ANY measurement system 'official'.

Yes there is: The book of Genesis. All you need is for God to mandate it, and mandate it He did. That more than made it official. It made it regulatory.

When Noah finished his window to one cubit, he wasn't being creative, he was being obedient.

.


What language was Genesis translated from, and what kind of writing implements were used by Adam and Eve and what school were they taught to use them at?

Sorry girls I can not participate in this PhD psychological wet dream

But you go right ahead explaining everything you know to no one

Who said Adam and Eve wrote Genesis?


Not me, I ask who wrote it. Seems that you have no clue who wrote it either. So if no one knows who wrote it then no one can verify that it is real.

On the other hand government analyst like you claim to know everything

130

Sucker


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
27-06-2022 03:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
Swan wrote:So if no one knows who wrote it then no one can verify that it is real.

Irrelevant. No religion is science. No religion needs to demonstrate anything to be "real."

Showing that something is "real" is a requirement of science.

Swan wrote:On the other hand government analyst like you claim to know everything

Which is silly because I'm the only one who knows everything.
27-06-2022 09:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
IBdaMann wrote:
Into the Night wrote:So you have decided to ignore any verse mentioning 'mountain'

Nope. I use intelligence and common sense to properly interpret all occurrences of the word "mount" and "mountain" because, as you point out, and then promptly forget, the Bible suffers from those translation problems.

I fully explained why. You are plugging your ears.

So you have decided to ignore the clear-cut distance of 15 cubits in order to change it on the order of magnitude to force-fit a different verse that is clearly misinterpreted..

Cherry picking fallacy. Special pleading fallacy.
IBdaMann wrote:

15 cubits is 15 cubits. You don't get to deny it with the excuse that I am somehow "cherry-picking." Either show that the waters did not prevail 15 cubits or accept that the use of the word "mountains" is just one of many mistranslations. I gave you several examples off the cuff.

Pivot fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
27-06-2022 10:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Who said Adam and Eve wrote Genesis?


Not me, I ask who wrote it.

You didn't. Not until now.
Swan wrote:
Seems that you have no clue who wrote it either. So if no one knows who wrote it then no one can verify that it is real.

It exists. It's real.

While the author is unknown, it was probably Moses.
Swan wrote:
On the other hand government analyst like you claim to know everything

I don't work for the government, dude.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
27-06-2022 10:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So if no one knows who wrote it then no one can verify that it is real.

Irrelevant. No religion is science.

No one is claiming that it is.
IBdaMann wrote:
No religion needs to demonstrate anything to be "real."

While true, the passage in the Bible exists. It is real.
IBdaMann wrote:
Showing that something is "real" is a requirement of science.

No, it is not. The ONLY requirement of any theory of science is that is must be falsifiable. The theory is real already, as all theories are. They exist. They are real.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 27-06-2022 10:05
27-06-2022 13:33
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So if no one knows who wrote it then no one can verify that it is real.

Irrelevant. No religion is science. No religion needs to demonstrate anything to be "real."

Showing that something is "real" is a requirement of science.

Swan wrote:On the other hand government analyst like you claim to know everything

Which is silly because I'm the only one who knows everything.


So you just accept that Genesis is real because you have faith in comic books that were written in a time before writing implements or even language for that matter.

To you this makes sense.

Since you know everything you absolutely work for the government as all those as dumb as you are government employees


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
Edited on 27-06-2022 14:01
27-06-2022 17:22
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
IBdaMann wrote:

Nope. I use intelligence and common sense to properly interpret all occurrences of the word "mount" and "mountain"


So if something doesn't fit into your world view it must be wrong? You couldn't possibly be wrong could you?


27-06-2022 17:34
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?



27-06-2022 18:17
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.
27-06-2022 18:32
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.



Edited on 27-06-2022 18:37
27-06-2022 20:53
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So if no one knows who wrote it then no one can verify that it is real.

Irrelevant. No religion is science. No religion needs to demonstrate anything to be "real."

Showing that something is "real" is a requirement of science.

Swan wrote:On the other hand government analyst like you claim to know everything

Which is silly because I'm the only one who knows everything.


So you just accept that Genesis is real because you have faith in comic books that were written in a time before writing implements or even language for that matter.

To you this makes sense.

Since you know everything you absolutely work for the government as all those as dumb as you are government employees


LOL the idiots from the Fed have no clue as to how to respond to rationality, so they are forced to ignore it.

Yawning, tell us more about what you KNOW about how everything happened?

I need a laugh


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
27-06-2022 20:55
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2508)
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Studies show that if you force several tubs of peanut butter down the throats of newborns, in some cases it could potentially be toxic. In cities where infant-PB-stuffing is more common, infant deaths increased by over 47% with corresponding increases in dead-infant obesity.. -IBdaMann
27-06-2022 21:10
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Yo? I'm all out of meth laced LSD, can you spare any?


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
27-06-2022 21:19
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Actually dumbass a dove is not in any way capable of circumnavigating the globe, so the story is BS.

You may continue masturbating


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
27-06-2022 22:04
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2508)
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Actually dumbass a dove is not in any way capable of circumnavigating the globe, so the story is BS.

You may continue masturbating



It doesn't say the dove checked the entire earth, dumbass. It says the dove found no place to land because water was over (that means above) all the surface of the earth.

I could say you couldn't find a parking place because they were all occupied, but that doesn't mean you checked all parking spots on the entire parking lot.

You continue your 3rd grade reading lesson. You'll get there.


Studies show that if you force several tubs of peanut butter down the throats of newborns, in some cases it could potentially be toxic. In cities where infant-PB-stuffing is more common, infant deaths increased by over 47% with corresponding increases in dead-infant obesity.. -IBdaMann
27-06-2022 22:13
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
Swan wrote:

Yo? I'm all out of meth laced LSD, can you spare any?


Did you hear about the guy that got LSD and LDS mixed up?
Instead of going on a trip, he went on a mission.


27-06-2022 22:26
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Actually dumbass a dove is not in any way capable of circumnavigating the globe, so the story is BS.

You may continue masturbating



It doesn't say the dove checked the entire earth, dumbass. It says the dove found no place to land because water was over (that means above) all the surface of the earth.

I could say you couldn't find a parking place because they were all occupied, but that doesn't mean you checked all parking spots on the entire parking lot.

You continue your 3rd grade reading lesson. You'll get there.


Retard alert.

1. There was no dove as the story is the equivalent of little red riding hood, a fable, not real.

2. If there was a dove it could not have checked any more than .000001 percent of the Earths surface, and as such could have not said that there was no land, not that doves can converse with people anyway. However refer back to #1

3. How would the dove know which way to fly to find land anyway if there was land there to be found? However refer back to #1

4. If the dove did find land, and it returned, how would it give the nautical coordinates to follow? Like would it say turn left at the next wave and then go East for 700 wing flaps? However refer back to #1

5. This concludes this test of the Emergency Retard Alert system, if this had been a real retard alert further instructions would have been given.


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
Edited on 27-06-2022 22:34
27-06-2022 23:03
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
Don't forget, snakes could speak back then. Sarcasm intended.

My guess is snakes, cattle, beasts, ravens, and doves are all metaphors for different kinds of people.

And Eve is a white cherubim (not red).

After Jesus fasted 40 days, and 40 nights, he was hung red (not white).



Edited on 27-06-2022 23:12
27-06-2022 23:39
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2508)
Swan wrote:
1. There was no dove as the story is the equivalent of little red riding hood, a fable, not real.

You mean parable, but OK, I get that your vocabulary is 3rd grade level. It was not written as a parable being told. It was written as what actually happened. If you don't believe it that is fine and it is everyone's own decision. However, it was not written as a parable.

Swan wrote:
2. If there was a dove it could not have checked any more than .000001 percent of the Earths surface, and as such could have not said that there was no land, not that doves can converse with people anyway.

The dove did not say there was no land. The dove could not find land to put it's feet on because there was no land. Did you find that parking place yet?

Swan wrote:
3. How would the dove know which way to fly to find land anyway if there was land there to be found?

It didn't need to know anything. It didn't find land because there was none visible anywhere on earth.

Swan wrote:
4. If the dove did find land, and it returned, how would it give the nautical coordinates to follow? Like would it say turn left at the next wave and then go East for 700 wing flaps?

Later on the dove did find an olive branch. Noah did not try to go find land mainly because his 3 outboard motors were toast. The olive branch simply meant that there was life on earth and conditions outside the ark were improving.

Swan wrote:
5. This concludes this test of the Emergency Retard Alert system, if this had been a real retard alert further instructions would have been given.

This test has been upgraded to a dumbass warning. Your instructions are to immediately consume large quantities of peanut butter.


Studies show that if you force several tubs of peanut butter down the throats of newborns, in some cases it could potentially be toxic. In cities where infant-PB-stuffing is more common, infant deaths increased by over 47% with corresponding increases in dead-infant obesity.. -IBdaMann
27-06-2022 23:47
Spongy Iris
★★★★☆
(1169)
A parable is a succinct, didactic story, in prose or verse, that illustrates one or more instructive lessons or principles. It differs from a fable in that fables employ animals, plants, inanimate objects, or forces of nature as characters, whereas parables have human characters.


27-06-2022 23:54
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
1. There was no dove as the story is the equivalent of little red riding hood, a fable, not real.

You mean parable, but OK, I get that your vocabulary is 3rd grade level. It was not written as a parable being told. It was written as what actually happened. If you don't believe it that is fine and it is everyone's own decision. However, it was not written as a parable.

Swan wrote:
2. If there was a dove it could not have checked any more than .000001 percent of the Earths surface, and as such could have not said that there was no land, not that doves can converse with people anyway.

The dove did not say there was no land. The dove could not find land to put it's feet on because there was no land. Did you find that parking place yet?

Swan wrote:
3. How would the dove know which way to fly to find land anyway if there was land there to be found?

It didn't need to know anything. It didn't find land because there was none visible anywhere on earth.

Swan wrote:
4. If the dove did find land, and it returned, how would it give the nautical coordinates to follow? Like would it say turn left at the next wave and then go East for 700 wing flaps?

Later on the dove did find an olive branch. Noah did not try to go find land mainly because his 3 outboard motors were toast. The olive branch simply meant that there was life on earth and conditions outside the ark were improving.

Swan wrote:
5. This concludes this test of the Emergency Retard Alert system, if this had been a real retard alert further instructions would have been given.

This test has been upgraded to a dumbass warning. Your instructions are to immediately consume large quantities of peanut butter.


I said fable and meant fable as the definition of fable is as follows.

fa·ble
/ˈfābəl/

noun
a short story, typically with animals as characters, conveying a moral.
"the fable of the sick lion and the wary fox"

LOL how did the dove know that there was no land visible anywhere on the Earth when if it was real and not a fable it never could have flown more than a quarter mile in any direction, leaving 99.999999999 percent of the Earth not searched?

That said when you are involved the retard alert is not a drill.

You may continue drooling now


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
Edited on 27-06-2022 23:58
28-06-2022 00:20
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Actually dumbass a dove is not in any way capable of circumnavigating the globe, so the story is BS.

You may continue masturbating



It doesn't say the dove checked the entire earth, dumbass. It says the dove found no place to land because water was over (that means above) all the surface of the earth.

I could say you couldn't find a parking place because they were all occupied, but that doesn't mean you checked all parking spots on the entire parking lot.

You continue your 3rd grade reading lesson. You'll get there.


Retard alert.

1. There was no dove as the story is the equivalent of little red riding hood, a fable, not real.

2. If there was a dove it could not have checked any more than .000001 percent of the Earths surface, and as such could have not said that there was no land, not that doves can converse with people anyway. However refer back to #1

3. How would the dove know which way to fly to find land anyway if there was land there to be found? However refer back to #1

4. If the dove did find land, and it returned, how would it give the nautical coordinates to follow? Like would it say turn left at the next wave and then go East for 700 wing flaps? However refer back to #1

5. This concludes this test of the Emergency Retard Alert system, if this had been a real retard alert further instructions would have been given.

You belong to the Church of No God. Fine. You feel you need to ridicule any other religion except yours. That just fundamentalism and hate.

It is also obvious you have not read this passage in the Bible. The dove was sent out for several days, when it came back with an olive twig, Noah knew the Flood was nearly over.

The Ark had no engines. It probably had no motive power at all (not even a sail) and no way to steer. Why should it? Where would it go? What nautical coordinate system would it have used??? How do know the Ark even had a compass?? Why would it need it???


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
28-06-2022 00:38
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
Spongy Iris wrote:
A parable is a succinct, didactic story, in prose or verse, that illustrates one or more instructive lessons or principles. It differs from a fable in that fables employ animals, plants, inanimate objects, or forces of nature as characters, whereas parables have human characters.


The word 'fable' first appeared in the English lexicon around the 14th century. It means a short story, usually comical in some way, that often made use of animals behaving in human ways.
Aesop's fables are prime examples of this.

The word 'parable' stems from the word 'parabola'. 'Para' by itself means 'aside' or and 'fabula' is Latin for a story or tale (This also forms the root for 'fable'!). A 'parable' is a story 'off to the side', in other words a story describing something using a different context applied to teach a lesson in another context. An example is Christ describing Satan as a 'dragon' or as a 'serpent'. A good analogy, since Satan is often considered by his followers as beautiful and seductive, but a cheat. God cast Satan out and given power for a time to tempt and to try Man.

The difference is small, but significant.

Satan, evil as he is, provides a valuable purpose: To give Man the opportunity to choose for Himself, to follow Christ and God, which counsels choice, or choose to follow Satan and his teachings of compulsion.

If we do not know cold, how can we understand hot? If we do not know evil, how can we understand good?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 28-06-2022 00:40
28-06-2022 00:52
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
Into the Night wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Actually dumbass a dove is not in any way capable of circumnavigating the globe, so the story is BS.

You may continue masturbating



It doesn't say the dove checked the entire earth, dumbass. It says the dove found no place to land because water was over (that means above) all the surface of the earth.

I could say you couldn't find a parking place because they were all occupied, but that doesn't mean you checked all parking spots on the entire parking lot.

You continue your 3rd grade reading lesson. You'll get there.


Retard alert.

1. There was no dove as the story is the equivalent of little red riding hood, a fable, not real.

2. If there was a dove it could not have checked any more than .000001 percent of the Earths surface, and as such could have not said that there was no land, not that doves can converse with people anyway. However refer back to #1

3. How would the dove know which way to fly to find land anyway if there was land there to be found? However refer back to #1

4. If the dove did find land, and it returned, how would it give the nautical coordinates to follow? Like would it say turn left at the next wave and then go East for 700 wing flaps? However refer back to #1

5. This concludes this test of the Emergency Retard Alert system, if this had been a real retard alert further instructions would have been given.

You belong to the Church of No God. Fine. You feel you need to ridicule any other religion except yours. That just fundamentalism and hate.

It is also obvious you have not read this passage in the Bible. The dove was sent out for several days, when it came back with an olive twig, Noah knew the Flood was nearly over.

The Ark had no engines. It probably had no motive power at all (not even a sail) and no way to steer. Why should it? Where would it go? What nautical coordinate system would it have used??? How do know the Ark even had a compass?? Why would it need it???


Sorry kid doves are not seabirds that can land in the water, they are land birds period so they do not fly over water for days. It is obvious that you are clueless.

Now on to the math of this fake flood, Mount Everest is and was at the time over 29,000 feet tall, meaning that if it was covered with water that sea level was over 29,000 feet higher than today, over the entire globe. LOL where did this water drain into?

Retard alert


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
28-06-2022 01:08
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2508)
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Actually dumbass a dove is not in any way capable of circumnavigating the globe, so the story is BS.

You may continue masturbating



It doesn't say the dove checked the entire earth, dumbass. It says the dove found no place to land because water was over (that means above) all the surface of the earth.

I could say you couldn't find a parking place because they were all occupied, but that doesn't mean you checked all parking spots on the entire parking lot.

You continue your 3rd grade reading lesson. You'll get there.


Retard alert.

1. There was no dove as the story is the equivalent of little red riding hood, a fable, not real.

2. If there was a dove it could not have checked any more than .000001 percent of the Earths surface, and as such could have not said that there was no land, not that doves can converse with people anyway. However refer back to #1

3. How would the dove know which way to fly to find land anyway if there was land there to be found? However refer back to #1

4. If the dove did find land, and it returned, how would it give the nautical coordinates to follow? Like would it say turn left at the next wave and then go East for 700 wing flaps? However refer back to #1

5. This concludes this test of the Emergency Retard Alert system, if this had been a real retard alert further instructions would have been given.

You belong to the Church of No God. Fine. You feel you need to ridicule any other religion except yours. That just fundamentalism and hate.

It is also obvious you have not read this passage in the Bible. The dove was sent out for several days, when it came back with an olive twig, Noah knew the Flood was nearly over.

The Ark had no engines. It probably had no motive power at all (not even a sail) and no way to steer. Why should it? Where would it go? What nautical coordinate system would it have used??? How do know the Ark even had a compass?? Why would it need it???


Sorry kid doves are not seabirds that can land in the water, they are land birds period so they do not fly over water for days. It is obvious that you are clueless.

Now on to the math of this fake flood, Mount Everest is and was at the time over 29,000 feet tall, meaning that if it was covered with water that sea level was over 29,000 feet higher than today, over the entire globe. LOL where did this water drain into?

Retard alert


Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, but later on He became too stupid to figure out where to drain a little water.


Studies show that if you force several tubs of peanut butter down the throats of newborns, in some cases it could potentially be toxic. In cities where infant-PB-stuffing is more common, infant deaths increased by over 47% with corresponding increases in dead-infant obesity.. -IBdaMann
28-06-2022 02:24
SwanProfile picture★★★★☆
(1841)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
How would "waters" prevailing upward only 15 cubits cause water levels to rise above all the mountains under Heaven?


The 15 cubits is probably the draft of the Ark, not height above present sea level.


Are you saying wind current is what lifted the ark 15 cubits?

I'll mention it to you as well. Any occurrences of the words "mountain" or "mount" in the Bible are likely gross mistranslations or, at the very least, poor word choices and should definitely be set aside until the rest of the account is understood without those words, and then proper meaning being assigned to those words.

It sounds like you accept that all the tallest trees were covered, correct? You acknowledge that the ark was "lifted off the earth," correct?

What is gained (storywise) by involving orders of magnitude additional water? Why is this somehow more important than understanding a proper translation?

.


If I haven't made it clear in my last 1100 posts in this forum, my position is that solar and lunar winds ("waters") came flooding through a hole in Heaven, which was shattered because too much pressure built up on Earth, because too much CO2 had been emitted, around what are today the borders of Lybia, Egypt, and Sudan. These "flood waters" incinerated all life on land, most in the sea, and covered all the hills and mountains. Whatever "gopher wood" is, it shielded what was inside the ark. The solar and lunar winds lifted the ark 15 cubits.


Genesis 8
8. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had receded from the surface of the ground.

9. But the dove could find nowhere to perch because there was water over all the surface of the earth.

Why solar wind and not ketchup or something of that nature??


Actually dumbass a dove is not in any way capable of circumnavigating the globe, so the story is BS.

You may continue masturbating



It doesn't say the dove checked the entire earth, dumbass. It says the dove found no place to land because water was over (that means above) all the surface of the earth.

I could say you couldn't find a parking place because they were all occupied, but that doesn't mean you checked all parking spots on the entire parking lot.

You continue your 3rd grade reading lesson. You'll get there.


Retard alert.

1. There was no dove as the story is the equivalent of little red riding hood, a fable, not real.

2. If there was a dove it could not have checked any more than .000001 percent of the Earths surface, and as such could have not said that there was no land, not that doves can converse with people anyway. However refer back to #1

3. How would the dove know which way to fly to find land anyway if there was land there to be found? However refer back to #1

4. If the dove did find land, and it returned, how would it give the nautical coordinates to follow? Like would it say turn left at the next wave and then go East for 700 wing flaps? However refer back to #1

5. This concludes this test of the Emergency Retard Alert system, if this had been a real retard alert further instructions would have been given.

You belong to the Church of No God. Fine. You feel you need to ridicule any other religion except yours. That just fundamentalism and hate.

It is also obvious you have not read this passage in the Bible. The dove was sent out for several days, when it came back with an olive twig, Noah knew the Flood was nearly over.

The Ark had no engines. It probably had no motive power at all (not even a sail) and no way to steer. Why should it? Where would it go? What nautical coordinate system would it have used??? How do know the Ark even had a compass?? Why would it need it???


Sorry kid doves are not seabirds that can land in the water, they are land birds period so they do not fly over water for days. It is obvious that you are clueless.

Now on to the math of this fake flood, Mount Everest is and was at the time over 29,000 feet tall, meaning that if it was covered with water that sea level was over 29,000 feet higher than today, over the entire globe. LOL where did this water drain into?

Retard alert


Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, but later on He became too stupid to figure out where to drain a little water.


So you have no idea where 29000 feet of water drained too, and naturally you have no real need to think because you can just babble that god did it. Do you have any idea why such a great god made you an idiot with no life who babbles about noah when it has no meaning to any of your obvious issues?

What does Scully say?


This place is quieter than the FBI commenting on the chink bank account information on Hunter Xiden's laptop

I LOVE TRUMP BECAUSE HE PISSES OFF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT I CAN'T STAND.

ULTRA MAGA

Now be honest, was I correct or was I correct? LOL
Edited on 28-06-2022 02:59
Page 2 of 8<1234>>>





Join the debate "... take care of it." -Genesis 2:15.:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Funny how none of the geniuses here care about climate change anymore3230-07-2022 21:58
America Has The Best Health Care In The World627-12-2018 20:43
"I don't care du u" slop coat323-06-2018 19:13
People who care about climate, is it about loving Earth or is it about their own self interests?625-12-2015 13:37
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact