XPost: alt.christian.bible, alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm   
   XPost: alt.atheism, alt.talk.creationism   
   From: lunch@nofreelunch.us   
      
   On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 06:04:54 -0400, old man joe  wrote   
   in alt.talk.creationism:   
      
   >On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 06:28:33 -0500, geronimo  wrote:   
   >   
   >>Consider the following:   
   >>When bringing all the animals aboard the ark, there could not have   
   >>been room for every single species on the entire earth.   
   >   
   >the Ark was as large as the Queen Mary,  you simply assume there was no room.   
      
   There was no Flood, so it does not matter that there was no ark. The   
   story in the Bible told us of a totally unseaworthy vessel that would   
   have killed the residents if the boat hadn't broken up the first moment   
   it was asked to float.   
      
   >>Most   
   >>Theologians solve this by saying that not every species was brought   
   >>aboard, just every "kind".   
   >   
   >how is it that you speak for " most theologians " ?  that's the same as   
   saying you've read every   
   >theologians work there ever was who commented on this subject, added up those   
   for and against, and   
   >you've found 51 percent of them saying the mystery is solved.   
   >   
   >and since when do most theologians speak for God ?  that's the same as saying   
   51 percent of people   
   >biased toward Adolf Hitler conclude he was doing the right thing so therefore   
   Adolf Hitler was a   
   >good man.   
      
   The whole point of all religion is 'speaking for God'. It doesn't matter   
   if the alleged god exists.   
      
   >>This means that only the basic "kinds" of animals, dogs, cats,   
   >>elephants, and so on, were brought aboard.   
   >>So, assuming evolution does not occur, there should only be one   
   >>species of cat, dog, elephant, and so on on the earth because all of   
   >>them are decended from the original 2 (or 7, in the case of the clean   
   >>animals)of each "kind".   
   >   
   >it can not be " assumed " evolution did not occur... evolution positively did   
   not occur because life   
   >doesn't come from elements that are not alive.   
      
   Even if your false claim were true, it would have nothing to do with   
   evolution.   
      
   >you don't get life out of absolute sterility from a   
   >molten cinder the evolutionists describe the earth as being.  neither is time   
   alive.  you don't get   
   >non-living things to come to life over time.  that's the same as saying just   
   wait long enough and   
   >every dead body in the grave will come back to life if given enough time, and   
   the dirt under my feet   
   >will come to life if given enough time.   
      
   Repeating your lies will not make them true, not even if you claim that   
   God told you to tell those lies. That will only remind us of the lack of   
   respect you have for the God you claim to worship.   
      
   >evolution is implausible and untenable.   
      
   You are ignorant and proud of your ignorance.   
      
   >>But if you simply look around a bit, you'll find all manner of cats,   
   >>big cats, small cats, cats with short hair, long hair, varying fur   
   >>patterns, varying ear sizes, varying ear shapes... How is it that we   
   >>ended up with (at least) 41 different species of cat when we only had   
   >>one to start with? I know one theory that has an answer!   
   >   
   >well just look around a bit and there is one manner of human beings... but   
   some are oriental, some   
   >are negro, some are caucasian;  some have reddish skin, some have blackish   
   skin, some have whitish   
   >skin, some have yellowish skin.   
   >   
   >yet, all came from Adam through Noah as it is to this day.   
      
   They did not. That is a lie that you are telling. The evidence shows us   
   that you are wrong.   
      
   >furthermore, the Ark is much more than just a big boat.  there is a spiritual   
   meaning to it... the   
   >Ark is a type or metaphorical picture of Jesus Christ.  while the world and   
   all whom God destroyed   
   >with the Flood were not chosen by God to enter the Ark, 8 souls were, which   
   is what the End of the   
   >world will be like... those in Christ shall be saved from the destruction to   
   come while those   
   >outside will perish.  ( Rev. 22;15 )   
      
   Then why do you insist on the false claim that there was a literal   
   flood?   
      
   >lastly, the Rainbow we see in the sky to this day is the sign of the Covenant   
   God made after the   
   >Flood that He would not again destroy the earth with water... that is, the   
   Gospel, but next time   
   >with fire, a synonym for Judgment.   
      
   Rainbows have always happened under the same circumstances. You are   
   worshipping a just-so story. You are worshipping ignorance.   
      
   >God's destruction of sinner's by the Flood and the saving of Noah and his   
   family and 2 and 7 of   
   >animals in the Ark may sound ridiculous to the unrepentant sinner of today   
   and that's one reason why   
   >God included the telling of it in the Holy Scriptures... the telling of it   
   separates the wheat from   
   >the tares... "  For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish   
   foolishness; but unto us which   
   >are saved it is the power of God. "  1 Cor. 1:18   
      
   It's not a matter of ridiculous. It's a matter that you are repeating a   
   falsehood after you have been presented the evidence. You are lying to   
   us. No one, not even someone who calls themselves a believer can be   
   justified in lying about the historicity of the Flood. It did not   
   happen. There is no question that it did not happen. Those who claim it   
   did happen are lying and misleading others.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)