[blueshogun96]

I'm sure you athiests will enjoy tearing this to pieces. Hell, I'll probably just get flamed, but oh well, I could care less because I'm quite used to it. Just know that I'm not exactly trying to prove anything here, I'm just posting an old theory just for fun. They are about "The Flood" and "The Beginning". I don't really dwell on these things, just ideas I came up with years ago. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong... just correct me if I am [Proto].

Now... I'm sure we all know the story about Noah and the ark, right? God floods the world over drowing the wicked and Noah takes two of each animal with him... that one. I was thinking maybe there is some science that backs that up. Let's look at a few things from the Bible first, then some scientific facts. According to the Bible, before the flood, there was no such thing as rain. The earth was watered differently (I think it was by morning dew if I remember correctly). Also, there were no seasons like we have today (Winter, Spring, Summer, and Fall). Meaning that the earth had a climate suitable for plant life everywhere. Now for the science. I can't say there's any sciences that prove the part about the rain, but I do believe I remember watching an episode on the Discovery channel relating to the south pole being habitable at one point. They said that continents like Australia drifted off from it, then Antarctica frose over. I also distincltly remember reading my science text books from school and seeing the map of the Earth millions of years ago. It showed that the Earth had more visible land above water than it does today. What does this have to do with "The flood"? I'm getting to it. Okay, the flood happens and the Earth is covered in water, then after X amount of time, it's gone. After that, then the seasons we know now take effect. Where does all the water go? Think about the north and south pole (south pole in particular). Remember, before the flood, there were no polar ice caps. From what I've read, the north and south poles contain 70% of the earth's fresh water. Imagine if the polar ice caps were to somehow melt completely, then the whole world would be flooded over again! See how it soft of connects? Yeah, I know it just raises more questions like "Why did the seasons start after that and not before?" and "Where did the rain water come from in the first place?". Good questions though.

My next one is about believing in God and evolution at the same time. Personally, I think there are more effective ways to prove that God doesn't exist other than the theory of evolution. I'm sure we all know the big bang theory as well, right? Good. Now let's take a look at the Bible's version; maybe evolution is just God's method of creation? How can the big bang and evolution happen in 7 days? It can't. Sure, we all knew that. Personally, I woun't think that it all happened in 7 days as we know it (24 hours). I prefer to think of them as "steps" instead of days. Depending on how you look at it, creation and evolution tend to agree in certain areas if you look closely. For instance, they both start off with the formation of the universe, solar systems, Earth and the moon. Evolution and creation clearly illustrates what animals and what other forms of life came first and which come last. Then what about the part where God creates man out of the dust of the Earth? We all come from the dust of the Earth just like everything else, right? I guess that's where evolution comes in again. That's what it suggests. I know I didn't answer everything, but hopefully you all get the idea. The bottom line is that not everything in the Bible should be taken literally (like the camel fitting through the eye of a needle, lol).

Once again, I'm not saying I believe all of this (even though I do believe in God, I don't prefer to call myself a religious person, because religion without the relationship will [email protected]#% you up). Just a bunch of old and undeveloped ideas from the past. Feel free to critize however you want. That's what this thread is for.

 

[Spyhop]

I'm sure you athiests will enjoy tearing this to pieces. Hell, I'll probably just get flamed, but oh well, I could care less because I'm quite used to it. Just know that I'm not exactly trying to prove anything here, I'm just posting an old theory just for fun. They are about "The Flood" and "The Beginning". I don't really dwell on these things, just ideas I came up with years ago. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong... just correct me if I am [Proto].

First, you're not posing theories. These are hypothesis. Theories are supported by a lot of evidence, have stood the test of scrutiny, and are largely accepted by the scientific community. I feel it's important people understand the difference as creationists like to pander that evolution is "only a theory"...inferring it was only a guess.

Now... I'm sure we all know the story about Noah and the ark, right? God floods the world over drowing the wicked and Noah takes two of each animal with him... that one.

There's no ship large enough to hold two of every species of animal on earth, nor is 2 animals of each species enough of a gene pool to support more than a few generations of reproduction.

I was thinking maybe there is some science that backs that up. Let's look at a few things from the Bible first, then some scientific facts. According to the Bible, before the flood, there was no such thing as rain. The earth was watered differently (I think it was by morning dew if I remember correctly). Also, there were no seasons like we have today (Winter, Spring, Summer, and Fall).

So Earth wasn't orbiting the sun at this point in time, is that what you're saying?

Meaning that the earth had a climate suitable for plant life everywhere. Now for the science. I can't say there's any sciences that prove the part about the rain, but I do believe I remember watching an episode on the Discovery channel relating to the south pole being habitable at one point. They said that continents like Australia drifted off from it, then Antarctica frose over. I also distincltly remember reading my science text books from school and seeing the map of the Earth millions of years ago. It showed that the Earth had more visible land above water than it does today.

This is called Pangea.

Continental drift separated the land to what we know today.

What does this have to do with "The flood"? I'm getting to it. Okay, the flood happens and the Earth is covered in water, then after X amount of time, it's gone. After that, then the seasons we know now take effect. Where does all the water go? Think about the north and south pole (south pole in particular). Remember, before the flood, there were no polar ice caps. From what I've read, the north and south poles contain 70% of the earth's fresh water. Imagine if the polar ice caps were to somehow melt completely, then the whole world would be flooded over again! See how it soft of connects? Yeah, I know it just raises more questions like "Why did the seasons start after that and not before?" and "Where did the rain water come from in the first place?". Good questions though.

mmm...not so much. Seasons are are a results of our rotation around the sun. The southern and northern hemisphere's receive different durations of sunlight, depending on the time of year. This was as true in the proposed "biblical period" as it is today.

My next one is about believing in God and evolution at the same time. Personally, I think there are more effective ways to prove that God doesn't exist other than the theory of evolution.

Evolution doesn't try to disprove existence of a deity, it only explains how life evolved since it's appearance on earth. Mind you, acceptance of evolution doesn't leave much room for theism, but some people believe in both.

I'm sure we all know the big bang theory as well, right? Good. Now let's take a look at the Bible's version; maybe evolution is just God's method of creation? How can the big bang and evolution happen in 7 days? It can't. Sure, we all knew that. Personally, I woun't think that it all happened in 7 days as we know it (24 hours). I prefer to think of them as "steps" instead of days. Depending on how you look at it, creation and evolution tend to agree in certain areas if you look closely. For instance, they both start off with the formation of the universe, solar systems, Earth and the moon. Evolution and creation clearly illustrates what animals and what other forms of life came first and which come last. Then what about the part where God creates man out of the dust of the Earth? We all come from the dust of the Earth just like everything else, right? I guess that's where evolution comes in again. That's what it suggests. I know I didn't answer everything, but hopefully you all get the idea. The bottom line is that not everything in the Bible should be taken literally (like the camel fitting through the eye of a needle, lol).

The idea of creationism being a metaphorical representation of evolution isn't new. Many people cling to it as a way of accepting scientific truth and holding on to pieces of their belief structure at the same time. However, there's no evidence to support this hypothesis.

 

[cottonvibes]

First, you're not posing theories. These are hypothesis. Theories are supported by a lot of evidence, have stood the test of scrutiny, and are largely accepted by the scientific community. I feel it's important people understand the difference as creationists like to pander that evolution is "only a theory"...inferring it was only a guess.

the word 'theory' has multiple contexts.

theory - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

it can mean an 'abstract thought'.
i commonly use it as that; obviously when people casually say "i have a theory" they're not talking about having some thoroughly tested scientific theory.

 

[Squall-Leonhart]

a theory is not yet proved. therefore it is still only an idea.

 

[ozzgx4]

Interesting read

 

[Radix865]

Well, spyhop already mentioned the one thing that would've been enough to explain why blueshoguns "theory" is wrong... Just two people or two animals aren't enough to create population of their kind...

 

[Exodus]

Well, spyhop already mentioned the one thing that would've been enough to explain why blueshoguns "theory" is wrong... Just two people or two animals aren't enough to create population of their kind...

Miracle Grow, dude. That's all you need.

 

[Mako Eyes]

First, you're not posing theories. These are hypothesis. Theories are supported by a lot of evidence, have stood the test of scrutiny, and are largely accepted by the scientific community. I feel it's important people understand the difference as creationists like to pander that evolution is "only a theory"...inferring it was only a guess.

the word 'theory' has multiple contexts.

theory - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

it can mean an 'abstract thought'.
i commonly use it as that; obviously when people casually say "i have a theory" they're not talking about having some thoroughly tested scientific theory.

You are both right. However, for the context of this discussion, it's best to refer to blueshogun's thoughts as hypotheses rather than "theories," if not only for the fact that he brings science into the mix. Standardization is important in discussions like this; chances are a lot of things are going to be misinterpreted as it is, so it's best to try and reduce any ambiguity as much as possible.

Good thread blueshogun. I'll provide some input later when I'm finished fixing up my computer, but Spyhop pretty much covered it.

 

[Gossamer]

Good, another chance for all the members of the forum to hate each-other over spiritual theory and belief. Personally, I don't believe in god because god is illogical and impractical; not to mention the fact that I'd never base my entire life and existence on man-made and edited printed book.

..but that's my side. I don't have any proof and neither does anyone else to whether or not god exists or doesn't. So I'll leave it at that.

So go for your conversion, Christians and Muslims.
And go pound your anti-belief, atheists.

I'll sit back and watch.

 

[-StrikE-]

First i like to remention for the 100th time i'm a non believer in neither god or destiny i dont and will never except the idea of somebody/thing else other then me controling my life.

on man-made and edited printed book.

That book your referring to (i believe you meant the bible right? ) is a work of art and geniuses why ? cause every person who reads it understand something else, its interesting how this book can work on your subconscious so it may create your own version of the bible up there in the head. I may be exaggerating but imo this is just something created to control the masses.

 

[Gossamer]

That book your referring to (i believe you meant the bible right? ) is a work of art and geniuses why ? cause every person who reads it understand something else, its interesting how this book can work on your subconscious so it may create your own version of the bible up there in the head. I may be exaggerating but imo this is just something created to control the masses.

Perspective is not a basis for fact. How you "feel" doesn't determine how something "is".

Paper and ink doesn't make a hellish-mental weapon of the masses; the people reading it do.

 

[drown]

Well I believe in God,
if only for the fact that I don't want to believe that we were created because of a fluke of nature. That's my opinion though nuff said.
I hate conflicts

 

[sgsavvy]

first of all i want to say that i am a neutral party but i must say this thread is really interesting...

 

[drown]

first of all i want to say that i am a neutral party but i must say this thread is really interesting...

How so?

 

[Dennemark]

Interesting read. I can only say that we will never know what really happened back then or what will happen in the next 4,5 billion years, and that when we get told by 'some kind of higher entity' as 'it' would call itself we would not believe him for distrust is an part of being human, just like lying and the need to have a good time.

 

[Mako Eyes]

How so?

There's a saying that I'm quite fond of:

"Opinions are like armpits. Everyone has them, but nobody really cares."

If blueshogun just decided to make a thread that said "This is what I think, deal with it" then the thread would pretty much go nowhere. However, blueshogun made a thread that expresses his thoughts and also encourages discussion, and discussion is a great mental exercise. This thread isn't about arguing (as Grossamer so bluntly put it), and it isn't just about blueshogun (or anyone else, for that matter) spewing his opinions all over the place. This thread is about thinking.

You should join in sometime. Just because someone disagrees with you or challenges your thoughts doesn't mean that they are causing conflict; they're just discussing. Discussion of any kind is fun if it's kept civil